posted January 19, 2012 03:47 PM            

The onslaught has begun.

For the next several months, anybody who flips on the TV or surfs the web will be inundated with edgy ads, pontificating pundits and verbose politicians telling them who is the best candidate for president. President Obama and his Democratic backers insist he's the one to bring fairness back to an economy that favors the one percent over the 99 percent. Mitt Romney, who seems poised to lock up the Republican nomination, says Obama is in over his head and only a business honcho like himself can bring prosperity back to the U.S.

Voters who aren't sure will have months of polls, policy proposals, endorsements and perhaps even a few more debates to help them decide. But if you left the grid for most of 2012 and didn't plug yourself back in until the eve of the elections, you'd be able to predict the next president by consulting a few simple indicators. Here are three numbers that will indicate whether voters are feeling more comfortable when they head for the polls on Election Day, and are therefore likely to reelect Obama, or are feeling increasingly dissatisfied and are more likely to tap his Republican opponent.

The unemployment rate. If there's one single indicator that reflects the health of the overall economy and the mood of voters, this is it. When Obama took the oath of office in 2009, the recession was about a year old and the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent. It peaked at 10 percent later that year and has gradually fallen back to 8.5 percent. The downward trend is in Obama's favor, but most economists think it will still take years for the unemployment rate to fall back to the 5 percent range that's considered "full" employment in a good economy.

Threshold number: 9 percent. The unemployment rate could tick back up, as some out-of-work people who have given up looking for jobs start looking again, adding to the number of people technically counted as unemployed. If the economy continues to slowly improve, Obama can probably get reelected even if the unemployment rate inches close to 9 percent. Employers have added about 2.7 million jobs since the beginning of 2010, and if current trends continue, Obama will be able to say on the eve of the election that the economy created 5 million new jobs over the last three years. More importantly, voters will simply feel better, as they see fewer people around them struggling with unemployment and more people getting raises and promotions.

But if the unemployment rate exceeds 9 percent, it could mean another recession is brewing and companies are resorting to layoffs once again. That could happen if there's a financial meltdown in Europe or some other shock that unnerves CEOs and investors. Even if it's not Obama's fault, he'd likely get the blame for another surge in joblessness, and end up unemployed himself in 2013.

The price of gas. No single product affects the mood of consumers like gasoline. Foot-high price signs at every filling station are an inescapable reminder of what it costs to get around, and rising gas prices are usually associated with plunging confidence levels. Drivers seem to have gotten comfortable with prices hovering slightly above $3 per gallon, with polls showing that the majority of drivers are preparing for higher gas prices in the future. Still, any spike in the price of gas is like a tax hike that takes money out of consumers' pockets without giving them anything extra in return.

Threshold number: $3.75 per gallon. After nearly hitting an average price of $4 per gallon in 2011, gas prices have dropped back to about $3.40, which is low enough to keep them out of the headlines and off consumers' worry list. But gas prices are notoriously volatile, and one thing that could push them up is a confrontation with Iran over oil shipments in the Persian Gulf, which some analysts think could push prices as high as $5.

On the other hand, Obama has a powerful trump card: the U.S. strategic petroleum reserve, which he could tap to put more oil on the market if there's a shortage, driving oil and gas prices down. Gas prices tend to stir up the media as they get close to $4, so $3.75 might be an equilibrium price that favors neither candidate. Obama would surely like to see them lower, while his Republican rival would probably benefit if they were higher.

The Dow Jones average. Most working- and middle-class families don't follow stock prices every day, but the stock market still has a powerful effect on the overall economy. Rising stock prices ease the financial pressure on companies and make it easier for them to hire and invest. Wealthy people who tend to own the majority of stocks feel better off when their investments are rising in value, spending more on everything from food to cars to music lessons for their kids. Many ordinary people also have pensions or retirement funds that benefit when stocks rise, making everybody feel a bit more bullish. A falling market, by contrast, brings confidence down with it, even among people who aren't losing money.

