The latest Madville Times poll asked you, the politically savvy collective mind of South Dakota, "Has Mitt Romney boosted his chances of beating President Obama by picking Paul Ryan for VP?" Between Saturday and yesterday morning, August 11&ndash14, you responded (thank you!) thus:
- No (72%, 113 Votes)
- Yes (28%, 45 Votes)
As usual, the margin of error here is somewhat larger than the number of senior citizens who will die earlier under Paul Ryan's voucherized Medicare program, so your guess is as good as mine. The latest national polls may disagree with our initial assessment: Gallup's latest seven-day poll on the Presidential race captured some voter reaction after Romney's VP announcement Saturday, while Rasmussen conducted its latest poll entirely after the speech at Battleship Irony. Both polls show Romney slightly ahead (Gallup: 2%; Rasmussen, 3%) of Obama.
But notice that at the end of July, Rasmussen showed Romney leading Obama by five points. Gallup showed Romney and Obama tied last week. That's not much of a Ryan bump.
In a separate poll, Gallup finds the Ryan pick drawing less favorable reaction than any VP choice since Bush picked Quayle in 1988. And while Republicans and Democrats alike are hoping Ryan will affect how people vote, Gallup finds 66% of voters saying the VP pick won't affect whom they pick for President. That figure lends some support to Troy Jones's thesis that most voters have already made up their minds, leaving a very small percentage of votes up for grabs (just 1%? really?).
Ryan has more positive influence than negative: 17% say the Ryan pick makes them more likely to vote for Romney, while 12% say they are now less likely to vote for Romney. Still, that 12% is a bigger reported running-mate deterrent effect than any since Quayle's in 1992 (25%). Of course, even I will agree that Paul Ryan is no Dan Quayle. Quayle turned off a lot of the electorate because he came across as an airhead. Ryan's head is full of ideas... really bad ideas.
Update 20:12 MDT: Los Angeles Times sees no Ryan bounce. They also anticipate no convention bounce for either the GOP or Dems, given the stability of this year's polls. Interestingly, the biggest VP bounces in recent history went to Bob Dole for picking Jack Kemp in 1996 and Al Gore for picking Joe Lieberman in 2000.
The earth haters will stop at nothing to remove a black man from the "White" House: MoveOn.
--As usual, the margin of error here is somewhat larger than the number of senior citizens who will die earlier under Paul Ryan’s voucherized Medicare program
Or the millions fo elderly who ARE dying because of Barry Obama's defunding of Medicare by $700 MILLION.
There's only ONE candidate for president this year who has actually cut Medicare funding: Barry Hussein Obama.
Tribes in Nebraska ignored by politicos:
"The quarterly meeting of the Indian Commission addressed items ranging from a youth empowerment program to the burial of potentially ancient Native American remains unearthed in Nebraska. It was held to coincide with the 147th annual Winnebago Powwow.
To the best of anyone’s knowledge, no one running for U.S. Congress campaigned there, one of the largest Native events of the year." NET radio.
Julie - I couldn't agree more. Nothing like complaining about a man who hasn't cut anything yet, while their current president and savior has just gutted medicare. Obama is killing grandma as we speak.
Western Nebraska under a red flag warning. Gaia: be merciful.
"gutted Medicare": We know that's a lie. President Obama imposed the same cost controls to control growth in spending that we've used in the past to extend the solvency of the program. No recipient has lost benefits. Plus, Ryan endorses those same cost controls and assumes them in his own plan to really destroy Medicare. Plus plus, the cost savings from Medicare fund the ACA, which will reduce health care costs by getting rid of lots of uncompensated care and keeping people healthier earlier, both of which reduce what the feds will pay out for services under Medicare. President Obama is working to make Medicare more sustainable; Romney and Ryan want to give up, say America doesn't have the wealth to take care of its senior citizens, and throw them on back to the tender mercies of the individual insurance market (ha!).
Obama on Medicare: Yes We Can! Romney-Ryan on Medicare: No We Can't!
--President Obama imposed the same cost controls to control growth in spending
Cost controls = cuts.
--say America doesn’t have the wealth to take care of its senior citizens
Senior citizens are largely able to fund their own everyday health care costs.
Why are you suggesting that we take from the young worker to fund seniors' free monthly checkups. In the Obama economy, most youths, especially black & minority youths, cannot find work, and thus cannot afford ANY healthcare. Why are you arguing that they should pay for senior care but not their own?
