TPM Polltracker: Obama: 281 Romney: 191 Tossup: 66

[DCBob]

http://core.talkingpointsmemo.com/election/scoreboard

Nice map and polling tracker. Interesting Michigan is a tossup but the data is a bit stale there... lastest MI poll was 6/28. Some key states like OH, PA and VA looking good.

[SDjack]

1. Diebold has a lot of work to do before the election. n/t

[aaaaaa5a]

2. Good news. But more work needs to be done!

[fujiyama]

3. I wouldn't worry too much about MI

It'll come around. The state leans a few points left of Ohio...

[DCBob]

4. Agreed. I cant imagine Michigan going for Mitt "Let Detroit go Bankrupt" Romney.

I suspect the Obama campaign is saving a nice ad to run on that issue just prior to the election.

[MooseTrax]

5. I Fail To Understand The Right.............

............for the last 30 years. This country had always done a decent job of settling debts. After the 2nd word war anyone who earned more than $300,000 per year paid 91% of the excess to the IRS. That rate stayed in place through Eisenhower's two terms. Now with tax rates hovering at the lowest they've been in 40 years the right had taken a pledge, "No Tax Increases." All this after Reagan and the Bushes cut taxes for the wealthy and borrowed from foreign banks to cover the shortfall. In other words funneling borrowed money into the hands of those in this country who already made up the top 1% of taxpayers. This is from the national debt figures at the end of fiscal years all the way back to 1980:

Total U S Debt

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accomodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38(Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00
09/30/1980 $907,701,000,000.00

[DCBob]

6. Alot of numbers there... Im getting dizzy.

Not sure I get your point. Does it have anything to do with polls showing Obama spanking Romney?

[MooseTrax]

7. My Point Is

I can't understand why any Republican with one eye and half sense doesn't understand that they're the problem. I voted for Eisenhower in 1956, voted for Richard Nixon three times. I was a Republican for thirty years but will never vote for another one if I live to 100. The idea of Grover Norquist and the T party throwing a bunch of bullshit into the tax game makes my arse crave lime juice.

[Cosmocat]

8. As it should

This is the one basic, fundamental truth that seems so simple, but somehow the starting point on the baseline is that roughly 45% of the voters buy this tax and spend liberal song and dance ...

All Clinton did was get the top rate bumped up to the high 30s - as you noted, less than half of what it has been historically.

That is it, that is really all it would take to get the budget turned around in a half decade, get more money flowing in the economy and uptick things a bit.

But, somehow, it is life and death over the top rate ...

[DCBob]

10. Good point.

I get it now. Thanks for explaining.

BTW.. welcome to DU MooseTrax!

Bob

[Rosanna Lopez]

13. Eisenhower

Eisenhower was probably the last Republican President with some honor and integrity. Possibly the best Republican President of the 20th Century.

Would be considered a liberal today and wouldn't be able to get the Republican nomination. But rather than trying to dismantle FDR's New Deal and social safety net and financial regulations like modern Presidents, Eisenhower left many of those programs in place and maintained high tax rates on the wealthy.

He also had the courage in his Farewell speech in January 1961 to warn Americans of the danger of an out of control Military-industrial complex. Can you imagine anyone having the guts to do that today?

The Republican Party went downhill after Eisenhower left and descended into the vile, inhumane group of people that control it today.

[demwing]

26. It's intentional

They WANT to starve the beast, its the only way they can see killing whats left of the New Deal.

The good news is that if they don't succeed this time, they probably won't get another chance. The political map is changing, America is getting less white, and states that were once reliably red are turning blue. The world in which Republicans live is more narrow than ever, and grows increasingly more so each year. They cannot win for much longer, just look at the EC map and see the trend,

The next generation of Americans will look back on this economic crisis and easily see what so many of us (who are currently too close to the problem) cannot now grasp - the fact that taxes are to a government as gross sales revenues are to a business - the life blood. You can only starve the beast for so long before the beast dies - an out come that even the Tea Party rank and file wants to avoid (as evidenced by the "Hands off my Medicare" signs). I don't see future generations having the same "To tax, or not to tax" styled conversations. We are settling those argument now, this year, in this election. It's god damned historic!