Threshold number: 12,832. That would be a modest five percent gain over the Dow's start at the beginning of 2012, the range of growth many Wall Street analysts expect to see this year--as long as no shocks occur. A five percent gain by Election Day certainly would not be a blistering performance, but it would reflect an economy that's slowly recovering, with the battered financial sector getting back to fundamentals. It might also reflect more "quantitative easing" by the Federal Reserve, which is meant to stoke the economy by encouraging people to take their money out of the mattress and invest it in risky securities like stocks.

If the Dow is much lower than that, it will probably signal that something's wrong. The markets are probably prepared for a few modest disruptions this year, such as a contained disruption involving Greece or a brief spurt in oil prices. But anything more severe could startle investors and begin a whole new cycle of gloom. Even if Obama didn't cause such a shock, pinched voters afflicted with frugality fatigue may vote him out anyway. Like many of his fellow Americans, Obama has little margin for error when it comes to holding on to his job this year.
http://news.yahoo.com/3-numbers-determine-next-president-182903690.html

posted January 19, 2012 11:16 PM            

The actual unemployment number is closer to 11% due to all the people who quit looking for work and dropped off the "unemployed rolls".

Neither is a Dow Industrial Average of 12,800+ an indicator O'Bomber is going to be reelected.

Neither are gas prices below $4 per gallon an indicator O'Bomber is going to be reelected.

posted January 20, 2012 02:43 PM            

August 30, 2011 RSS Feed Print

Allan Lichtman, the American University professor whose election formula has correctly called every president since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 re-election, has a belated birthday present for Barack Obama: Rest easy, your re-election is in the bag.

“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman, the brains behind The Keys to the White House.

Lichtman’s prediction helps to explain a quirk in some polling that finds that while Americans disapprove of the president, they still think he will win re-election.

Working for the president are several of Lichtman’s keys, tops among them incumbency and the scandal-free nature of his administration.Undermining his re-election is a lack of charisma and leadership on key issues, says Lichtman, even including healthcare, Obama’s crowning achievement.

Lichtman developed his 13 Keys in 1981. They test the performance of the party that holds the presidency. If six or more of the 13 keys go against the party in power, then the opposing party wins.“The keys have figured into popular politics a bit,” Lichtman says. “They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.”

Lichtman’s earned quite the reputation. In 1992, it seemed likely former President George H.W. Bush would be re-elected, having reached historic highs in popularity after he launched a war that pushed Iraqi troops out of Kuwait. But Lichtman thought otherwise and that factored into former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton’s decision to challenge Bush.“I got a call from this woman with a thick southern drawl. It was Clinton’s special assistant. She wanted to know if it was true that a Democrat could win. I assured her it was and I sent Clinton a copy of my book and a memo and the rest is history.”

In 2005, Lichtman also hit a home run when he said that the political stage was looking so bad for Republicans that Democrats could pick a name out of the phone book and win in 2008, the year a little known first-term senator became the first African-American to win the presidency.

Now Lichtman’s predicting a repeat performance by Obama.

Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama.

1.Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Says Lichtman, “Even back in January 2010 when I first released my predictions, I was already counting on a significant loss.” Obama loses this key.

2.Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama wins this key.

3.Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. Easy win here for Obama.

4.Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point.

5.Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.”

6.Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Says Lichtman, “I discounted long term economy against Obama. Clearly we are in a recession.” Obama loses this key.

7.Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar. Another win for Obama.

8.Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.” Obama wins a fifth key here.

9.Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win.

10.Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama wins again.

11.Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key.

12.Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the incumbent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key.

13.Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection.
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/08/30/never-wrong-pundit-picks-obama-to-win-in-2012

posted January 20, 2012 05:53 PM            

Who is this clown who never heard of Solyndra and the other money cesspits O'Bomber threw money into to pay back his largest private campaign contriubors.

This same clown seems to not have heard about O'Bomber's gun running operation across International borders which got hundreds of Mexican citizens killed...along with a US Border agent.

posted February 14, 2012 08:57 AM            

steadily declining unemployment, following a recession of such depth and far reaching influence that the economic globe shuddered.

or that millions of previously uninsured americans will not have to rely on the ER for med treatment, and save all of us a load of money.

The Commander who orchestrated the hit on Osama?? The terrorist that the previous admin promised to capture/neutralize/kill?? Then lost interest like a chew toy?