--Romney and Ryan want to give up, say America doesn’t have the wealth to take care of its senior citizens,
Obviously even Barry Obama agrees that the US does not have the wealth to take care of its seniors--why else try to enact cost controls to avoid more TRILLIONS in unpatriotic debt?
--, which will reduce health care costs by getting rid of lots of uncompensated care
Huh? If care is "uncompensated", how does one save money by eliminating it?
Gawd, you're so funny sometimes.
My Medicare is doing just fine, thank you. Now either get real or get some serious counseling. Your fantasies and lies are wearing thin. About as thin as your cerebral matter!
My bet is this gives a pretty good indication of the distribution of your readership who supports Obama or Romney. Nothing more.
I'd be more interested to know if your readers think Obama should fire Biden. I thought he should have announced a VP/SOS trade a few years ago for term two. Too late now but interesting to get feedback on this what if.
Julie...You want to think President Obama is gutting Medicare? Does the name Rick Scott ring a bell? Think Florida...think Medicare fraud. Republicans must see that as a virtue considering they rally around his governorship.
But maybe...just maybe...Obama's plan is a part of getting the $716B back into the business of health, stopping fraud (like Rick Scott) and implementing other savings...
You know what...why don't you look it up yourself. Where does the $716 billion in savings come from in the ACA go...the info is out there. Go out on a limb and be curious.
On the flip side, Romney/Ryan are proposing to cut the same amount...I know, who would have guessed with all of the Mediscaring.
Guess where they are going to put the savings from their cuts...the general fund...kind of sucks if you are a senior, huh.
Certainly you see the hypocrisy and deception.
The convention-goers will signal whether our party supports a switch: don't expect a call from the DNC for your opinion, Troy.
Jeffro: find some gasoline, douse yourself with it, then set yerself alight.
Cory I'll give you a chance to put your money where your mouth is. The bet is a dinner at the Lodge in Deadwood for 12 people sometime in November or December of 2012 on a weekend. The winner invites nine plus himself and the loser invites one plus himself and pays for the meal plus all cocktails and tips. Here is the bet; " Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan beat Barack Obama/Joe Biden in the Presidential election held on the first Tuesday of November, 2012! I bet with Romney/Ryan and you would obviously bet with Obama/Biden. Public display of affection? Or sinister move on Hoffman's part to extract yet more money from the Liberal Cause? Your Call = Game ON?
"Ryan has more positive influence than negative: 17% say the Ryan pick makes them more likely to vote for Romney, while 12% say they are now less likely to vote for Romney."
Cory, How can you reconcile that statement with the title of this post? All I can make out of it is the conclusion that one or both of the polls are skewed, biased. Like that should come as a surprise.
Only one poll matters: The election itself.
My prediction: Obama by a small popular majority but a substantial electoral majority.
I think your projection is right on Stan.
But the rationalization is that those polls are for the whole population not the 1% of likely undecided voters.
Having said that, I know Cory doesn't bet but I'd back that all day long.
My terms: a cap on the average per person after 20% of pre-tax amount tip of $100 bucks so there isn't any crazy wine or Scotch abuse (but a reasonable amount of abuse).
Cory can take his wife if we lose, but if we win it has to be at either Foley's or Minerva's, it would take more than $1,200 to get me to drive to Deadwood in the SD winter.
Stan you must be gaming Cory for a very legal bet in SD. No money exchanges hands or enriches the victor. You are not taking into account the "Young Vote" which threw the dogs on McCain four years ago; now aligned with the "Unemployed" and will switch hit for Romney. That wonderful feeling of "Hope and Change" has turned into "What the Hell"!
OK,
side bet between us. $10k on the youth vote.
Is this all legal if there is no vig?
You should know the law better than me, Charlie.
sorry, "better than I".
My high school English teacher, who is the mother of a very conservative state legislator, would be ashamed of me for that. She did help me get the best score on the grammar ACT with all of that sentence diagramming.
Justin the second we bet on dollars exchanged between us the bet becomes illegal. If we bet with a third party taking the winnings and we taking the stimulus of the bet it remains legal as far as I can understand the law. But the law is fuzzy at times yet I will stand firm unless someone can prove me wrong.
Cory ; it is only 9PM out West. Or are you centrally located and dreaming of that 10 mile ride before sunrise?
Stan: "Ryan doesn't boost" fits with the Gallup results on Ryan's influence. 17% felt more likely to vote for Romney, 12% less likely, but a huge majority say it doesn't affect their choice. If anything, the Gallup results seem to support the "doesn't boost" thesis even more than my poll here.
