Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2011
Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?
11
Fri, 09-28-2012 - 4:39pm

Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

 

 .By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News   9/19/2012

 

In the twilight of President Barack Obama's first term, many polls, including a new Quinnipiac University tri-state survey of likely voters, show that most Americans say they are not better off than they were four years ago. But in those same polls, the president retains his edge over challenger Mitt Romney.

 

That's not normal, says Quinnipiac University pollster Peter A. Brown.

 

"Most times if voters think things haven't gone well, they say, 'Let's think of somebody else.' But at this point they're not saying that," Brown said. "Clearly they think [Obama] is more in tune with their lives."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/voters-worse-off-four-years-obama-why-romney-154912983--election.html

 

Why? Because the US is controlled by the Feds. They control the media and election machine. They select the politicians to control the government. That's why even Clinton did a good job in his last term, Bush won the election. What the Feds needed was not a good economy, they need war and the Patriot Act. Several month after his election, 911 happened which satisfied what the Feds needed.

 

This time, Obama will give the Feds something Romney can't give. So you saw Romney is under the fire of media despite the life of Americans is worse off after four years reign of Obama.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2011

The track 14 months ago is still the Obama's. Is there any difference?

The real reason is the Feds need Obama's new Health care reform. There is nothing they care if people can benefit from it or not. They just want it to frame a target in their case with which they have created OKC bombing, 911 attack to get the Patriot Act.

You can see it from the surprise turn around of the Chief Justice Roberts.

726. The surprise turnaround of Chief Justice (7/4/2012)

On 6/28, Supreme Court issued a pass for Obama's Health care policy. What surprised people was Chief Justice Roberts sided with four liberal justices in voting 5-4 to declare the law's "individual mandate" constitutional.

Why did John Roberts, a Bush appointee who generally votes with his conservative colleagues, suddenly change his opinion to vote with the liberal? Just three months ago, he still opposed that "individual mandate" law.

Quote:
Chief Justice Roberts: Can government require you to buy a cell phone?

Mar. 27, 2012 - Chief Justice Roberts asks the Solicitor General Verrilli if the government can require the purchase of cell phones for emergency services, just as the health-care law requires for health insurance.(The Washington Post)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chief-justice-roberts-can-government-require-you-to-buy-a-cell-phone-042/2012/03/27/gIQA9kkreS_video.html

There are different theories about this mysterious turnaround. Mostly were from disinformation office of the Feds to cover up their puppet Roberts. None could solve the puzzle. I know why - the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision. When the Feds want to put Kat Sung under surveillance, they forced the law makers passing through the Patriot Act. (Through OKC bombing and 911 bombing) When the Feds want to restrict Kat Sung in US, they activate the TSA search, (blocking leaving from air flight) blocking the entering of Canada and Mexico; (by "Operation Fast and Furious") see "697. TSA search, Canada and Mexico (12/11/2011)". Now when they want Kat Sung to have a health insurance, they activate their proxy- John Roberts.

 Six years ago when Roberts was selected as Chief Justice, I have written already,
"344. Roberts, a secret agent of D.O.J. (9/18/05)"
http://katsung47.yuku.com/topic/4/The-dark-side-of-the-USA?page=4
This case proves I was very, very accurate at that judgement.

I'll talk about why the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-25-2006

Uh....in case you didn't notice, this is 2012.  That poll is 14 mos. old.

We still support obama cuz Romney offers NO DETAILS and we know we'd be even worse off with more Republicans in DC.

-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2011
Tripower wrote:

Who are these "feds" that you are referring to? The entire government? You believe that voting doesn't matter, that these feds decide the election?

 

The Feds = D.O.D. (Pentagon) and D.O.J. (FBI and DEA)

They control the government system and select the candidate in rigged election and justify the result by faked poll. (because they control the media)

-----------------

Most Americans say U.S. on wrong track: poll

 

 

 

By Steve Holland

 

WASHINGTON | Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:21pm EDT

 

(Reuters) - Economic fears are weighing heavily on Americans, with a large majority saying the United States is on the wrong track and nearly half believing the worst is yet to come, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said on Wednesday.

