.

After the Conventions: Who Will Win the 2012 Presidential Election, Obama or Romney?

Now that the Democratic and Republican delegates have officially chosen their nominees, Patch wants to know: Who are you betting on?

It's official: With President Barack Obama's acceptance speech in Charlotte Thursday night, both the Republicans and Democrats have formally chosen their nominees for the 2012 presidential election. Let the real race begin.

A lot can change between now and Nov. 6: Gaffes, scandals or even major international news events could shift the dynamics of the campaign.

The latest Gallup Polls show registered voters preferring President Obama to Republican nominee Mitt Romney by just one percentage point, 47 percent to 46 percent. A USA Today/Gallup poll taken just before the party conventions found American voters think the president is more likeable, but trust Mr. Romney more to handle the economy.

Pundits have been busy for months handicapping the candidates on various factors: incumbent advantage, fundraising clout, even religion.

Patch wants to know: Regardless of who you support for president, who do you think will actually claim victory in November?

Vote in our poll below, and let us know your reasoning in the comments.

Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 05:57 AM
Can't you see the rhetoric here? if the prevailing market rate is $10, and the union says we want to set the prevailing wage at $12, can't you see through this??? The fallacy is that NO ONE CAN SET THE MARKET RATE, so it is absurd to make this claim. Who can believe it except members of the public who do not understand basic economics? If you were to discover even one fallacy, like the minimum wage fallacy, or this one about unions, you would be able to unravel most of the vicious fallacies on your own.
Tim September 15, 2012 at 06:01 AM
Speaking of unions... anyone see or hear these lunatic nut job teachers in Chicago protesting? These people look and sound like some of the protesters currently outside a number of our embassies in the middle east. THIS is the problem with the public sector unions. These so-called teachers could give a damn about the children they SAY they care about. It's all about them. They could give a damn if their bloated contracts are unsustainable in the current market. Comparably, private school teachers make less, and have to perform or be fired. Public school teachers simply show up and maintain a pulse and get annual increases regardless of performance. Competition breeds success, government unions breed failure.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 06:04 AM
Great, now please cite anything from that book that supports your view in any of the areas we are discussing. Your voting record is not material here. If you quote anything that supports your views in our discussion I will be surprised even though the textbook is likely very Keynesian as most are, but no matter.
Tim September 15, 2012 at 06:05 AM
If they are forced to pay more than the market allows, a business won't be in business very long. Employees would have to be let go, prices of the products increased above what people are willing to pay. But, what does the modern day liberal care, it's all about equal results and misery for all. By the way, our fool Fed chairman Bernanke just announced QE3. Romney should fire his ass the day he is inaugurated.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 06:05 AM
>As for your anti Union coments. They hold no truth since I am a third generation IBEW Man and have lived the Good Life through hard work and Union memebership. This is a fallacy, and Fallacies hold no truth. It does show however that I cannot reason with you.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 06:15 AM
I don't fault you for the textbook, just your own views. But I did find this interesting: "Samuelson wrote a weekly column for Newsweek magazine along with Chicago School economist Milton Friedman, where they represented opposing sides: Samuelson took the Keynesian perspective, and Friedman represented the Monetarist perspective." Between the two, Friedman would be much more reliable, based on what I know about Friedman and Keynesian-ism.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 06:36 AM
Anyone who does not embrace Economics and how it applies to political theory is lost in their political views. This is not intended to be any kind of insult. It is a simple reasoned statement. "People may disagree on the question of whether everybody ought to study economics seriously. But one thing is certain. A man who publicly talks or writes about the opposition between capitalism and socialism without having fully familiarized himself with all that economics has to say about these issues is an irresponsible babbler." - Ludwig von Mises
Dalamar September 15, 2012 at 06:42 AM
