Romney Picks Paul Ryan as Veep - Mkay ...

[Kimberly]

Nam,

We did have this discussion; thanks to PD for his research:
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,23367.msg522555.html#msg522555


I was just hoping you had new information. I guess not. 

[Nam]

If you look at wiki's map for state polling, you can see it is updated to show it's a battleground state leaning toward Romney. If you check 270towin they have information, too. If you check other websites, on the issue, I'm sure you can find out more. But, that's up to you.

-Nam

[Kimberly]

Nam,

I don't think any of your sited sources warrant even mentioning it. You get my hopes up every time you mention it and you never provide any new data. I'm glad you're opportunistic about TN but I wouldn't hold my breath or even find it worthy of discussion.

http://www.270towin.com/states/Tennessee says Romney. My anecdotal life experience in the state says Romney. How about this if TN votes Obama I will buy you a beer. Otherwise lets discuss real battleground states.

[Nam]

I'm on a phone. I can only go so many places that allow mobile access. Or doesn't take 100 years to load. If you want to know, you find out, it's not my state.

[EDIT]

Oh, and I never said it wasn't going to Romney, actually I've stated quite a few times it'll likely go to Romney.

-Nam

[Kimberly]

You're making claims; back them up or dismiss them. It's not a big deal, I've made my opinion and if/when you have the resources to back up your claim I will read it. Until then it's just your opinion.

Edit: Spelling error.

[shnozzola]

I know we’ve hammered this to death, and I’m  preaching to the choir, but today’s NPR guests with Diane Rehm talking about global warming, and how strongly VP Ryan comes out against the science on global warming – another mark against Romney/ Ryan and common sense – it is worth listening to.

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-08-14/new-consensus-climate-change

Also, this from the NY Times a few days ago.

A firestorm is raging across the Internet after The New York Times ran an op-ed piece by University of California Berkeley scientist Richard Muller. In it, he explains why he turned from climate-change skeptic to accepting the central role that humans play in warming the planet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

@ Nick – starting to see Obama has a chance?

I realize that many view Obama as too conservative - but Romney with Ryan becomes very scary.

[HAL]

If you look at wiki's map for state polling, you can see it is updated to show it's a battleground state leaning toward Romney.

Tennessee a battleground state? No way according to Real Clear Politics -

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

[Nick]

Tenn didn't even vote for their own guy (Gore) in 2000.  Would have been enough without Florida.

[Nam]

My opinion is based on the 2 sites I mention; sure the data is a couple of months old but at one point I saw Tenn. A battleground state at wiki then it wasn't and now it's shown to be again. So, I have backed up my statements. If you don't like it, I don't care. If wiki didn't feel it was a battleground state, they'd leave it solid in Romney's favor.

There isn't any new polling out of Tenn., you have to read varying local papers to find out the current situation if I were on a desktop, i'd do that but I'm on a phone, so, I can't.

End of discussion.

-Nam

[HAL]

End of discussion.

I was not aware we ended discussions here with "end of discussion"

Is that a new policy?

[shnozzola]

Something else – reading between the lines and listening to Ryan, I believe a Romney/Ryan Whitehouse would quickly get rid of Obama’s health care plan – and, realizing how more and more people like alot of Obama’s heath plan (and since it is based on a version of Romney’s)  they would replace it with  ……………… Obama’s heath care plan, claiming how much better it is .   

[Kimberly]

End of discussion.

I was not aware we ended discussions here with "end of discussion"

Is that a new policy?

Only if your Nam and too entitled by a phone to research your claims yourself. IDK Why you don't just state that this is your opinion instead of a fact is beyond me . It would be less painful if you would stop using the phone excuse during conversation. If you aren't equipped for debate then don't do it.

Top Google Results:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/20/1093242/-Tennessee-within-Margin-of-Error-for-2012-Presidential-Election

I wrote a few at SwingStateProject, but I thought the headline today in my local paper (The Tennessean) was exciting. A new Vanderbilt poll has Mitt Romney leading Obama by 1 in the state of Tennessee (42-41).

