Git Sum Presidentin' (Republican primaries)

[FirefightnRick]

Predictions model on chances of election. Adjust for GDP, forecasted GDP, & Obama approval rating.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/15/magazine/what-are-the-chances-for-republicans.html?ref=magazine

I believe that NYTimes poll about as much as I believe David Axelrod touting another poll this morning on CBS that claimed 62% of Catholics support the Contraception mandate.

How stupid do they think their viewers are?

Rick

Edited February 15, 2012 by FirefightnRick

[Coffee and TV]

I believe that NYTimes poll about as much as I believe David Axelrod touting another poll this morning on CBS that claimed 62% of Catholics support the Contraception mandate.

How stupid do they think their viewers are?

Rick

I see you're not familiar with Nate Silver's work.

[FirefightnRick]

I see you're not familiar with Nate Silver's work.

I cant find it, but did he correctly predict Scott Brown in 2010? Also, since it adjusts for GDP, doesn't that basically fall back to what '90 has been saying all along about the economy?

Rick

Edited February 15, 2012 by FirefightnRick

[Coffee and TV]

I cant find it, but did he correctly predict Scott Brown in 2010?

Special elections are tricky, they're hard to accurately predict. But he went 35 for 35 in 2008 on the Senate, as well as getting 49 out of 50 states in the presidency.

Also, since it adjusts for GDP, doesn't that basically fall back to what '90 has been saying all along about the economy?

Rick

I'm not arguing that people won't vote with their wallets in November, I simply argue that a poorer candidate stands a tougher chance at beating Obama. You can't just throw up anybody and expect people to trust that he/she would do a better job with the economy.

Edited February 15, 2012 by Coffee and TV

[DeepGreen]

Yep. And all the "compromise" does is shift the burden from the church to the insurance company. So, even though the Catholic Church is principly opposed to birth control, the insurance that is offered to their employees will include birth control.

Because the government says so.

Come on, all you libs that scream improperly about seperation of church and state. Where the hell are you now? Is it OK for the Government to impose their obvious political will on a religious institution? What's next? The Catholic Church forced to have insurance that includes abortion coverage?

This is just one of the problems when government overreaches into the lives of the people they govern. You will see more and more of these types of issues come forward if this monstrosity of universal health care isn't discarded.

This also shows the lengths this administration will go to forward their political agenda.

I'm Catholic and I'll tell you one thing- the Bishop of our Diocese is all over this issue and they're not real happy. I want to tell some of my Catholic brothers, you voted for Obama(52%+ voted for him) and this is what you get. And now one of Obama's goons comes out and says 62% of Catholics support Obama??? I say bullsh!t on that! Catholics are mad, fighting made.

Edited February 16, 2012 by DeepGreen

[yyz28]

It's really a dumb move politically for Obama. Insurance or not, women can secure birth control for free or very minimal cost at Planned Parenthood and any number of local sources and clinics. Access to contraception isn't am issue or problem right now, so picking this fight seems a bit odd to me in an election year.

[UNT90]

It's really a dumb move politically for Obama. Insurance or not, women can secure birth control for free or very minimal cost at Planned Parenthood and any number of local sources and clinics. Access to contraception isn't am issue or problem right now, so picking this fight seems a bit odd to me in an election year.

All about advancing an agenda. It is really stupid, but it is also one of the core beliefs of the liberal wing of the democrat party, who thinks everyone should think as they do and have zero tolerance for any opposing viewpoint (to the point of name calling).

People shouldn't be surprised that this administration is completely on board wth that wing of it's party.

[Censored by Laurie]

I'm Catholic and I'll tell you one thing- the Bishop of our Diocese is all over this issue and they're not real happy. I want to tell some of my Catholic brothers, you voted for Obama(52%+ voted for him) and this is what you get. And now one of Obama's goons comes out and says 60% of Catholics support Obama??? I say bullsh!t on that! Catholics are mad, fighting made.

I kinda get the Catholic church logic. Why take away from the sensation and pleasure of sex considering its difficult, if not impossible, to get an 8-year old boy pregnant?

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I'm Catholic and I'll tell you one thing- the Bishop of our Diocese is all over this issue and they're not real happy. I want to tell some of my Catholic brothers, you voted for Obama(52%+ voted for him) and this is what you get. And now one of Obama's goons comes out and says 60% of Catholics support Obama??? I say bullsh!t on that! Catholics are mad, fighting made.

---I pretty sure that any hospital with a religious name collects a lot MORE money from the Federal government than than do from their "supporting" church in donations..... They take medicare and insurance from federal employees... that is federal money.. If they only serve Catholics and take no federal money then they should entirely be able to make their own rules.... but they don't. If they take federal money, even medicare, especailly from non-Catholic patients....then the government has a voice in the matter.....can't have it both ways.... Can't take the money but give them no voice.....

---They even sell bonds to build or upgrade them....and they are sold to the PUBLIC not just people who are members of their faith.. Taking Federal money plus serving the general public makes any institution a public one to some extent... even if the name involves a religion.

---The same for schools...the government has no say unless they are paying money to the school.... which is exactly what happen at churches.. no federal/state support...but if they take government grants and even tuition from government sourses... the rules change.

..

Edited February 16, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[DeepGreen]

I kinda get the Catholic church logic. Why take away from the sensation and pleasure of sex considering its difficult, if not impossible, to get an 8-year old boy pregnant?

Was that really necessary CBL? Don't throw all Catholic Priest under the bus because of a few bad apples.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

...the liberal wing of the democrat party, who thinks everyone should think as they do and have zero tolerance for any opposing viewpoint (to the point of name calling).