Hello Albert, You keep reciting from your book as if everything else is flawed. I respect your opinions & your belief in free markets. I truly do. However, it is oversimplified It's a reality that todays corps have the ability to hire workers overseas. Workers overseas have a lower cost of living. Therefore corps have the advantage of utilizing the microeconomics of the region they employ from. Workers in the U.S. do not have that luxury. The cost of living is the cost of living. The best any worker can do is move, but if the jobs are not where the employer hires, the move negates any improvement in the workers own microeconomics. Every worker has their own curve of what is worth their time. If the time away from their family is replaced by a value which "provides" for the family, including the betterment of descendants, then the worker is willing to exchange. If the time workers spend away from their family is not appropriately compensated, including the betterment of the descendants then workers will seek better compensation. However if that worker has to compete with another worker who has different microeconomics regarding the same contingencies then the worker with the lower curve has the advantage & that advantage is in favor of the transcontinental employer. Unions do try to prevent this from happening by trying to keep wages inline with the direct region's cost of living. Employers avoid this by outsourcing jobs. The result is artificial unemployment.
Dalamar September 15, 2012 at 06:58 AM
The artificial employment figures are then exploited by corps (and the politicians they invested) in by declaring the problem are unions artificially inflating the cost of labor. Artificially inflated compared to what? The other worker? The one who is overseas and who has a different microeconomic scale to compare to? I would believe in your book if employers were not able to outsource workers. The cost of living in the U.S. would create an equilibrium. Cheaper labor is the goal. Understandable. However, cheaper labor exploits market forces through their different microeconomic forces. Does the cheaper labor afford the same standard of living IN THE U.S. as their home country? We are now told by some on the right that compared to laborers in other countries our nation's poor are "spoiled" in comparison. Seriously? Now we're supposed to blame the poor in our country for pointing out they can't make a living in the U.S.? We always hear the chanting of individual responsiblity and accountablity, but yet when workers want the wages to do that, they are blamed for bringing down corps. If anything, maybe blame the cost of living in the U.S. But that would entail the microeconomics of individual demographics and what is allowed as a "standard of living" in each region of the U.S. Including what kind of house, car, clothes are acceptable. How many children are allowed per household. Where they can travel on vacations, if they have vacations. etc, etc.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 06:59 AM
Dalamar, >You keep reciting from your book as if everything else is flawed. It makes no sense to say this. It is no argument. I make propositions either with my words or the words of some thinker that expresses it well. You must refute ideas with ideas and if you fault me because quote ideas I agree with, we cannot progress. Furthermore I have no book that is "mine." I quote from many books and people. I do often recommend Economics in One Lesson though I hardly quote from it. I mention that book like a broken record because it is the best single book for the layman reader who does not read economics. It is short, well written and easy to read, if only anyone will open it. Lastly, of course I produce quotes and propositions as if everything else is flawed. but only in matters of fact and economics where I am familiar. When I do this I am making an argument and refuting other ideas. This presumes i believe they are flawed. Otherwise I would say little or nothing or agree. I would amend my view(s) if anyone would do the same with greater reasoning. So I am puzzled at your expression as if you are pointing out a flaw in my method. We could still reason if we disagree, but if you think my method is flawed then we have no hope of our reasoning together. I would have to regard you as beyond reason.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 07:30 AM
Dalamar, Regarding your other statements, You express the subjective valuing of individuals which is completely correct. Everything else is superficial or over simplified and faulty. I have always understood your narratives but you don't seem to be able to see how they are fatally flawed. I point it out, and you return with another narrative. I don't think you are a dummy, but I can only believe you have not come to a careful understanding of capitalism (though you likely reject this proposition). This is the other reason I promote the economics book, because then I don't need to do all the work, you do it yourself to greater effect. Again, economics is the key, when you can see your own flaws, then you can start unraveling the narrative. I don't expect to convince anyone, neither am I encouraged to spend all my time refuting everything to no effect. If you are fixed like I perceive Edward is by his statements then it's time to move on. You appear to be sincere, but so am I and one of us is profoundly wrong. If believe in rational discussion, how can we persist? If I refute your statements above what will you do with it? Do you hear what I am saying???
Dalamar September 15, 2012 at 07:37 AM