The Red leadership may want the beast to die, and will try to replace it with a new beast driven by profit instead of civil liberty, but the Republican voters don't share that vision, even if they don't know it yet. Those that can "get it"-will "get it," and those that cannot will fall from the genetic melting pot. Liberalism has an evolutionary bias.

If we can survive, we will win.

[MooseTrax]

9. Plus.....

......the Republican house has vowed that their primary goal is to defeat the president. They seem to be totally aloof from any common sense approach to governance. Like I said...in a national election I'll never vote for another one.

[mnhtnbb]

11. I sure hope my fellow Tar Heels wake up and go Obama again.

[JoePhilly]

19. My wife and I will be voting for the big O, and my son is now old enough to vote.

[Rosanna Lopez]

12. George Romney

How much resonance does George Romney's name still have in Michigan? Are there some people there voting for Romney just because of his last name?

Perhaps someone needs to explain that Romney left the state 40 years ago and never looked back. He went elsewhere to make his fortune and political career. He only returns to his beloved 'home state' when he wants their votes.

He loves Michigan because the 'trees are the right height'. Surely they see through that?

[DCBob]

14. "Let Detroit go Bankrupt" -- Mitt Romney, NYTimes, Nov 2008

That is why Romney will never win Michigan.

[Rosanna Lopez]

15. Yes, but . . .

That's what most of us thought earlier this year, but the state has turned out to be closer than we expected.

As you said in your own post above, who would have thought that a state like Michigan would be listed as a Toss-up?

Kind of odd to see a Democrat polling well in Virginia but not in Michigan. Presumably the pollsters are underestimating Democratic support in Michigan, but it has still alarmed people at the DNC to see Romney tied there in some of the polls.

[DCBob]

16. There is no "but".. Michigan will go blue once again.

You want to wager something on that?

[Rosanna Lopez]

17. 80%

I think Nate Silver gives Michigan an 80% chance of going for Obama, so it would certainly seem that way based on its electoral history and the current campaign dynamics.

If Obama is leading in a state like Virginia, a state like Michigan which hasn't voted Republican since 1988 should be in the Democratic column. Presumably the Obama campaign isn't that concerned or they would be spending more time there. They must feel the recent close polls in Michigan don't correspond with reality.

But it's weird seeing a map in which Obama does better in Virginia than he does in Michigan .

What's also interesting is that Romney appears to be doing worse in Tennessee than he is in Arizona, which is kind of odd considering that TN was a bad state for Obama in 2008.

So either something different is happening or else the polls this year are very out of whack.

[DCBob]

21. You claim to be knowlegeable about politics and polling yet..

you seem concerned about what you call "odd" fluctuations. If you have followed polling for any period of time you will notice all sorts of odd fluctuations that make no sense. It happens all the time and every year. The only way to make sense out of it is to look at trends and averages.

[DCBob]

18. "has alarmed people at the DNC"

Are you buds with people at the DNC? Who do you know exactly? Just curious.

[JoePhilly]

20. Yup ... Obama will take Michigan too.

I think Obama wins with more that 300 EC votes.

[DCBob]

22. 300 would be a good target to set.

I think he can do it given the opponent he is up against.

[JoePhilly]

23. I think Obama can match his last EC numbers.

NC might be tough, but it is doable. And I think Obama can win FL.

[DCBob]

24. FL will probably be a nail biter once again.

I think OH, VA and NC are going to be "easier" wins than FL... and that's why the President has multiple win scenarios whereas Romney pretty much has to run the table on all the tossups. I think the campaign is doing a great job so far and if the economy doesnt tank before Nov Obama wins it by a solid margin.

[JoePhilly]

25. YUP ... agree ... Obama has a huge edge on "paths" to victory.

Mitt needs some one to come down with a few Golden Plates and save his sorry ass.