It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GDP formula points to Obama win - The Trial on ATS

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
I expect to get flamed but I’d really like people to take an honest look at this. Lets put the partisanship aside and look at the reality on the ground. The video below is a great example of propaganda IMO. Just as Obama is hitting new all-time lows the MSM roll out this garbage!

In this video the MSM points to three indicators that apparently mean Obama is a shoe-in for a second term. So, let’s look at what they point to, shall we?



They point to GDP Q2 growth as a positive sign, but is it?



* Second-quarter GDP rises 1.5 percent, slows from Q1

* Consumer spending growth slowest in a year

* Inventories rise, point to slower third-quarter growth

* Report could raise chances of further monetary stimulus

WASHINGTON, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. economic growth slowed in the second quarter as consumers spent at their slowest pace in a year, increasing pressure on the Federal Reserve to do more to bolster the recovery.

Gross domestic product expanded at a 1.5 percent annual rate between April and June, the weakest pace of growth since the third quarter of 2011, the Commerce Department said on Friday.
Reuters

They then point to ‘Presidential approval rating’…well, let’s take a look.



Nope, that looks like crap too.


Finally they point to the so-called ‘Incumbency Factor’ - How has that worked in the past?


Here are the facts, many of which you may not remember from your American History Classes:

• There have been 56 elections in the United States Prior to the November 2012 elections

• In total there were 25 chances for an incumbent to be re-elected. (Death, and an elective no second try, are the main reasons for not having a second term)

• In total only 8 out of 25 incumbent presidents were ousted for a 68% pass rate, including FDR’s near two decade run

• Modern day (aligning with our prior research of 76 years) there were 11 chances for an incumbent to be re-elected

• In Modern day times, only Hoover, Carter and Bush Sr were willing to go a second, but “one time” presidents, making for a 73% chance pass rate.
stats

They have a point here, except for the FACT that no POTUS in history has ever run the spending and deficits of this POTUS. I’m not sure how he can make a credible argument about how he’s made the country any better at all…..can you? Every major indictor of prosperity has taken a beating!

So what do these numbers mean to you?

Is Obama going to win in 2012?

Do these stats point to an Obama victory or is this more MSM propaganda?



edit on 28-7-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
These numbers mean nothing to me for i believe that both main parties are controlled by the same entity. One must win, let it be the one who's got more money to give and is easiest to control.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CaveCanem
 



These numbers mean nothing to me for i believe that both main parties are controlled by the same entity. One must win, let it be the one who's got more money to give and is easiest to control.


More money to give?


So you want more free stuff I presume?


You do realize that the money Obama gives out isn’t “Obama’money” but actually tax dollars collected by the 50% who actually pay taxes, right?

Actually, that was a rhetorical question because I know you don’t have a clue based on your response!



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
The numbers don't really mean anything to me, I've been aware that Obama hasn't done a damn thing in four years for awhile now. Unfortunately he will probably win in 2012 because I don't think many people believe Romney would/will be any better



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by behindXtheXveil
 



The numbers don't really mean anything to me, I've been aware that Obama hasn't done a damn thing in four years for awhile now. Unfortunately he will probably win in 2012 because I don't think many people believe Romney would/will be any better


Fair enough…

Do you believe the video is MSM propaganda based on the info I presented?

Would you rather more of the same or a different (or even slightly different) approach?

You already know what you’re going to get with the incumbent.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by CaveCanem
 



These numbers mean nothing to me for i believe that both main parties are controlled by the same entity. One must win, let it be the one who's got more money to give and is easiest to control.


More money to give?


So you want more free stuff I presume?


You do realize that the money Obama gives out isn’t “Obama’money” but actually tax dollars collected by the 50% who actually pay taxes, right?

Actually, that was a rhetorical question because I know you don’t have a clue based on your response!





And you have a very poor reading comprehension and analytic intelligence is clearly not the one you were blessed with.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
It means to me, that it's perfect Ron Paul campaigning season. Spread the word!

In all seriousness... Obama is dooming himself, left and right. BUT, he has 'accomplished' a lot. For good or bad, it doesn't really matter... because some how, action is viewed as success and we always want a successful president. He's an easy sale over Mitt, that is... until the name Ron Paul enters the equation!



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Of course they roll out this when the popularity is down- they're trying to prop him back up. Just publishing this sort of thing does actually work on a lot of people. It all looks very scientific, and makes the election appear to be mathematically predetermined. That tends to defeat the energy in the opposition, and, sadly, a lot of undecided people will vote for whom they believe will win.

I really detest this sort of manipulation.

Having said all that, I remain a sort of optimist. I don't believe this election is going to be typical. I think we're in for some surprises.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yeah it does seem like propaganda

and I would love to see a different approach from Obama or anyone else in that matter, 4 years of essentially treading water didn't do anyone any good

and that is a tough question, there is something to sticking with the "devil" you know rather than the one you don't. I personally won't vote for Obama, but I don't think either of them are the best candidates for the job so it shouldn't make a huge difference either way



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by CaveCanem
 



And you have a very poor reading comprehension and analytic intelligence is clearly not the one you were blessed with.


And you have lame comebacks and lack of references!

Why don’t you at least tell me something and back it up?



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by CaveCanem
 



And you have a very poor reading comprehension and analytic intelligence is clearly not the one you were blessed with.


And you have lame comebacks and lack of references!

Why don’t you at least tell me something and back it up?





I already told you something, it might have been too ambiguous for your mind to grasp it. And why would i put a reference to a statement that is coming from me?

source : CaveCanem



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by behindXtheXveil
 



Yeah it does seem like propaganda

and I would love to see a different approach from Obama or anyone else in that matter, 4 years of essentially treading water didn't do anyone any good


Yes, it’s a tough position, which is why the MSM is carrying his water and trying its best to make lemonade out of lemons.



and that is a tough question, there is something to sticking with the "devil" you know rather than the one you don't. I personally won't vote for Obama, but I don't think either of them are the best candidates for the job so it shouldn't make a huge difference either way


I hear you…but the ‘devil you know’ has brutalized our economy. If there was EVER a time for 'change' its NOW!



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Regardless of who wins, I don't see any real change. Yes, we are seeing an ever increase in spending, deficits will continue to grow larger and larger every year. Obama, Romney - they agree on so many things. Health care, Patriot Act, NDAA and cybersecurity laws (now with the added bonus of gun control)

As to who wins, there is no clear winner at the moment imo.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by FractalChaos13242017
 



It means to me, that it's perfect Ron Paul campaigning season. Spread the word!


Right!


For those who haven’t heard, Ron Paul suspended his campaign and has announced his retirement from public service; he won’t seek another term in congress; he’s done.

He was a pipedream from the start an he said it himself; he never expected to win and he was right (at least about that).


In all seriousness... Obama is dooming himself, left and right. BUT, he has 'accomplished' a lot. For good or bad, it doesn't really matter... because some how, action is viewed as success and we always want a successful president. He's an easy sale over Mitt, that is... until the name Ron Paul enters the equation!


He has accomplished a lot…I agree!




posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Intrade has Obama winning, at this point. Which sounds about right. They are often a great indicator for these things. Better than the silly 'polls'.

www.intrade.com...



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   
OK, let's put partisanship aside.

I have yet to see a model showing Mitt Romney ending up with 270 electoral votes at this point in time.

A little partisanship thrown in:

According to talkingpointsmemo.com; Obama is calculated as having 281 electoral votes to Romney's 191.

Slightly more mainstream NY times shows Obama ahead 217 to 206.

More to the right at realclearpolitics.com show Obama up 231 to 191.

At 270towin.com they have Obama up 217 to 191.

CNN currently has the president with 247 to 206.

Even Karl Rove's weekly electoral projection has Obama up 194 to 101, add in the 'leading' states and you get Obama 237 vs. Romney 172.

Now, is it possible that Romney could sweep up those toss-up states for the win? Absolutely. Anything is possible. No one is projecting an overwhelming win for Romney right now, remember, Obama took 53% of the vote in 2008 and about 75% of the electoral votes. If his numbers are anywhere near that come November then you're looking at another Obama term.

This is reality.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I really hate short replies but this one does not need much elaboration. Romney has so many advantages over Obama due to his near total failure as a President except one - Mitt Romney. That is Obama's greatest benefit. If anything saves Obama this election it is Mitt Romney.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



Intrade has Obama winning, at this point. Which sounds about right. They are often a great indicator for these things. Better than the silly 'polls'.


Sounds like more propaganda from “Intrade”. (By the way…do you have a link?)

What is your opinion, based on what I laid out in the OP? How does anyone justify a second term?

What do we WANT MORE OF from Obama?


edit on 28-7-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 



I really hate short replies but this one does not need much elaboration. Romney has so many advantages over Obama due to his near total failure as a President except one - Mitt Romney. That is Obama's greatest benefit. If anything saves Obama this election it is Mitt Romney.


No worries about being short…I think you’re right.

Romney isn’t the candidate of choice for many…but he’s not OBAMA!

I sure wish Obama had a real opponent because we’d be looking at a damn landslide right now (and maybe some serious change in the right direction too).

Though I feel Romney is likely the other side of the same coin I do believe he IS a STEP (just a small step) in the right direction simply because he appears to be a free market capitalist rather than a Marxist.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



Intrade has Obama winning, at this point. Which sounds about right. They are often a great indicator for these things. Better than the silly 'polls'.


Sounds like more propaganda from “Intrade”. (By the way…do you have a link?)


You mean the link in the post you are responding to? The link you cut out when you cut when you posted the above reply? That link?

Here it is again:

www.intrade.com...

Intrade is an online betting website that buys and sells 'shares' of preictions for various events, from sports to natural disasters to politics, etc. I'm not sure how that could be considered 'propaganda'. It's more like a fairly accurate barometer.


What is your opinion, based on what I laid out in the OP?


I think he'll win. This is all pre-planned.




What do we WANT MORE OF from Obama?


edit on 28-7-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)


Ice Cream. More Ice Cream.

And hats. Lots of funny hats. And Ponies.

Oh, wait, that's Vermin Supreme.
edit on 28-7-2012 by stanguilles7 because: spelling



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join