Liberals dont care that Kerry was rich, richer than Romney substantially, because he is a parasite who married the money, same as his wife. He is on foodstamps/disability -- it's just a larger disability check. Talking of disability, great hopey changer tripled disability rolls. Most of these people had to lie to get there. Romney should speak directly to them and say that he understands that Obama support comes from fear, not hope. He should say that he wont cut unemployment, disability, foodstamps but instead create jobs. He can, there are easy ways to get US economy going and growing and he should be more confident that he can and not be afraid to overpromise.

Is there anything despicable and shameful Obama could do to lose support of liberals? I mean, Thatcher protected Rushdie with special secret shelters and bodyguards, in spite of the man being vicious critic of her. Danes did the same for Danish cartoonists. French put police in front of the magazine publishing Muhhamad cartoons and said firmly they will protect freedom of speech in spite of having largest islamic percentage of population among western countries. Obama jumped like a lapdog of Muslim Brotherhood and arrested the movie producer in the middle of the night on some trumped up charge, instead of speaking for the freedom of speech. He is a shame and national disgrace to the US, and all you guys are capable to think of is repeat like robots that Romney misspoke here or there.

First of all the movie producer was never arrested or detained. The sheriff only spoke to him.He has gone into hiding voluntarily.I think that he has much less to fear from Obama than from the Islamic radicals who want to cut off his head.There were some videos posted online showing when they chopped of the heads of some Americans. I think they even posted the video of Daniel Pearl beheading.If you see those videos you will realize that they chop off people's heads similar to what they chop off the heads of chickens. There is no remorse, no empathy, nothing.We already saw what they did to the US consulate in Benghazi.Why? Because of a movie. Are they nuts???

QuoteOriginally posted by: traderjoe1976First of all the movie producer was never arrested or detained. The sheriff only spoke to him.He has gone into hiding voluntarily.Clearly. Obama didn't out his name and religious affiliation. He wasn't arrested in the middle of the night, instead of being given protection, like it was done in England, Denmark, or France. He just voluntarily jumped into the squad car, being surrounded by 10 deputies. That could have been the story of nazi collaborators -- those people were just voluntarily hiding in those trains.

QuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaLiberals dont care that Kerry was rich, richer than Romney substantially, because he is a parasite who married the money, same as his wife. He is on foodstamps/disability -- it's just a larger disability check. I remember this story: President Gigilo

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerI am a little puzzled. Normally when polls look like this, intrade shows around 55-45, not 69-31. For example, I think I remember Bush polling ahead four or five points, and trading 58-42.Associated Press/GfK 9/13 - 9/17 807 LV 4.3 47 46 Obama +1NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 9/12 - 9/16 736 LV 3.6 50 45 Obama +5Rasmussen Tracking 9/15 - 9/17 1500 LV 3.0 45 47 Romney +2Gallup Tracking 9/11 - 9/17 3050 RV 2.0 47 46 Obama +1If I were Gallup, I would get on those intrade message boards, and offer one of those geniuses $30k a year to explain how to sample correctly. If there is really a good reason to second-guess a poll to that extent, then polls need some kind of improvement.The registered versus likely voters looks plausible. O+1 in registered, O+.5 in likely. Direct measurements show much greater voter interest and enthusiasm on the Romney side.In summary, these polls seem about right to me. If O is not over 50% after 5 years, I am not sure that 5 years and one month will change much.Not necessarily. A poll is not necessarily more correct if the gap between candidates is larger. And a candidate's chance to win is not necessarily larger if he leads by more %. It might just be that USA 2012 is a very divided nation and if we *could* see the true opinions of people Obama:Romneyontknow/Dontcare was 47:45:7.

QuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaIs there anything despicable and shameful Obama could do to lose support of liberals? I mean, Thatcher protected Rushdie with special secret shelters and bodyguards, in spite of the man being vicious critic of her. Danes did the same for Danish cartoonists. French put police in front of the magazine publishing Muhhamad cartoons and said firmly they will protect freedom of speech in spite of having largest islamic percentage of population among western countries. Obama jumped like a lapdog of Muslim Brotherhood and arrested the movie producer in the middle of the night on some trumped up charge, instead of speaking for the freedom of speech. He is a shame and national disgrace to the US, and all you guys are capable to think of is repeat like robots that Romney misspoke here or there.Oooh, I'll play.Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeild refused to arrest Osama when they had him surrounded even though he killed lots of US civilians. Why, why do these conservatives constantly kiss the behinds of Islamic fundamentalists?

QuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaLiberals dont care that Kerry was rich, richer than Romney substantially, because he is a parasite who married the money, same as his wife. He is on foodstamps/disability -- it's just a larger disability check. Talking of disability, great hopey changer tripled disability rolls. Most of these people had to lie to get there. Romney should speak directly to them and say that he understands that Obama support comes from fear, not hope. He should say that he wont cut unemployment, disability, foodstamps but instead create jobs. He can, there are easy ways to get US economy going and growing and he should be more confident that he can and not be afraid to overpromise.Me too, me too! McCain's wife is much, much wealthier than McCain, how come the conservatives elected a man who was a parasite on "foodstamps"?

QuoteOriginally posted by: AnomanderisQuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaLiberals dont care that Kerry was rich, richer than Romney substantially, because he is a parasite who married the money, same as his wife. He is on foodstamps/disability -- it's just a larger disability check. Talking of disability, great hopey changer tripled disability rolls. Most of these people had to lie to get there. Romney should speak directly to them and say that he understands that Obama support comes from fear, not hope. He should say that he wont cut unemployment, disability, foodstamps but instead create jobs. He can, there are easy ways to get US economy going and growing and he should be more confident that he can and not be afraid to overpromise.Me too, me too! McCain's wife is much, much wealthier than McCain, how come the conservatives elected a man who was a parasite on "foodstamps"?Unlike you, who as a liberal speaks for a great conglomerate of liberals, i don't speak for what conservatives do or did, i speak for me. You can search wilmott for my views on McCain at the time of the last elections. I said McCain is a republican mirror of John Kerry. Someone who was born privileged and much of his life lived as a parasite, someone who by his psychological makeup was not suited to be a president, in my view. He did some actual fighting though, and I don't doubt his courage. His call to fame is not that he was wounded into the buttock Forrest Gump style by some stray bullet after three weeks near the field of action.

I found it, here is what i said on McCain then==============Yes, choice of McCain reminded me in many ways the choice of Bob Dole -- was not done on merits, but on some notion of pay for service. I still wait for viagra ads with him and Cindy. In many ways he is a republican version of John Kerry -- important ancestors, privileged background, average to bad student, military service, afterwar celebrity status, almost no time working for a living, spent almost all life in politics and US Senate, left first wife with kids, married a rich heiress whose money paid for his livelihood. There are some differences -- McCain was a courageous soldier and an extremely bad student, and Kerry was a mediocre student and an extremely unremarkable soldier, but overall it's a similar story of people who relied more on their family connections, their celebrity status, their wives wealth than on experience, insight, ingenuity, or originality.

QuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaQuoteOriginally posted by: AnomanderisQuoteOriginally posted by: zerdnaLiberals dont care that Kerry was rich, richer than Romney substantially, because he is a parasite who married the money, same as his wife. He is on foodstamps/disability -- it's just a larger disability check. Talking of disability, great hopey changer tripled disability rolls. Most of these people had to lie to get there. Romney should speak directly to them and say that he understands that Obama support comes from fear, not hope. He should say that he wont cut unemployment, disability, foodstamps but instead create jobs. He can, there are easy ways to get US economy going and growing and he should be more confident that he can and not be afraid to overpromise.Me too, me too! McCain's wife is much, much wealthier than McCain, how come the conservatives elected a man who was a parasite on "foodstamps"?Unlike you, who as a liberal speaks for a great conglomerate of liberals, i don't speak for what conservatives do or did, i speak for me. You can search wilmott for my views on McCain at the time of the last elections. I said McCain is a republican mirror of John Kerry. Someone who was born privileged and much of his life lived as a parasite, someone who by his psychological makeup was not suited to be a president, in my view. He did some actual fighting though, and I don't doubt his courage. His call to fame is not that he was wounded into the buttock Forrest Gump style by some stray bullet after three weeks near the field of action.Just so we're clear, you're pushing a position I don't hold on me. I'm definitely not a liberal, though I might be liberal leaning. Based on the politics of the day, I'm more likely to vote democrat than republican, not because I like democrats, but because I believe republicans are much, much worse.There have been one or two libertarians I like, but I'm not convinced about uncle Ron, Gary Johnson is more like it.Bottom line - you like bashing lefties, I enjoy pointing out the hypocrisies of the right.

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerI am a little puzzled. Normally when polls look like this, intrade shows around 55-45, not 69-31. For example, I think I remember Bush polling ahead four or five points, and trading 58-42.Associated Press/GfK 9/13 - 9/17 807 LV 4.3 47 46 Obama +1NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 9/12 - 9/16 736 LV 3.6 50 45 Obama +5Rasmussen Tracking 9/15 - 9/17 1500 LV 3.0 45 47 Romney +2Gallup Tracking 9/11 - 9/17 3050 RV 2.0 47 46 Obama +1If I were Gallup, I would get on those intrade message boards, and offer one of those geniuses $30k a year to explain how to sample correctly. If there is really a good reason to second-guess a poll to that extent, then polls need some kind of improvement.The registered versus likely voters looks plausible. O+1 in registered, O+.5 in likely. Direct measurements show much greater voter interest and enthusiasm on the Romney side.In summary, these polls seem about right to me. If O is not over 50% after 5 years, I am not sure that 5 years and one month will change much.Apparently you haven't understood the basic notion of markets that prices are determined by trading not by what you think they should be. If you think Romney's chances are much better than the market suggests, you should be rejoicing at the opportunity to get such a good price. So why are you complaining?

The really sad thing is that Romney has wasted over $600 million of donor money to try to win an election in which he has never led in the polls for even a single day. If only he had given me that cash, I could have put it to much better use in the strip clubs of Montreal.

QuoteOriginally posted by: traderjoe1976The really sad thing is that Romney has wasted over $600 million of donor money to try to win an election in which he has never led in the polls for even a single day. If only he had given me that cash, I could have put it to much better use in the strip clubs of Montreal.If you should manage to convince Romney to give up his campaign and give you the dough, please remember your fellow Wilmotters.

QuoteOriginally posted by: FermionApparently you haven't understood the basic notion of markets that prices are determined by trading not by what you think they should be. If you think Romney's chances are much better than the market suggests, you should be rejoicing at the opportunity to get such a good price. So why are you complaining?I don't know is there is anything for someone like you.1) the market prices have moved towards the polls since I wrote that2) I suggested the polls might need to be fixed3) I am not sure what you were listening to when your brain heard complaining4) I have said before I don't risk my money at intrade because not only the counterparties, but also the management is stupid