2012 Race for the White House II: The Two Towers

I may be late to this, but The Economist has endorsed Obama: http://www.economist.com/news/leade...sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one

 

Agreeing that Nate Silver may be right is an inherent rejection of the usefulness of the pundit class. If 7 hours a day discussing "who won the week" and "Romneymentum" is less credible than a guy in his apartment running some statistical models, why listen to the pundits at all? They're attacking Silver the same way that horse carriage drivers attacked cars; they're frightened.

 

Maybe Bloomberg shouldn't have publicly said Obama wasn't welcome in New York.

 

Bloomberg didn't want a visit from Obama. Say what you want about the symbolism of these visits, but they do actually have an effect. Although its not a competition, I think the Jersey shore took the absolute worst of it. NY has plenty of damage, and that one neighborhood burning down is pretty awful.

 

Bloomberg asked Obama not to come because of the disruption that the President's arrival would cause. For better or worse, the press follow the president.

EDIT: I see it's already addressed above. Seems like Bloomberg should have asked Obama to avoid Manhattan and survey Queens and Staten Island instead.

 

Still to soon to start the "2016: Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie thread"?

 

Just sayin'.

 

Just sayn' what? That Bush shouldn't have gone to the site of a terrorist attack?

I think that's a little different than a hurricane.

 

Steve Young is publicly apolitical, but his wife came out against Prop 8.

 

Woooooosh.

I'm just sayin' that Bloomberg could have worked out a presidential visit. That was one of the best moments of the Bush presidency, for him and for the country. I think people in NJ were lifted a bit by Obama's visit, and I'm sure it could have been arranged in NY. As TPH mentioned, he didn't have to go to lower Manhattan. He probably could have bounced over on Marine One from NJ without too much hassle.

 

OK that's good.

 

And I am saying the concentrated destruction of 9/11 was a little different than the widespread destruction of a hurricane.

 

Right wingers love unskewedpolls.com so I wonder if there will be any backlash if he's wrong.

Here's his current projection:



http://unskewedpolls.com/unskewed_projection_2012 president_02.cfm

 

Literal LOL.

 

A reminder of what all should know, that the right-wing media are not a collection of people with integrity and principles who have just happen to have a different viewpoint. They are instead whores who will say anything at any time, and hope that the audience is either too biased or too stupid to hold that against them -

 

The name belongs up there with Stalinist Truth Squad.

 

If he's wrong, it was widespread voter fraud.

 

I was going to say, they don't have ACORN to kick around any more.

 

Truthfully, the two situations are rather different.