We know most people don't watch "the news" anymore, but you might have heard from your friends on the Facebook that we are in the midst of a years-long grinding economic recession, the primary feature of which is persistently high un- and underemployment.
The regulations arising from Obamacare. Also too, any regulation that has anything to do with extracting planet-killing fuels, plus the CAFE increases. Otherwise, AOTK, of course.
So according to TPM, Obama would be reelected if he <em>only</em> won the states he&#039;s currently leading by at least 5 points? Nice. Not sure I feel that comfortable about it yet, myself.
The NBER&#039;s criteria are actually much more complicated than 2 quarters of GDP shrinkage. They consider employment, industrial production and real income in addition to GDP.
But even focusing on just the employment situation, the recession ends at the trough, in other words, at the worst of the bad times. The recession does not last until the economy has recovered to pre-recession levels. Clearly the employment situation has been (too slowly) improving for years, so <a href="http:\/\/thinkprogress.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/05\/apriljobschart.jpg" target="_blank">looking only at jobs</a> one is still forced to conclude that the recession ended no later than Q1 2010.
Nixon may have told the most brazen lies (&quot;I am not a crook&quot;), but on sheer volume of lies, the determination to keep telling lies that have repeatedly been exposed, and willingness to lie even when the truth would&#039;ve worked just fine, I&#039;m pretty sure Romney has him soundly beaten.
I was actually referring to the states which TPM colors dark (Obama +10 or more) or mid (Obama +5 - +10) blue. As of right now, those states alone are enough to seal the election - Mitt can sweep the +5 to -5 states (CO, IA, IN, TN (!!! *), FL, NC, VA and NH), and still lose. It&#039;s not very likely he&#039;ll sweep all those states, RCP currently has Obama +1.3 in IA, +1.4 in FL, +2.7 in CO, +2.8 in VA and +3 in NH. Meantime, some of the states - MT, GA, SC, AZ, IN - that Romney hasn&#039;t yet managed to turn darker than light pink on RCP&#039;s map should have Karl Rove in a flop sweat every night.
* looks like most of the TN polling was done before Mitt sealed the nomination, and is thus non-representative. The only post-primary poll is a more believable Rmoney +7.
&quot;His policies will take America backward &mdash; back to the discredited liberalism of a bygone era...&quot;
Careful there, Mitt-tards -- voters are sort of hankering for the days when everything pretty much worked. You know, back when people had jobs, there was no Federal deficit, and the Clinton-era tax rates on bazillionaires somehow left actual job-creators humming along just fine.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the pond, it&#039;ll be all Oasis vs. Blur while Suede and The Stone Roses produce better music than either but break up in despair at not being able to have anyone pay attention.
We could probably at this point engage in a lengthy discussion of hypodescent, matrilineality and &quot;passing&quot;, but that&#039;d just be depressing, now, wouldn&#039;t it?
The regulations arising from Obamacare. Also too, any regulation that has anything to do with extracting planet-killing fuels, plus the CAFE increases. Otherwise, AOTK, of course.
Romney is the most dishonest Republican nominee for president since Richard Nixon.
So according to TPM, Obama would be reelected if he <em>only</em> won the states he&#039;s currently leading by at least 5 points? Nice. Not sure I feel that comfortable about it yet, myself.
The NBER&#039;s criteria are actually much more complicated than 2 quarters of GDP shrinkage. They consider employment, industrial production and real income in addition to GDP.
But even focusing on just the employment situation, the recession ends at the trough, in other words, at the worst of the bad times. The recession does not last until the economy has recovered to pre-recession levels. Clearly the employment situation has been (too slowly) improving for years, so <a href="http:\/\/thinkprogress.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/05\/apriljobschart.jpg" target="_blank">looking only at jobs</a> one is still forced to conclude that the recession ended no later than Q1 2010.
Nixon may have told the most brazen lies (&quot;I am not a crook&quot;), but on sheer volume of lies, the determination to keep telling lies that have repeatedly been exposed, and willingness to lie even when the truth would&#039;ve worked just fine, I&#039;m pretty sure Romney has him soundly beaten.
this is so good.
Ahh, the unbridled pessimism of a true liberal ;)
Fortunately, although perhaps not surprisingly, not too many of the mid- and dark-blue states are wholly owned subsidiaries of Koch Industries.
Well, depends how you define swing states.
I was actually referring to the states which TPM colors dark (Obama +10 or more) or mid (Obama +5 - +10) blue. As of right now, those states alone are enough to seal the election - Mitt can sweep the +5 to -5 states (CO, IA, IN, TN (!!! *), FL, NC, VA and NH), and still lose. It&#039;s not very likely he&#039;ll sweep all those states, RCP currently has Obama +1.3 in IA, +1.4 in FL, +2.7 in CO, +2.8 in VA and +3 in NH. Meantime, some of the states - MT, GA, SC, AZ, IN - that Romney hasn&#039;t yet managed to turn darker than light pink on RCP&#039;s map should have Karl Rove in a flop sweat every night.
* looks like most of the TN polling was done before Mitt sealed the nomination, and is thus non-representative. The only post-primary poll is a more believable Rmoney +7.
&quot;His policies will take America backward &mdash; back to the discredited liberalism of a bygone era...&quot;
Careful there, Mitt-tards -- voters are sort of hankering for the days when everything pretty much worked. You know, back when people had jobs, there was no Federal deficit, and the Clinton-era tax rates on bazillionaires somehow left actual job-creators humming along just fine.
Spam.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the pond, it&#039;ll be all Oasis vs. Blur while Suede and The Stone Roses produce better music than either but break up in despair at not being able to have anyone pay attention.
see, this is what happens when you hire Lewis Carroll as your campaign manager...
We could probably at this point engage in a lengthy discussion of hypodescent, matrilineality and &quot;passing&quot;, but that&#039;d just be depressing, now, wouldn&#039;t it?
Although you won&#039;t mind its absence much, as it&#039;ll give you much-needed time to recover from Mel, Ace and the Seventh Doctor.
Other than Obamacare, which is not really a regulation, I have yet to hear of a specific regulation they would like to repeal.
Katie?
One doesn&#039;t exactly have to be Alan Turing to break that code, does one?