And just what choice do we have from the moronic cadre of self centered, delusional, corporatist moonies???

Romney will win the nomination. Fact is he has the support [$] in all the states. Santorum will have to cherry pick. Newt and his [I] moon business enterprise is just one of the many reasons for failure assurance. That Newt is still in the game at all is pure desperation from a base that has no great love for any of the candidates, they simply want Obama out, no matter what.

To my mind, all Romney has to do is open his mouth, and Obama wins.

Santorum wants big gov and christians to make reproductive decisions for all of us.
~~~~
The 1% never has enough money. The billionaires are intent upon making sure that they become the ½ %. They are well on their way to doing so, and with Romney support as Prez, it will surely happen quicker. Obama has made some serious inroads in the corporate support business by taking Mitch McConnell's advice several times of late- with appointments et all. That Obama would take Advice from the man who has stated from the get go that agenda #1 is to oust Obama at all cost smells of back room deals I am reluctant to even contemplate. Whatever could they be cooking up?

Say tuned for new distraction issues, and the return of old favorites. They- [our corporate owners] have only one issue of import....to increase holdings of American wealth- as the ½ %.

One of the numbers that makes me ill is the ammount of $$ we spend on these elections....it is really sick.
Do we really need to have a narrative of 20 or more months on elections???

posted February 14, 2012 10:42 AM            

It's not unemployment that's declining.

It's the number of people dropping out of looking for work who are then not counted as "unemployed" by the Bureau of Labor Statistics...which is INCREASING; 1.2 million between Dec 2011 and January 2012.

posted February 14, 2012 02:11 PM            

In a potential Election 2012 matchup, the president attracts 50% of the vote and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney 40% (see tracking history). This is the largest lead the president has enjoyed against Romney in regular polling going back more than a year. It’s also the first time that the president has reached the 50% level of support against Romney.
Rick Santorum now trails the president by four percentage points, 46% to 42%. Rasmussen Reports will now be tracking the Obama-Santorum race on a daily basis. Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Last week, Santorum had a one-point advantage over Obama. However, like Rick Perry, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich before him, Santorum was unable to sustain that advantage beyond a single poll.
In the crucial swing state of Ohio, Santorum is now even with the president. Romney trails by four. Democrat Sherrod Brown has a modest lead in the Ohio Senate race. Rasmussen Reports will release new data on the race for president in Florida at noon Eastern today.

this was a few days ago, BEFORE obama reworked the contraception insurance issue to let the churches off the hook.

gotta warn the religious right though, most women, including catholics, will not stand for limitation of availability to contraceptives...which in many cases are used for hormonal imbalance issues and nowt to do with pregnancy at all.

posted February 17, 2012 12:02 PM            

..Obama poised to win 2012 election with 303 electoral votes: The Signal Forecast
By David Rothschild & Chris Wilson | The Signal – 20 hrs ago..

With fewer than nine months to go before Election Day, The Signal predicts that Barack Obama will win the presidential contest with 303 electoral votes to the Republican nominee's 235.

How do we know? We don't, of course. Campaigns and candidates evolve, and elections are dynamic events with more variables than can reasonably be distilled in an equation. But the data--based on a prediction engine created by Yahoo! scientists--suggest a second term is likely for the current president. This model does not use polls or prediction markets to directly gauge what voters are thinking. Instead, it forecasts the results of the Electoral College based on past elections, economic indicators, measures of state ideology, presidential approval ratings, incumbency, and a few other politically agnostic factors.

posted February 17, 2012 03:05 PM            

The only poll that matters is going to be taken on November 6, 2012.

Right now, O'Bomber is getting a free pass because republicans are busy beating each other up to gain the republican nomination. As a practical result, the republican vote is split among 4 candidates while O'Bomber's is solidified behind only one candidate.

Of course with the republican vote split, O'Bomber beats each of them because he's the only demoscat.

Once the republican candidate is settled, ALL the republican vote will be united against O'Bomber. Further, the story will began to be told about O'Bomber's utter lawlessness, his utter incompetence, his war against American jobs and the American economy, his war against the US military and his willingness to bargain away the US nuclear arsenal...for absolutely nothing in return from Russia, from China, from Iran and from North Korea; none of whom could be trusted to keep any arms treaty they would sign in the first place.

