Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Obama over Romney in Trial by Combat because (like Snoop someanimal would say) "He's a good n***a." and "he could ball." LOL
There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and county-equivalent cities in the country first are grouped into 2,025 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample consisting of 824 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State. (For a detailed explanation of CPS sampling methodology, see Chapter 1, of the BLS Handbook of Methods.)
So I confirmed my suspicions.
I asked because a article/editorial in the Wall Street Journal was attacking the 7.8% statistic for being inaccurate, due to it being decided by a survey and such questions being vague (like someone being considered part-time employed if they worked one hour of babysitting.
Also, the editorial attacked the fact that the Obama campaign treat the statistic as if it was gold.
I would link it, but the Wall Street Journal put its articles beyond a pricing wall.
edited 11th Oct '12 5:13:58 AM by chihuahua0
On how the noise from these Bureau stats gets handled.
It's not a perfect number, exactly, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics is giving the most accurate data possible at the moment, and needs 2 months from now to adjust the numbers to a more sound average. WSJ is right to call Obama on it being 'gold', but the Jobbers pretty much are pulling shit out of their asses. The economy is improving slowly.
Also the president when he's saying 'things are getting better' has to reference some number. And the most available number is that 7.8% unemployment. Him saying "around" 7.8% would get people on both sides huffy, and knowing America, would get someone to call him 'Un American'.
edited 11th Oct '12 6:01:07 AM by PotatoesRock
![]()
Well the thing is though that the statistic has always been calculated the same way, so it's not like Obama's presidency could have massaged the numbers to make it reflect better on them. Both parties have been treating an inaccurate statistic as "accurate"... except when it suits one's purpose not to.
edited 11th Oct '12 6:22:26 AM by ohsointocats
The VP debate isn't likely to matter much—long as neither man makes some monstrous gaffe that reflects upon the whole campaign. However, such gaffes are distinctly possible: Ryan is capable of tone-deafness, and Joe Biden is ... Joe Biden.
As long as both veep-wannabes avoid those missteps, though, it probably won't matter which one gets the better of the arguments or does better rhetorically.
Which is why I doubt the the VP debate will amount to much. Biden is capable of staying on message for the length of a debate; Ryan is probably determined not to make Obama's mistake—i.e., assuming that he can win by showing up & letting his opponent do his work for him. There's still a non-trivial chance that one of them will slip, but one shouldn't bet on it. And absent that, the polls aren't likely to budge in either direction.
On the other hand, Biden pretty much should be able to hold command on Foreign Policy, as that's been his thing his entire career. 'cuz if Ryan goes with the Romney talking points, I don't see it going terribly well for him, since Biden has real time experience with most of the foreign politicians Ryan's going to be talking shit about.
Then again, no one cares about foreign policy this election, so. Que sera, sera. I just hope he's able to do something about Ryan's "aw shucks" homey Washington Outsider shit (which is apparently one of Ryan's key strategies in previous debates).
Actually I'm getting more of Jimmy Carter vibe from the Obama camp.
Inherited a recession,which he's getting flak for
Alienating the base he needs
Working with people hell bent on getting him out of office
Attempting to get the opponent to stumble,instead of being a Red Oni. Romney may not be Reagan,but he's certainly proved himself not to be Kerry or Gore anymore
Carter lead the whole summer until the debates.
Obama and Carter both got in blaming everything on the last administration
Really, House Republicans? You're going to launch a congressional investigation into the fucking jobs numbers?
Because they're optimistic?
OH, and one of them revealed the location of a secret CIA base.
EDIT: Mitt Romney, you are so fucking full of shit.
He claims that we don't have people who die because they don't have insurance.
edited 11th Oct '12 11:28:59 AM by Enkufka
Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry

Look, Grant was no idiot. It's grade school history that he was too "trusting" and "naive" and "good-hearted" when making appointments. Motherfucker slaughtered men daily on the battlefield, you think he can't sense when some of his friends are on the take?
Moreover, he obstructed justice by crowing, "Let the law be executed" when the US Attorneys threatened to come after him.
Evidence seems to point to Grant wanting to be treated like an Earl and live in lavish gold rooms like his English counterparts. After all, until blowing all his cash on speculations he had amassed a fortune from bribes.
edited 11th Oct '12 12:29:55 AM by johnnyfog
I'm a skeptical squirrel