<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OK I&#8217;m proposing a thought for you to chew on&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 19:18:10 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: TB</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/#comment-19691</link>
		<dc:creator>TB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:24:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://habitablezone.com/?p=24359#comment-19691</guid>
		<description>I remember back when conservatives were arguing that Bush had secret intelligence information about things like WMDs that he couldn&#039;t bring into the open, and that we should trust him.

All Romney has to do now is sit and watch the Democrats continue their implosion.  The Left is nuts, and when they&#039;re losing power, it shows.  A lot.

You been watching people like Chris Matthews?  Or Paul Krugman?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I remember back when conservatives were arguing that Bush had secret intelligence information about things like WMDs that he couldn&#8217;t bring into the open, and that we should trust him.</p>
<p>All Romney has to do now is sit and watch the Democrats continue their implosion.  The Left is nuts, and when they&#8217;re losing power, it shows.  A lot.</p>
<p>You been watching people like Chris Matthews?  Or Paul Krugman?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TB</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/#comment-19690</link>
		<dc:creator>TB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://habitablezone.com/?p=24359#comment-19690</guid>
		<description>When the other guy is shooting himself in the foot, all you have to do is watch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the other guy is shooting himself in the foot, all you have to do is watch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BuckGalaxy</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/#comment-19689</link>
		<dc:creator>BuckGalaxy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:56:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://habitablezone.com/?p=24359#comment-19689</guid>
		<description>Look at the electoral college math.  Romney NEEDS to peel votes off Obama to win.  O is leading or within the margin of error in all the swing states except NC.  In Ohio 30% of voters have already voted.  Of those O has a huge lead and of the not yet voted it&#039;s tied.  O has a superior field operation in Ohio.  

As for the national polls you like to quote so much, the aggregate is essentially tied.  As for Gallup it has gone from 7+ for Romney to 3+ for Romney in the two days since the debate, and keep in mind it is a 7 day tracking poll so most of it&#039;s data is pre-debate. 

Have you looked at O&#039;s job approval ratings?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look at the electoral college math.  Romney NEEDS to peel votes off Obama to win.  O is leading or within the margin of error in all the swing states except NC.  In Ohio 30% of voters have already voted.  Of those O has a huge lead and of the not yet voted it&#8217;s tied.  O has a superior field operation in Ohio.  </p>
<p>As for the national polls you like to quote so much, the aggregate is essentially tied.  As for Gallup it has gone from 7+ for Romney to 3+ for Romney in the two days since the debate, and keep in mind it is a 7 day tracking poll so most of it&#8217;s data is pre-debate. </p>
<p>Have you looked at O&#8217;s job approval ratings?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SDAI-Tech</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2012/10/24/ok-im-proposing-a-thought-for-you-to-chew-on/#comment-19687</link>
		<dc:creator>SDAI-Tech</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://habitablezone.com/?p=24359#comment-19687</guid>
		<description>He didn&#039;t want to appear as though he was beating a horse. Fox News and Drudge will keep the story alive by themselves and since he is ahead in the polls, and doing well in all the battleground states, why take a debate road that backfired last time when Candy backed up the President?

Any independents following the story will see how it unfolds and read about the emails. Romney stayed focused on the economy, which is what everyone cares the most about.

Romney is a prudent guy. He&#039;s a Mormon. As I mentioned before, I know a lot of Mormons now. They go in to something prepared. If they are not prepared, they don&#039;t go in. The debates served him well and now he just has to keep those six points of the electorate that wobble around.  The damage from the e-mails will intensify by itself over the next weeks and will probably sway at least 3 percent of those on the fence.

Obama has his 47%. The e-mails wont change 45% of those people&#039;s votes. Perhaps a maximum of one or two percent might actually be put off enough by the outright lies, to just abstain from voting. However, most won&#039;t care if he lied or even care about Libya at all. That they even know where Libya is, is already statistically unlikely for most of the electorate. 

For the past 2 weeks the poll numbers bounce around and Romney has different quantities of that 8 percent of voters in play. Historically though, that 3-7 percent he has been holding is enough to win it, especially at this late date. 

So my take is that Romney just is not taking any chances whatsoever. If he can win without the risk, why not do that? Women voters also didn&#039;t like to see him aggressive. So he hung that burden of &quot;mean guy&quot; on Obama for the 3rd debate and score some more women voters.

I now just hope he really is good at bipartisanship and does declare China a currency manipulator on the first day and kills Obamacare ASAP.

I have high hopes he will be a better steward of the US economy and protecting our economy than Bush was. Bush was influenced by bad financial advisors, who steered him wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He didn&#8217;t want to appear as though he was beating a horse. Fox News and Drudge will keep the story alive by themselves and since he is ahead in the polls, and doing well in all the battleground states, why take a debate road that backfired last time when Candy backed up the President?</p>
<p>Any independents following the story will see how it unfolds and read about the emails. Romney stayed focused on the economy, which is what everyone cares the most about.</p>
<p>Romney is a prudent guy. He&#8217;s a Mormon. As I mentioned before, I know a lot of Mormons now. They go in to something prepared. If they are not prepared, they don&#8217;t go in. The debates served him well and now he just has to keep those six points of the electorate that wobble around.  The damage from the e-mails will intensify by itself over the next weeks and will probably sway at least 3 percent of those on the fence.</p>
<p>Obama has his 47%. The e-mails wont change 45% of those people&#8217;s votes. Perhaps a maximum of one or two percent might actually be put off enough by the outright lies, to just abstain from voting. However, most won&#8217;t care if he lied or even care about Libya at all. That they even know where Libya is, is already statistically unlikely for most of the electorate. </p>
<p>For the past 2 weeks the poll numbers bounce around and Romney has different quantities of that 8 percent of voters in play. Historically though, that 3-7 percent he has been holding is enough to win it, especially at this late date. </p>
<p>So my take is that Romney just is not taking any chances whatsoever. If he can win without the risk, why not do that? Women voters also didn&#8217;t like to see him aggressive. So he hung that burden of &#8220;mean guy&#8221; on Obama for the 3rd debate and score some more women voters.</p>
<p>I now just hope he really is good at bipartisanship and does declare China a currency manipulator on the first day and kills Obamacare ASAP.</p>
<p>I have high hopes he will be a better steward of the US economy and protecting our economy than Bush was. Bush was influenced by bad financial advisors, who steered him wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