To be fair, they're not the only ones.

[UNT90]

To be fair, they're not the only ones.

No, just the most vicious and headstrong.

Edited February 16, 2012 by UNT90

[Coffee and TV]

I'm Catholic and I'll tell you one thing- the Bishop of our Diocese is all over this issue and they're not real happy. I want to tell some of my Catholic brothers, you voted for Obama(52%+ voted for him) and this is what you get. And now one of Obama's goons comes out and says 62% of Catholics support Obama??? I say bullsh!t on that! Catholics are mad, fighting made.

Dunno about Catholics, but the majority of Americans seem to support this decision.

[Coffee and TV]

No, just the most vicious and headstrong.

Please. The vitriol for Obama from the right has been 10x's what Bush ever got. And Bush had to start a war to get that hate, Obama gets blamed for stuff he didn't even do - like TARP.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Was that really necessary CBL? Don't throw all Catholic Priest under the bus because of a few bad apples.

A FEW???

You are kidding... it was even a big issue in Ireland {an extremely Catholic country ]when I was there last year... all over the TV news there too.. It is an big issue out here in West Texas as well..

Edited February 16, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[FirefightnRick]

.... Why take away from the sensation and pleasure of sex considering its difficult, if not impossible, to get an 8-year old boy pregnant?

There you go again.

Rick

[Green Mean]

Please. The vitriol for Obama from the right has been 10x's what Bush ever got. And Bush had to start a war to get that hate, Obama gets blamed for stuff he didn't even do - like TARP.

Can't say I agree with that. Things got really bad for President Bush towards the end of his tenure. I'd say Bush got a lot more criticism for his tenure than President Obama has overall thus far. Plus I think a lot more moderate republicans became more against Bush towards the end.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---I see GM is reporting record profits this past quarter...... I am not crediting anyone ...but.. the economy is sure not as bad as some candidates are reporting who seem to delight in the fact that America could be doing better. It takes time to recover from the 2008 meltdown just as it takes time to stop a car and get back up to speed. Never has recovery happened overnight. Doubt those same candidates will mention this.

..

Edited February 16, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[Coffee and TV]

I'd say Bush got a lot more criticism for his tenure than President Obama has overall thus far.

Not even close. Obama has had 3x's the number of negative books written about him than Bush. With Bush (besides the jabbing at his perceived lack of intellect) there wasn't anything consistent to what Obama endures. The whole 'outsider he's not one of us memes' that vilify him as some sort of Muslim/socialist/Kenyan/terrorist is the main stream of the Republican Party, not the fringes. Just look at the House Rep that commented about Michelle Obama's figure, find me an example of something similar a Dem house rep said about Laura Bush.

[KRAM1]

Please. The vitriol for Obama from the right has been 10x's what Bush ever got. And Bush had to start a war to get that hate, Obama gets blamed for stuff he didn't even do - like TARP.

And, President Obama is the first ever president to speak ill and "dis" his predecessor during his inaugural speech with the former president sitting right on the podium with him! Talk about taking the high road, and this guy has been bashing Bush almost on a daily basis ever since. Obama still...STILL...blames Bush and Congress for everything...then to top it off he delivers a campaign blueprint rather than a budget to Congress that he knows full well has ZERO chance of being passed...and wastes untold federal dollars and untold hours of every one's time and energy in doing so and in having the thing printed....you go O! Harry Truman he is not....the "buck never stops" on O's desk!

[DeepGreen]

To me, First Ladies are off limits unless they keep themselves in the public eye. Obama has earned every criticism thrown his way.

Serious question- do those of you on the left really like the way America is heading overall under this President? Simple yes or no.

Edited February 16, 2012 by DeepGreen

[HoustonEagle]

To me, First Ladies are off limits unless they keep themselves in the public eye. Obama has earned every criticism thrown his way.

Serious question- do those of you on the left really like the way America is heading overall under this President? Simple yes or no.

On balance yes

[Coffee and TV]

Can't say I agree with that. Things got really bad for President Bush towards the end of his tenure. I'd say Bush got a lot more criticism for his tenure than President Obama has overall thus far. Plus I think a lot more moderate republicans became more against Bush towards the end.

Republican Staffer emails "spook" photo

GOP Activist Compares Michelle Obama to escaped Gorilla

Racist Obama Witchdoctor email that went around

State Rep compares Obama to 9/11 hijackers

Tennessee Mayor Says "muslim Obama" keeping him from seeing A Charlie Brown Christmas

There's tons more examples.

[Coffee and TV]

To me, First Ladies are off limits unless they keep themselves in the public eye.

You must be kidding, right?

EVERY SINGLE FIRST LADY is the public eye. It's unavoidable. They're married to arguably the most power man in the world. They take up a non-controversial cause (Laura's was literacy, Michelle's is kids nutrition) and speak publicly about it. Its something every first lady is basically 'required' to do. What is she supposed to do, sit up in the White House and watch TV all day?

Serious question- do those of you on the left really like the way America is heading overall under this President? Simple yes or no.

If you put it that simplistically, then yes. But even if the answer was no, he's still miles ahead of any Republican alternative IMO.

[UNT90]

I'm just amazed by the amount of people on this thread that now apparently believe birth control is a right.

Such a growing sense of entitlement on this board (and in America in general).

It's not a right. It's a benefit that your employer SHOULD have the right to decide whether or not to offer. Don't like it? Get another job.