Any way you slice the bread, O'Bomber is as unfit to be an American president as he was when he ran for the office in 2008.

The difference this time around is that the incompetent community organizer O'Bomber has a record he can't possibly win on.

posted February 17, 2012 03:29 PM            

perhaps the reason palin is not in the running anymore?

All we have to do is replace Obama. ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate.

The requirement for president?

Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. This is a change for Republicans: the House and Senate doing the work with the president signing bills. His job is to be captain of the team, to sign the legislation that has already been prepared.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/13/grover-norquist-speech-cpac.html

posted February 18, 2012 07:58 AM            

What a pair that guy has!

-------
Etymology

The word megalomania is derived from the Greek words "μεγαλο": megalo-, meaning large or great, and "μανία": mania, meaning madness, frenzy. The first attested use of the word "megalomania" in English is in 1890 as a translation of the French word "mégalomanie".

Proposed distinction from narcissism: Bertrand Russell

A quotation by Bertrand Russell gives his interpretation of megalomania: "The megalomaniac differs from the narcissist by the fact that he wishes to be powerful rather than charming, and seeks to be feared rather than loved. To this type belong many lunatics and most of the great men of history."

Early Freudianism

Russell's near-contemporary, Sigmund Freud, freely used the same term in a comparable way. Referring with respect to an adult neurotic to 'the omnipotence which he ascribed to his thoughts and feelings', Freud reckoned that 'this belief is a frank acknowledgment of a relic of the old megalomania of infancy'. Similarly Freud concluded that 'we can detect an element of megalomania in most other forms of paranoic disorder. We are justified in assuming that this megalomania is essentially of an infantile nature and that, as development proceeds, it is sacrificed to social considerations'.

Edmund Bergler, one of his early followers, considered that 'as Freud and Ferenczi have shown, the child lives in a sort of megalomania for a long period; he knows only one yardstick, and that is his own over-inflated ego....Megalomania, it must be understood, is normal in the very young child'. Bergler was of the opinion that in later life 'the activity of gambling in itself unconsciously activates the megalomania and grandiosity of childhood, reverting to the "fiction of omnipotence".

posted February 18, 2012 12:10 PM            

Unemployment in America IS NOT declining.

Why is this so difficult for our math challenged leftists to comprehend?

The number of jobs available remains relatively static. IF the number of people looking for a job also remained static, the unemployment statistic would not change month to month.

Let me simplify this for simple minds. I'll use small numbers so your math capabilities don't get overloaded.

If there were 1000 jobs in America and 100 people were unemployed and actively looking for a job, the unemployment rate would be 10%.

If however...as is the actual case...aside from the simplified numbers used....50 of those 100 unemployed who had previously looked for a job and couldn't find one AND STOPPED LOOKING FOR A JOB were dropped from the BLS rolls of the unemployed...as millions have actually been dropped from the unemployed rolls by the BLS....then you would only have 50 people actively looking for one of those 1000 jobs. The unemployment rate...as shown by the Bureau of Labor Statistics would now show an unemployment rate of 5%.

Now, this is not advanced math. Any 5th grader could do this math calculation.

In actual practice, 1.2 MILLION Americans simply disappeared from the Bureau of Labor Statistics rolls of the unemployed between December 2011 and January 2012...unemployed defined as those who want a job and are actively looking for a job. 1.2 Million Americans stopped looking for a job in that one month and the BLS no longer counts them as "unemployed". That doesn't mean those 1.2 MILLION Americans don't want a job. It means they've been looking for work and couldn't find a job AND finally gave up trying to find work in the O'Bomber job market.

This is what accounts for the "official" Bureau of Labor Statistics reported unemployment rate drop to 8.3%. There's nothing whatsoever positive about this number and one day, a wide awake reporter who is not an O'Bomber Kool-Aid drinker is going to explain it all to THE ONE, the Marxist Messiah and ask O'Bomber why he thinks tens of MILLIONS of Americans who want a job, can't find one and stopped looking for work...is a positive development for the American jobs market.