 

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found 73 percent of Americans believe the United States is "off on the wrong track," and just one in five, 21 percent, think the country is headed in the right direction.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/10/us-usa-poll-idUSTRE7794EX20110810

 

If most people believe US is on wrong tracks, why do they still support Obama. That's Obama's track. But when the Feds need Obama, they would manipulate the media to convince people Obama will win, no matter how senseless it is.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
It's an op-ed piece giving the author's opinion of why Mitt seems to be slipping.

The author noted a similar response as that of your earlier post, from Republicans/conservatives: "That there must be some magical, maniacal skew in the numbers, and the skew must be a conscious effort by a scheming, elite media to dampen Republican enthusiasm."

And like me, he wondered at the lack of facts. No links, no proof, just unsubstantiated claims.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-28-2012

The first line is "Mitt Romney is losing badly."  That's what I said that the left is now saying. So I guess they are.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
You might be able to make a credible case to convince other iVillage posters if links were provided to substantiate the claims.

In the meantime, I came across a NYT piece which was more than a little germane to the OP's topic: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/opinion/blow-40-days-of-night.html?_r=0

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-28-2012

Well, looks like we disagree -- by a wide margin!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009

Crikey. You do know that the more reputable polls show the attitudes of a representative sample, right? So the media outlets which report those results are covering trends;  NOT ginning up "facts" to create a self-fulfilling "reality" (which is more than can be said of Fox).

I had not heard anything which indicated that Obama was so far out in front of Romney--greatest lead was something like 8 points.  Links, please.   I have not seen nor heard a single instance of voters (of either party) being told that they should not exercise their civic rights, though if you want to get nittygritty about it, the voter ID push (from the GOP, naturally) comes closest.  Again, links please.

As for the "worst president ever"....huh. That's absurd. If you look at how the rest of the world is faring economically, the "anemic" job growth record is better by far.

Based on polling results, I think there's a real chance of a rude awakening, but it's going to happen to the GOP, which has drifted so far right as to be in danger of being totally out of touch with the concerns most of us grapple with. IOW, irrelevant.  Women see the GOP treat them as though Roe V Wade never was decided. 47% of us, according to Romney are basically freeloaders who cannot be reached with the message of reduced taxation. Romney is clueless.  Ironically enough, the GOP apparently thinks that voters are dumber than dishwater.

As for God helping us, I'm fine with that in the religious arena, but not at all in politics. Keep God in the churches, synagogues, and mosques.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-28-2012

Who are these "feds" that you are referring to? The entire government? You believe that voting doesn't matter, that these feds decide the election?

The latest drum beat from the left and the media is that Obama is so far out ahead, republicans should not bother voting. A recent poll that had Obama ahead polled 50% democrats and 37% republicans. Really, Obama was able to pull that one out? Obviously they are worried, a lot of Obama's support from '08 has disappeared, and he can't run on his record. He may be the absolute worst president ever. He crows about 42 months without losing jobs, but with anemic job growth. God help us if he gets reelected. I think the democrats will be in for a rude awakening again, just as they experienced in 2010. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Romney is struggling, not because of some plot or other; but because he lacks sincerity, the ability to clearly enunciate details of his often-hyped plan to redeem the U.S. economy, and the ability to speak extemporaneously without putting his foot in his mouth.

Many people also realize that though they may be worse off than they were four years ago, Obama inherited a plunging economy and diminished global prestige from his predecessor.

When the Senate minority leader indicated his party's intent to limit Obama to a single term, it also became clear that he and his confreres in Congress would balk and block any legislation which might reflect well on the POTUS, regardless of how badly the nation would be hurt by their political posturing.

I do not see how the Federal Reserve (presumably "the Feds" to which you refer) could have such vast and sinister powers that they control the internet as well as older forms of media such as television, radio and printed periodicals.

Not EVERYTHING is a conspiracy!

Jabberwocka