The standard of living, the cost of housing, food and clothing are dictated by individual markets. The Consumers/workers who are insufficiently paid and who cannot afford the U.S. standard of living and now must turn to credit. The credit industry has become a stop-gap between insufficient wages in the U.S. and the ability to afford the cost of living in the U.S. Combine these basic factors and the result are families who work as much as they can (both spouses) to compensate for the lack of appropriate initial compensation due to the differing microeconomics they must compete against in other countries. These differing factors encourage (not coerce) these same families to use credit to make up the difference. These same workers must now continue maximizing their work days to reimburse the credit used while still trying to afford the U.S. standard of living at intercontinental wages. Add the unemployment and the result is a workforce which feels "lucky" to have a job. Which is EXACTLY what the oligarchy/plutocracy of the U.S. want. This is exactly why they are heavily investing in politics through ALEC and Americans for Prosperity, etc. etc. to limit unions ability to stop them. The goal is to dismantle anything workers have to help them achieve the U.S. standard of living. Because the opposite will be a workforce which is grateful, submissive and quiet.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 07:45 AM
Dalamar, Your overriding concern is Social Issues. True? There is nothing wrong with this concern. What I claim you fail to do however is: 1. Identify the economic principles that apply to the social issues. 2. apply the principles properly to better understand the social issue. 3. discard social ideals and programs that are in conflict with economic reasoning. 4. Maintain a clear line between social concerns/goals and economic principles. For example, if you came to see by economic reasoning that the minimum wage was fatally flawed in its ability as a policy to effect its purpose, would you oppose the minimum wage? Answer carefully. If you could see that State intervention into the economy is useless, would you deprecate it? Answer carefully. Here is another very clear fallacy: The broken window fallacy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs Do you see this fallacy?
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 07:49 AM
I'm sorry Dalamar, but you're really killing me.
Dalamar September 15, 2012 at 07:50 AM
Albert, I am not done in expressing my points above. however, it is late. I have a copy of your book. I have begun looking into it. Maybe after everything in the end we will still agree to disagree. Until we reach that point, we will continue....maybe.... but for now, it must be another time. Good night.
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 08:17 AM
‎"The philosophy of today is that of Karl Marx [1818–1883]. He is the most powerful personality of our age. Karl Marx and the ideas of Karl Marx—ideas which he did not invent, develop, or improve, but which he combined into a system—are widely accepted today, even by many who emphatically declare that they are anti-communist and anti-Marxist. To a considerable extent, without knowing it, many people are philosophical Marxists, although they use different names for their philosophical ideas." Mises
Albert Rubio September 15, 2012 at 08:18 AM
fair enough.
Edward September 16, 2012 at 04:24 AM
The Unrest of the 99% in 2012 will be amplified if The Romney/Ryan ticket and their Ideals of killing the middle class are imposed. Labor unions grow in hard times and political silencing of workers at the poles or in the workplace. California Prop. 32 is one such attempt to silence the Middle class Unions and let Super PACs free to run the show at election time. For the first ime in 30 years Union membership grew in 2010 and 2011 even after counting the retirees and shuttered plants. When the Government pro-activly raised the minimum Wage and enforced safety laws and Pension laws, unions declined. To day , all the attacks on wages and benefits have made those with "no were to turn" to reach out to unionism. When all else fails, there is the power of the STRIKE. Witholding ones labor from those who would use it without just compensation or in an un-safe manner. And, thanks to Credit Cards, you can live for months without a paycheck where in the 1930,s you were in "Bread Lines"
Edward September 16, 2012 at 04:34 AM
Romney probably will and get Albert Rubio to be the new Federal Reserve Chairman. Hey Albert, name some othe things you would do to increase Employment by Private Companies? Don't say cut Taxes again because they have been cut 4 times since Nixon and we still find ourselves deep in debt and with over 8% unemployment with all those cuts. Based on your beliefs, we should be less than 3% unemployment after all those tax cuts yet here we are at 8% plus. Cut any more taxes and our debt will double in 4 years in order to continue being "World Policeman". The Bush Tax cuts including eliminating the Inheritance Tax put 4 trillion more dollars on our national Debt over the past 8 years plus interest.
Edward September 16, 2012 at 04:36 AM
Then name some real things our governement can do to make buisnesses grow durring a ressesion like were are having. If you were the Fed Chairman, what would you do?
Albert Rubio September 16, 2012 at 04:44 AM
You can see what can be done from the video I posted and from Economics In One Lesson. Its free to download. You won't listen to me so check out these sources.
Edward September 16, 2012 at 04:50 AM