Charlie, Justin is right: I will avoid any legal questions by avoiding all bets. But I'd still enjoy dinner or just a face-to-face conversation with you next time you're out Spearfish-way (oui!, back in South Dakota's Boulder, revving up to teach French for another year).
Cory that is fair game for me. (Honestly I'd hate to have the Attorney General call me and say --#@@*#@@#**#-- are you doing Hoffman?)
My bride has a gig in Spearfish in September. I message you the details tomorrow. Ride on!
I'll ---message you the details tomorrow. Justin, you have me really thinking now..................
Justin if I place you within 20 miles of both a Minerva's and a Foley's your home base should pop up which would lead me to a slightly better understanding of who you may be.
My "prediction" is based on pure gut feeling, not any sort of reasoning at all.
Charlie, trust me, I'm nobody you've ever met. I am in no way involved in SD politics. Other than being a voice on this board.
I'd be happy to tell you who I am if you don't start a smear campaign against my business interests. If you want to invest, I'd especially welcome the introduction.
In fact, you don't need to do any CIA style searching, I am a Sioux Falls resident.
But when we meet, I'm still going to tell you SD needs a better record on open government. That's my opinion.
Gut feeling or not, Stan, your predictions are basically spot on with the electoral college polls. They are currently projecting both Florida and Ohio for Obama, which is the real downside of the Romney nomination. I thought Portman was a shoo-in and the best chance the GOP had. The polled GOP favored Rubio, but I think that would have been a bigger mistake than Ryan, despite the giant trophy Florida is in the electoral vote. Ryan doesn't even deliver Wisconsin, but things are looking good in Iowa and Colorado based on the choice.
sorry I meant the "Ryan nomination"
Ruh-roh Shaggy...Politico reports that there is some angst in the ranks of the well heeled GOP that Ryan will have a negative effect on down ballot races.
Maybe it's the Ayn Rand thing...or championing total control over a woman's right to have a period without reporting the results to the government..or maybe it's Mediscare and privatizing Social Security.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/15/us/with-ryan-in-medicare-fight-recasts-races-for-congress.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79648.html?hp=l3
Stay tuned to hear the new Republican code words for talking about to Ryan's radical plan gutting medicare.
"It only took two hours after the Paul Ryan vice presidential announcement for Republican congressional candidates to get their talking points on how to spin the Ryan budget and Medicare attacks."
“Do not say: ‘entitlement reform,’ ‘privatization,’ ‘every option is on the table,’†the National Republican Congressional Committee said in an email memo. “Do say: ‘strengthen,’ ‘secure,’ ‘save,’ ‘preserve, ‘protect.’â€
The email read like a warning shot, alerting Republicans that they would soon face a barrage of Medicare-themed attacks and telling them they needed to be ready for the scrutiny that was to come. The internal email, obtained by POLITICO, was a clear and immediate sign that Republicans knew Ryan could create trouble down ballot for GOP candidates in tight congressional races.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79673.html#ixzz23gL8SQSO
Can't wait for Varilek to call her out on that little memo to deceive when she uses those words in the debates. Just be careful about turning those words into a drinking game...
Jana, there is a bigger event that occurred post Ryan nomination. Rupert Murdoch, who had been publicly obstinate because Romney hadn't turned his campaign over to Roger Ailes much earlier, has now started supported Romney publicly (as if that wasn't going to happen anyway).
Fortunately, that will only serve to unite a minority base that was already going to vote for Romney, but expect almost-fired people like Palin to get behind the ticket trying to protect their jobs. I think the damage has been done with Gingrich, though. I don't expect him to endorse the ticket until the last second. He was the one conservative voice that didn't and doesn't support the outrageous claim that cutting taxes decreases the deficit.
sorry I am completely wrong. Newt apparently has firmly embraced the "fiscal meth" already.
It's embarrassing when somebody completely disavows their philosophy for a chance at holding the Presidency.
In fact Newt now calls the lack of any foreign policy an "advantage".
Looks like he knows where his next job will come from. I'm sorry I assumed what he told my cousin who worked for his campaign wasn't a complete lie.
Jana, nervous Republicans? That just shows that reasonable members of the base recognize that you can't win a Presidential election with nobody but the base on board. They recognize that Romney has abandoned the center that President Obama squarely occupies. They thus have that same gut feeling Stan does.
"The Libertarian Party of Washington has notified the Secretary of State’s office that it has filed suit in Thurston County Superior Court asserting that Republicans’ presidential ticket does not qualify for a place on the November ballot."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/08/17/162605/washington-state-libertarians.html