One is greater than two?

[Zeus]

Someone please explain to me why if, as most polls suggest, Obama won the last two debates, than Romney still seems to have the momentum from the first debate? Is that first debate so much more important?

It's an honest question, I don't understand why that first one was so much more important to undecided voters in the swing states

[Anarky]

The only thing that really matters is the Electorial College:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Generally the popular vote is close, which polls typically measure.

[Zeus]

The only thing that really matters is the Electorial College:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Generally the popular vote is close, which polls typically measure.

Yeah, I remember that from when Gore actually won the popular vote 49%-48% but lost on the electoral colleges (and maybe some rigging....but let's not get into that).

But it's in these swing states where there isn't much of a change from the last two debates that I'm referring to. There's been clear evidence that the race has tightened in the swing states after the first debate and hasn't changed much after the other debates. Why is it that the first had so much impact?

[Anarky]

I wish I had an answer for you, but understanding people defending someone that has proven to be a liar over and over again is difficult. If you go back to the Republican primary his own party rails him on this issue.

I live in a Blue state, and in a very blue city. In Los Angeles it is hard to get the other perspective without people saying something along the lines of "I don't like Obama", but that is all I'm hearing in general.

Politics in this country don't make sense. My dad is a Republican and from my perspective I can't even tell you why. His father was a WWII Veteran and he grew up in Minnesota which is another blue state, and then moved to California, granted the city I grew up in is a Republican pocket. My dad is disabled, has never had an issue regarding race or sexual orientation, always been generous with charity, and he is an atheist. He is still voting for Romney, and I cannot understand how that benefits him in anyway. I don't know if he is holding onto what the Republican party used to represent or what.

[Anarky]

http://cavalrymenforromney.com/

[Shrinweck]

Romney clearly won the first debate where Obama seemed weak whereas the debates Obama won were closer and many people just don't care unless the winner is obvious. If better arguments swayed elections then we'd live in a more intellectual world, but we live in a world of zingers and headlines winning the day. Undecideds are a mind boggling phenomenon. It's clear where these opponents stand in the election - in order to be undecided at this point you really have to be a great big idiot or just not paying attention.

Over a million more users on Youtube watched that jump from outer space a week or so ago get SET UP than last nights debate. I really don't know what else undecideds are waiting for other than a snazzy success or a downright headline-making failure.

One of my best friends in high school was a deep, deep Republican and he told me once that he was still willing to be friends with me and talk about politics because at least I had an educated opinion, as opposed to the kids that were Republic, Democrat, or moderate because that's all they knew. That's a lot of what's out there. People who just don't care about what's going on and who are just looking for something obvious because god forbid they form an opinion that isn't based on what someone else is/has been telling them.

Also military people tend to vote Republican. You heard Romney saying last night that he was just going to up military spending two trillion dollars out of nowhere? That's basically why. Republicans just shovel money in their direction. Your father probably just learned some tendencies from that and just kept it going. Strange, since Obama is clearly who you want if you have a pre-existing condition.

[Zeus]

Republicans pour tons of money into the military to ensure extra spending goes towards the military industry they rule. That has always helped them garner almost unbridled support from military personnel and in America, where this is a very big thing, that counts for a lot of support overall. That's why Obama's trying so hard to show he's a military supporter.

And that is something that I do find: voters really do have amnesia (much like one of the candidates :-). You see anyone talking about the 47% quote anymore? I'm so amazed the Democrats ain't all over that just like the Repubs ain't all over Libya. You see anyone talking about all the contradictions R-Money has put forth from his hardline days trying to win the GOP nom to a lot of the moderate views he's trying to portray now on a national scale? Nope. It's like nothing matters aside from the last couple of weeks when everyone who hasn't already decided who they're voting for finally decide to start caring.

I've always said that this is an idealogical vote and not an issues one....and that's mostly on the economy which people don't really understand. You can talk about the other issues all you want but it seems like people are deciding whether or not they want a sort-fo moderate, rich Republican who wants to cut severely everything but spending to his friends to balance an unbalancable budget (in 4 years) or a president which hasn't magically fixed the Great Recession in 4 years (we won't bother talking about the roadblocks that were put in his way because they don't matter anymore) like he was basically promising (YES WE CAN). Do you let the current president keep going or do you take the other idealogical view?