Now I will note that this is only one poll and we need further polling to state that this is a reality. We should remember that Tennessee was last carried by Bill Clinton, so it is possible that it could become a swing state again. Regardless of Obama carrying Tennessee, if Mitt Romney has to worry about investing money to keep Tennessee, he has no chance of winning nationally on election night.

http://www.metropulse.com/news/2012/feb/29/tennessees-red-state-blues/

Now it’s considered a “red state,” as if it couldn’t be anything else. For the first time since before World War I, Tennessee is no longer considered a swing state.

No one’s predicting this year will be any different. Barring a major surprise, 2012 will mark the first time in history that Tennessee has gone Republican four elections in a row.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2011-07-17-obama-travel-visits_n.htm

•Obama has skipped 10 states entirely — nine of them solidly Republican. The other, tiny Vermont, is solidly Democratic and has received just two presidential visits in 35 years. Only in May did Obama visit Kentucky and Tennessee for the first time.
White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest says policy, geography and logistics play greater roles in choosing sites for Obama to visit than politics.
"We look for venues where he can emphasize or reinforce a larger message," Earnest says. While Obama is likely to visit more states in the future, he says, "I don't think it's a surprise that the president travels more frequently to the states that have more people in them."

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jul/03/tennessee-sen-corker-unhappy-with-student-loan/?print

The Volunteer State "is not going to be a swing state," Corker[1], a Republican seeking a second Senate term in November, told residents at a morning coffee gathering at the Cleveland/Bradley Chamber of Commerce.

1.	One of my reps I mentioned writing, you know the anecdotal part that was dismissed

I'm not a political guru so IDK what sites are the best to use as sources. But I read every entry on the Google results and not a single one backed up your claim Nam.

BTW This is the only time I do your leg work for you. Please do your homework before coming to class and sharpen your pencil before the bell rings.

[Nam]

I can't post links, my phone doesn't show links. I can't quote from websites 'cause my phone doesn't have that feature. I never got your hopes up, you got your hopes up. I cited the two websites where I got this information. That's all I can do. Cite.

I'm limited. It's a fact. If I could do all the things I used to be able to do, I would do those things. I never said Tennessee was going to Obama. What I said, based on the information I gathered from reading 270towin, which also provided a link, at the time, to local papers in Tennessee on how it just may be a "battleground state", and the fact that wiki still lists it on their map, as a battleground state, that it was in play. South Carolina is as red as Tennessee, yet that too seems to be a "battleground state". Will it go to Obama? Most likely not. Same with Tennessee.

-Nam

[HAL]

Here's four more battleground state sites - none show Tennessee as a battleground state. The information you obtained was evidently flawed.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map

http://www.270towin.com/

http://www.politico.com/2012-election/swing-state/

http://battlegroundstates2012.com/

The only thing that mentioned Tennessee as a battleground state was something regarding the Civil War. 

http://www.banktravelmanagement.com/Article.aspx?id=115

[Kimberly]

Nam,

It hinders discussion when you state facts and sources and require everyone else to look it up for you. Then when we look it up the data doesn't match.

My hopes were never really up or dashed, it was a figure of speech to express lightheartedness. Ya' know; "I wish my state would magically turn in to a progressive state, less bigoted state, more freedom from religion, etc." I know this isn't likely to happen and that I'd be better off moving to a state that better suited my principles. But I figured you would understand this type of banter and didn't explain it thoroughly.

I think it would be easier to have a dialogue with you if you just stated opinions instead of "facts". Especially if you don't have the ability to produce sources. I'm pretty sure that is the proper forum etiquette or netiquette.

[Nam]

All I ever do is state opinions. I tell people where I get the information from, and cite the website. Tell me that wiki doesn't show on their statewide map that Tennessee is shownas a battleground state, and I'll shut up. I looked a half hour go, and it shows it a light color with lines through it in favor of Romney but not a solid red. That signifies it a battleground state. It's not like there's much polling out of the state so it is relied upon the most recent information.

-Nam

[Kimberly]

I'm saying Wiki is wrong. You say I'm wrong because Wiki says I'm wrong. Circular logic isn't getting us anywhere. Just say you were wrong and/or that in light of new information being brought forth you change your mind and we can move on to real matters.

[HAL]

All I ever do is state opinions. I tell people where I get the information from, and cite the website. Tell me that wiki doesn't show on their statewide map that Tennessee is shownas a battleground state, and I'll shut up. I looked a half hour go, and it shows it a light color with lines through it in favor of Romney but not a solid red. That signifies it a battleground state. It's not like there's much polling out of the state so it is relied upon the most recent information.

-Nam

Um, no. Light color with lines through it in favor of Romney means it's leaning Romney. Battleground states are in play for either side and not leaning either way.

Bless your heart, you just got confused.

[Kimberly]

Um, no. Light color with lines through it in favor of Romney means it's leaning Romney. Battleground states are in play for either side and not leaning either way.

Bless your heart, you just got confused.

For the record I didn't understand that either. ::Blushes::
I can see how Nam would find it confusing, especially on a smaller screen with lower quality.

Edit: Hey if you click the map it expands, whodathunk it?

Wiki says TN has two stripped color stripes which mean:
  Light Pink Mitt Romney leading old polls (no recent polls available)
  Light Green  Barack Obama leading old polls (no recent polls available)

So Wiki basically says, "IDK."

[Nam]

It explains on the map what things are. It states anything with blue/red lines is a battleground state. It has that, therefore it's a battleground state, even if it's a lighter color. Texas isn't red, it's pink. Not an advantage for Obama since it's still in favor of Romney but it ain't red.

I may not have recent information for Tennessee but every time I ltry to load certain sites, it doesn't load. Perhaps based on the VP pick it has changed more in favor of Romney but more I read about recent information it has more to do with the politicians viewpoint rather than the opinions of the people. Which is why I am not backing down from my stance. Once I read a new poll, from the people, then I will change my stance. Based on what I've been able to read, that's my opinion.

-Nam

[HAL]

Tenn is NOT a battleground state, but I'd like to see this map.

Who's going to post the exact link to this flawed map?

[Nam]

If they are green lines instead of blue, I can't tell on my phone. They look blue, to me.

-Nam

[Kimberly]

Wiki says TN has two stripped color stripes which mean:
  Light Pink Mitt Romney leading old polls (no recent polls available)
  Light Green  Barack Obama leading old polls (no recent polls available)

So Wiki basically says, "IDK."

I used this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leading_presidential_candidate_2012_by_state_Obama_Romney.svg
I can take a screen shot if Nam can't click the link.

[Kimberly]

I only captured the relevant data. I still think Wiki is wrong.

[HAL]

Firstly, that map doesn't specify battleground (toss-up) states. It has something to do with old polls and new polls.

This -

Barack Obama leading old polls (no recent polls available)

Makes me wonder what is going on with this map. When has Obama ever led a general electorate poll for president (not just Dems) in Tennessee. Ever? In 2008 it was 57 - 42 in favor of McCain.

DO NOT USE THAT MAP.

[Nam]

The map Kimberly provided shows Tennessee and South Carolina in pink stripes, and light blue stripes. Which denotes that they are "Battleground states". South Carolina recently being added to recent polling there.

The map itself is more updated than the list they have.

-Nam

[Kimberly]

Nam,

Is the map I posted in reply #81 what you have been referring to?

[Kimberly]

The map Kimberly provided shows Tennessee and South Carolina in pink stripes, and light blue stripes. Which denotes that they are "Battleground states". South Carolina recently being added to recent polling there.

The map itself is more updated than the list they have.

-Nam

It says those lines mean:
Light Pink Mitt Romney leading old polls (no recent polls available)
Light Green  Barack Obama leading old polls (no recent polls available)

How do you come to your conclusion that it says otherwise?

[Nam]

I see blue lines, and pink. No green. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong based on the screen of my phone not based on information, collectively obtained. I do not use one source as my sole source of information. And, the "older poll" for Tennessee isn't that old. Like, they have one dating back to 2011 for one state. I don't trust the polling data from a year ago. But a couple or so months? That's not so old that it gives one side a greater advantage than the other.

-Nam