2012 Election

Come here to talk about topics that are not related to development, or even Kansas City.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18238
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: 2012 Election

Post by FangKC »

shinatoo wrote:
FangKC wrote:Especially if Americans keep seeing headlines like this.

Jobless rate drops to lowest level in almost three years

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... hree-years
Very misleading title, as the stats are about the unemployment rate and not the jobless rate.

Unemployment only indicates the people seeking jobs that have registered with the unemployment office as a percentage of total jobs.

Jobless rate is the total number of employable people compared to the total number of jobs.

Unemployment would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.

Doesn't matter if it's misleading or not. Most Americans don't know that distinction, and when they start seeing headlines like this, many will assume the economy is getting better, and unemployment is going down. For those who have been worried about the economy, they will sense it's improving and it will probably benefit Obama.
shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 7433
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by shinatoo »

FangKC wrote:
shinatoo wrote:
FangKC wrote:Especially if Americans keep seeing headlines like this.

Jobless rate drops to lowest level in almost three years

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... hree-years
Very misleading title, as the stats are about the unemployment rate and not the jobless rate.

Unemployment only indicates the people seeking jobs that have registered with the unemployment office as a percentage of total jobs.

Jobless rate is the total number of employable people compared to the total number of jobs.

Unemployment would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.

Doesn't matter if it's misleading or not. Most Americans don't know that distinction, and when they start seeing headlines like this, many will assume the economy is getting better, and unemployment is going down. For those who have been worried about the economy, they will sense it's improving and it will probably benefit Obama.
Well I do think the economy is getting better. I just don't like ignorant reporting.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

Image
phuqueue
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2833
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by phuqueue »

Max you should know better than to bring a silly thing like "facts" to a political discussion
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18238
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: 2012 Election

Post by FangKC »

shinatoo wrote:
FangKC wrote:Especially if Americans keep seeing headlines like this.

Jobless rate drops to lowest level in almost three years

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... hree-years
Very misleading title, as the stats are about the unemployment rate and not the jobless rate.

Unemployment only indicates the people seeking jobs that have registered with the unemployment office as a percentage of total jobs.

Jobless rate is the total number of employable people compared to the total number of jobs.

Unemployment would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.
Yeah, but not all those so-called "jobless" people are looking for work right now, so they may not be considered unemployed by the Labor Department. Some older people who have lost jobs in the recession have reached retirement age, so they stopped looking. Some young people decide to go to college, or go back for advanced degrees. Some women who worked, and lost their jobs, have reverted to being housewives. Not everyone who was formerly employed needs to work. A lot of women work because it gives them something to do, and because it gives them an identity. I have two sisters that work, but don't need to, because their husbands earn very good livings. I have a two sisters-in-law that work because their kids are grown and they were bored at home alone all day. Both my brothers earn very good livings, and their wives don't need to work. After all her kids were grown, my mother started working. It wasn't because they needed the money. She just didn't like being home all day.

And in many situations, when managers have to decide who to lay off, they often look at which employees would be affected the most. They often lay off people who have spouses who make good livings first. It may not be fair, but it happens more than people acknowledge.

In the aforementioned cases with my sisters and sisters-in-laws, if they were laid off under this principle, they would technically be unemployed. However, they don't financially need to work. They might seek work for awhile, and give up when they realize there aren't currently any jobs. So a lot of people under that "have given up looking" category might be these individuals.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/j ... llion.html
phxcat
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3454
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:11 pm
Location: Phoenix

Re: 2012 Election

Post by phxcat »

shinatoo wrote:
FangKC wrote:Especially if Americans keep seeing headlines like this.

Jobless rate drops to lowest level in almost three years

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... hree-years
Very misleading title, as the stats are about the unemployment rate and not the jobless rate.

Unemployment only indicates the people seeking jobs that have registered with the unemployment office as a percentage of total jobs.

Jobless rate is the total number of employable people compared to the total number of jobs.

Unemployment would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.
True, but what was the jobless rate three years ago? I do get what you are saying about sloppy journalism, we have been talking about unemployment rate all this time, and to switch midstream would actually be far more dishonest.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

Anyone planning on voting today in the non-binding GOP Primary?

You can also vote for Democrat or Libertarian Presidential nominees if you so choose.
User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9365
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by AllThingsKC »

KCMax wrote:Anyone planning on voting today in the non-binding GOP Primary?
ME! Just to say that I did it. I'm going to write-in KCMax.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11238
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: 2012 Election

Post by mean »

I thought about it, but meh.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

AllThingsKC wrote:
KCMax wrote:Anyone planning on voting today in the non-binding GOP Primary?
ME! Just to say that I did it. I'm going to write-in KCMax.
Great, here come all the sexual harrassment allegations against me!
loftguy
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3850
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:12 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by loftguy »

KCMax wrote:
AllThingsKC wrote:
KCMax wrote:Anyone planning on voting today in the non-binding GOP Primary?
ME! Just to say that I did it. I'm going to write-in KCMax.
Great, here come all the sexual harrassment allegations against me!
We do think of you as one of the most allegible men in town.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

Rick Santorum "wins" the Missouri primary and is awarded....zero delegates.

Not all tallies are in, but he is winning in every single county right now, and is taking over half of the vote. Mitt is a distant second at 25% with Ron Paul just under 12%. Gingrich did not get on the ballot.
bobbyhawks
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3890
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by bobbyhawks »

KCMax wrote:Rick Santorum "wins" the Missouri primary and is awarded....zero delegates.

Not all tallies are in, but he is winning in every single county right now, and is taking over half of the vote. Mitt is a distant second at 25% with Ron Paul just under 12%. Gingrich did not get on the ballot.
All you need to know about those numbers is this:
http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrmaps/20120207/
I have no idea what this means for next November, but the turnout will obviously be much different for both sides. Will Romney command a similarly strong turnout from the religious right, or does the GOP risk alienating them by having him as the nominee?
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

Romney did much worse in MO this year than he did in 2008. Does this spell trouble for him in MO if he wins the nomination?

OTOH, Obama did much worse in voting this year than Bush did in 2004. Does this spell trouble for him in MO as well?

I see an opening. That is why today I'd like to announce I am running for President of Missouri.
User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9365
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by AllThingsKC »

KCMax wrote:I see an opening. That is why today I'd like to announce I am running for President of Missouri.
I'm on board. I already voted for you in the primary. So, you already got more votes in Missouri than Newt did.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18238
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: 2012 Election

Post by FangKC »

George Stephanopolous said on World News With Diane Sawyer last night that Romney will have a hard time beating Obama in the general election if he can't even beat Gingrich and Santorum in the primaries.
phuqueue
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2833
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by phuqueue »

A lot can change before November of course, but as it stands right now none of these candidates scares me at all. Even Rasmussen shows Obama leading Romney nationally and Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum all have terrible numbers among independents and moderates. akp's (I think it was akp) post a page or two back about all the stats that are unfavorable for Obama like high unemployment, his relatively low approval rating, not happy with the "direction of the country" or whatever, etc may hold in a typical election but the crop of candidates the GOP has put out this year is just astonishingly bad, and add to that the fact that people are getting fed up with the Tea Party (polls showed the GOP bore the brunt of the blame for last summer's debt ceiling crisis, for example). Even though things are tough and people aren't happy right now, the GOP has utterly failed so far to represent itself as a viable alternative. Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum all have their bases, but none of them have much else to rely on. Barring major new economic problems, it's really hard to see, at least at this stage nine months out, how this ends without Obama getting reelected.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: 2012 Election

Post by KCMax »

FangKC wrote:George Stephanopolous said on World News With Diane Sawyer last night that Romney will have a hard time beating Obama in the general election if he can't even beat Gingrich and Santorum in the primaries.
Its hard to see how anyone beats Romney in delegates, however there are a number of scenarios where if Gingrich and/or Santorum can stay in the race long enough, they prevent Romney from reach the 1144 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. Then what? Brokered convention? Santorum releases his delegates to Romney if he gets put on the ticket and Romney bans gay marriage? Palin comes in to save the day? Chris Christie finally relents and runs?
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11238
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: 2012 Election

Post by mean »

KCMax wrote:Palin comes in to save the day?
Haha, man... I don't think any of the current three candidates can beat Obama right now. Palin would get cremated.
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12653
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: 2012 Election

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

One commentator speculated as to why Obama is leading any GOP candidate right now. The reasoning being the GOP guys are mostly beating each other up while Obama might take a hit once-in-a-while he goes day-after-day outside of the battle. Once the GOP's main focus gets on Obama then the polls should start reflecting a closer race.
Post Reply