What's really gonna decide this? Voter turnout. The less voters that come out, the better chance R-Money wins. It's no secret that conservative-minded people have much greater turnout and can often win the elections in a country with mostly liberally-minded people.

[Don]

I saw an analysis that says basically Romney originally started out sounding like a nutjob. After winning the first debate people realized he's not a nutjob and Obama loses by the virtue of the economy sucking. In similar to how Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush, Romney's getting the momentum for not being Obama, because Obama is responsible for 4 years of lousy economy. Sure it's probably not his fault but voters don't care about that. The incumbent gets all the blame if the economy sucks while he's in office.

[Zeus]

I saw an analysis that says basically Romney originally started out sounding like a nutjob. After winning the first debate people realized he's not a nutjob and Obama loses by the virtue of the economy sucking. In similar to how Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush, Romney's getting the momentum for not being Obama, because Obama is responsible for 4 years of lousy economy. Sure it's probably not his fault but voters don't care about that. The incumbent gets all the blame if the economy sucks while he's in office.

Yeah, just like they get all the credit for the economy doing well even if they did nothing (*cough*Clinton*cough*) when it was the economic policies and actions taken during the previous term that actually caused the recovery.

Not to mention most people don't know / don't care about the economic cycle....

[SineSwiper]

I saw an analysis that says basically Romney originally started out sounding like a nutjob. After winning the first debate people realized he's not a nutjob and Obama loses by the virtue of the economy sucking. In similar to how Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush, Romney's getting the momentum for not being Obama, because Obama is responsible for 4 years of lousy economy. Sure it's probably not his fault but voters don't care about that. The incumbent gets all the blame if the economy sucks while he's in office.

Yeah, just like they get all the credit for the economy doing well even if they did nothing (*cough*Clinton*cough*) when it was the economic policies and actions taken during the previous term that actually caused the recovery.

Not to mention most people don't know / don't care about the economic cycle....

Most people don't know / don't care about a great many important things about electing somebody. They don't know about how the filibuster works. Or how businessmen make lousy presidents. Or which of their stupid rumors they heard from Rush is actually true or not.

People are fucking stupid, and most of them shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[Zeus]

I saw an analysis that says basically Romney originally started out sounding like a nutjob. After winning the first debate people realized he's not a nutjob and Obama loses by the virtue of the economy sucking. In similar to how Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush, Romney's getting the momentum for not being Obama, because Obama is responsible for 4 years of lousy economy. Sure it's probably not his fault but voters don't care about that. The incumbent gets all the blame if the economy sucks while he's in office.

Yeah, just like they get all the credit for the economy doing well even if they did nothing (*cough*Clinton*cough*) when it was the economic policies and actions taken during the previous term that actually caused the recovery.

Not to mention most people don't know / don't care about the economic cycle....

Most people don't know / don't care about a great many important things about electing somebody. They don't know about how the filibuster works. Or how businessmen make lousy presidents. Or which of their stupid rumors they heard from Rush is actually true or not.

People are fucking stupid, and most of them shouldn't be allowed to vote.

That's the beauty of democracy, even a veiled one. Everyone gets an equal vote whether you be the crack-ho or Warren Buffet. It may be towards lesser of evils in a system that is set up to benefit the super-wealthy. But if people really started to care, they could actually make changes.

[Shrinweck]

Not letting people vote is a slippery slope that 100% of the time will churn out worse decisions than before. It's impossible to limit who gets to vote without becoming ULTRA SUPER RACIST or ULTRA SUPER MURDER-Y or whatnot. Saying one group of people should have a stake over what happens in this country than the next group of people is inherently elitist. Exclusion is not a path that should be gone down. Stupid people voting is an unfortunate consequence, but it's not one I'd be willing to forgo. The United States already tried to test people's competence to vote and those were hardly the best of times.