Like welfare to work, Apprenticship Training for high School Graduates that can not afford to go to college. 2 year technical training for jobs that have turned from manual to robotic to keep the robotic equipment running. WE need Highways and a rail system that works so why not train people in road and rail construction and upgrade America's infrastructure. Europ anbd japan are building Automobile factories here in the USA and we need to make sure our sucontractors can supply their parts along with our domestic Automobile industry. Costs of delays, poor ON-TIME parts managment add cost to every Automobile Made in the USA. You want to compeat, bring down the costs of moving materials. Labor costs are down to $800.00 per vehicle on the assembly Lines because more than hafe the work today is automated and done by robots. The remaining skilled jobs and maintenance of those robots is done by highly skilled, well paid workers. Productivity is up, costs are down yet people blame Unions for any miscalculations done by Automobile companies on the desirablility of the cars they make. Tesla is building a great car but will the publice want to purchase it? Is it affordable enough? If it fails, you wan't be able to blame the UAW because they are not Unionised....YET.
Albert Rubio September 16, 2012 at 04:53 AM
Edward, You cannot use historical events to prove or disprove Economic truths. Economic Truths are derived from logical abstract reasoning and are then used to interpret historical economic events. Economic history and Economics must never be confused. BTW, While taxes may have been cut spending and borrowing for the most part have simultaneously increased.
Albert Rubio September 16, 2012 at 05:03 AM
> If you were the Fed Chairman, what would you do? I would abolish the Federal Reserve. Here are some books that you can download free from www.Mises.org The Case Against the Fed, Murray N. Rothbard http://mises.org/document/3430/The-Case-Against-the-Fed The Origins of the Federal Reserve, Murray N. Rothbard http://mises.org/document/6119 What Has Government Done to Our Money? by by Murray N. Rothbard http://mises.org/money.asp
Edward September 16, 2012 at 05:04 AM
If we all were bone with our own private Gold Mine, the marxist Ideas would work very well because we would all have a reserve of wealth to draw from. His Idea was our "Labor" was our "Gold Mine" and our skills were the tools to build his ideal society. unfortunatily not every human being has the skills, health or mental ability to draw from. There is also the problem of who one could sell their services to unless the entire world was "nationalized". With over 180 different countries with 5000 different dialects and 160 monitary systems, who would deturmine how it would all work? That is why he wanted to see "ONE WORLD ORDER" so the world would be on the same page. In the 19th Century it was only a dream and today it is still only a dream. Peacefull co-existance is still only a dream. Equality is still only a word that is non-existant even in America. Women are paid less, laborers are still lower than doctors on the pecking scale and onm the Pay Scale.
Edward September 16, 2012 at 05:11 AM
I agree with the abolishment of the Federal Reserve. it was their doing that the interest rates were raised 14 times in 2005 that led to the melt down of the housing market and all those bail outs. Artifical manipulation of interest rates when everybody's interest rates were resetting screwed millions out of their homes. Home they could afford at 3% interest but not at 8% interest. Good point and i agree. What else could we do to make our economy work with less artificial intervention? (I will check out your noted web sites but just to shorten this discusion could you please indulge me). Thanks
Albert Rubio September 16, 2012 at 05:31 AM
Edward, >If we all were bone with our own private Gold Mine, the marxist Ideas would work very well because we would all have a reserve of wealth to draw from. 1. If we all had a private gold mine, would this solve our problems? 2. Why use gold?, Why not make money from wood chips, it is possible for everyone to grow trees to make money. 3. The gov't can print money, why not just give everyone money (you can name the amount). That should solve the problems right? 4. or how about declaring that every penny we own is now one dollar, so our net worth is increased by 100 times overnight. Would this solve our economic problems?
Mark September 20, 2012 at 03:11 PM
I hope you enjoy your trip... please don't come back
Mark September 20, 2012 at 03:13 PM
Enjoy your trip....please don't come back
Edward December 24, 2012 at 07:03 AM
How did you reserect this old Post? Zombie Posts! Funny how all my posts back in September were true and America Re-Elected President obama and how the GOP wants still to TAX the Middle Middle class, if the rich that support them, have to pay more. I personally am willing to pay more Taxes because I have seen with my own eyes how other people live in counties and we get "Bang for our Buck" here in America. As goofy as Congress and the President Seem, sometimes, I feel Living in California, USA is a privilage. So do 4 million Imigrants who came here legally the past 15 years. How much do you love America. I served in the Armed Forces and served in Viet Nam because I wanted to make a difference, even thou I did not Agree with the War politicly, i still served. All I hear is Sour Grapes from the die hard Republicans instead of "how can I get Involved to solve the Debts and Great Society programs that make the USA #1. You do nkow that Congress Writes the Bills that become Laws once signed by the President. Business loves and expands when congress is divided and there will be very little chance of change, Business loves the "status quo" and manipulates the existing law to maximise Profits. Profits are way up and PEs are at historic lows because people are living in fear and won't buy into the market. Corporations, though, are buying back stocks with excess Cash that could have been shared as taxes or dividents to stock holders. I retired at age 55 because i can.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »