Seriously. The press will bump him down, just to build him up and show The Big Mo.
Posted on 09/04/2012 7:00:31 PM PDT by Jess Kitting
Barack Obama approaches his nomination for a second term with the lowest pre-convention personal popularity of an incumbent president in ABC News/Washington Post polls since the 1980s. He’s also at his lowest of the year among registered voters, with trouble among women.
Just 47 percent of registered voters in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll see Obama favorably overall, down 7 percentage points from his recent peak in April, while 49 percent rate him unfavorably. He’s numerically underwater in this group for the first time since February.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I wish that everyone would stop worrying about Intrade. It means nothing. It's the equivalent of a bar bet, albeit nearly a million of them. Here's an explanation I posted last night:
The all-time highest daily volume for Obama winning the election was 21,889 shares on 9/1. That same day, the volume for Romney winning the election was 32,822 shares (also an all-time high).
A winning share pays $10. So, you can consider the price of the share to be approximately 1/10th of the probability of winning. At the close on 9/1, Obama was $5.84/share, and Romney was $4.21/share.
That means that 1 day's volume (on 9/1) for Obama was 21,889 * $5.84 = $127,831. And the same day, the volume for Romney was 32,822 * $4.21 = $138,180. That's a lot of money to you and me, but that's chickenfeed to someone that wants to manipulate it for political purposes.
But, only a fraction of that would be needed. First, that daily volume is 4-5 times the average daily volume up until the last few days. Second, only a small number of shares are available for immediate trade right now, to satisfy outstanding orders. If you were to buy or sell all those, the price would move very quickly.
Right now, I could boost Obama's share price from $5.82 to above $5.98, buying 3,017 shares for $17,794. That would satisfy all the outstanding orders currently listed. Conversely, I could depress Romney's share price from $4.16 to below $3.88, selling 9,048 shares for $37,290. I wouldn't even have to own those shares -- I could effectively create new shares immediately.
Moving either one all the way to 0 or 100 could get a bit expensive. There are a total of 410,183 open shares for Obama and 402,797 open shares for Romney. But, even at the maximum price of $10/share, that's still only a bit over $8,000,000 for both, combined. That's the total "capitalization" of the market, currently -- although more shares can quickly be added by people selling shares they don't already own.
So, do you see how easy it is to manipulate the Intrade prices? It's like a penny stock -- relatively moderate amounts of money can move the price a great deal.
This past weekend we travelled from Cleveland to Cincinnati and back. We saw 1...that’s ONE...Obama 2012 sticker.
We got plenty of thumbs up for our Romney sticker.
I work for the Federal Government and park in a designated employee only garage.
There are ZERO Obama stickers.
Very telling. In 2008, you couldn’t count them all.
ping
It's clear the enthusiasm isn't there. The question is how many previous Obama voters will vote for Romney, or just not vote at all. It depends on how successful the Kneepad Media is in repeating the Carter strategy: "My term was a disaster, but Reagan would be worse".
I think the enthusiasm gap will result in lower turnout on the left side of the political spectrum. But, I don't know if Romney will inspire higher turnout on the other side.
The slope of the truth curve is beginning to rise slightly. It will be vertical by november
Gallup has always been in the tank for the Democrat's latest candidate du jour. They apparently thought they could they could get a return on their investment.
I've worked on government contracts. Intentional inflation of a bid for services is considered a serious infraction.
A convention dip is very possible considering who is running, their patform, and their track record.
Again, this poll is in registered voters. If they used likely voters, it would be even worse for Hussein and the jackasses.
You got it. When the economy sucks, the women who used to care about "abortion rights" now care more about putting food on the table and paying the rent/mortgage. That translates into voting Republican.
Oh you know it..Next week its going to be the most amazing numbers in polling history as the Won achieves 101% approval rating after a stellar convention.
They are delusional. Where does they think he's going to get the money to continue the upkeep on that lavish life? His books? Investments? Speaking? Lord knows her fat a$$ is never going to work again.
Seriously. The press will bump him down, just to build him up and show The Big Mo.
Once people, particularly women, start paying attention to the election in the final month or two, they'll see that instead of the evil & nasty person the Dems try to portray him as, he's a tall, handsome man with a youthful appearance who looks Presidential.
I don't care what rationale the reality-show-watching segment of the population uses to vote for Romney over Obama, as long as they do. If appearance helps, then that works for me!
Yeah, I like how they said that. Couldn't just say 'Since 1980.' Nope, 'Since the 1980s.' Let's see. There were two presidents that were incumbents in the 1980s. One lost miserably while the other won every state except his opponent's home. Hmmm, I wonder which one they were talking about.
Whatever he fills it with, you can bet your sweet a$$ it won't be empty chairs!
I can well believe it; the whole country’s going to h*ll - and in a hurry, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.