It's Not Just Nate Silver Predicting Obama to Win Ohio and the Election

source: NYT 538 Blog

Nate Silver is getting pushback and lots of trash talk for sticking to his prediction that Obama will win the electoral college on Tuesday. Right now the prediction is that Obama has 85% chance of winning the electoral college if the election was held today. Actually, the election IS being held today, thanks to early voting, with thousands of new voters participating in every state. The vote may be slightly disrupted in the Northeast thanks to Hurricane Sandy, but plans are in place for mobile truck polling places in places like New Jersey and New York, which are blue states for Obama anyway. Ohio and Pennsylvania were not as affected by the storm, so any disruptions there are more likely to be overcrowded precincts and shenanigans from their Republican overlords in charge of the election.



And Obama is still set to win Ohio and Pennsylvania based on poll after poll. The only people who seem to doubt that are the pundits who are trying to make this into an "undecided" race when the numbers show something else entirely.

All the quotes from Nate, his detractors and other pundit hackery here:

Snark Amendment: Wagering War on Nate Silver
(Yes, the title is a pun not a misspelling)

There's a good reason for Silver's prediction. Look at the Polls:



All Obama needs is to win Ohio and then Romney can't possibly patch together enough votes to win. Yet media hacks like CNN's Wolf Blitzer, MSNBC's Chuck Todd, and several writers at Politico keep calling the race too close to call. They sound just like the wingnuts at Breitbart and Fox, so where is the journalistic integrity? If they won't report the facts then they are useless, and no better than Dick Morris or Karl Rove.

Particularly despicable is Chris Cillizza of Washington Post who moved Ohio to "Toss-Up" status the other day just because Mitt Romney needs the state to win. No real arithmatic involved, just pandering to the right, or perhaps nervousness about some Republican getting mad on the internet, LOL. Oooo, scary!

Washington Post

The Fix is moving Ohio from “lean Obama” to “tossup” in our presidential ratings amid a slew of polling that suggests that the race has tightened over the past month, even as the incumbent retains the slightest of edges.
. . . After reviewing all of the available public polling data as well as talking to operatives in both parties about the private polls they are privy to, we are convinced that Ohio is a 1-3 point race in President Obama’s favor at the moment.
That — coupled with the state’s electoral history and the absolute necessity for Romney to win the state if he wants to be president — leads us to move it back to the “tossup” category.

In response, numbers guy Sam Wang of Princeton wrote a piece called Perverse media incentive watch: Chris Cillizza

...Cillizza is hardly alone. A few days ago, Wolf Blitzer at CNN cited a single Ohio poll, done by his own organization, showing Obama up by 4%. He then proceeded to call this a "tie," revealing an amazing inability to interpret a simple number. Compounding this is the fact that dozens of polls have been conducted in Ohio. The odds of an Obama lead are extremely high. So why does he persist?
The news media have an incentive to fuzz up the picture: ratings and profit. A message that the cake is fully baked does not automatically bring back the viewers. Without the artificial suspense, Cillizza and Blitzer are put in a position of having to say something substantive or interesting that gets beyond a horserace number. Think how much work that would be.
The same problem extends to the aggregation of polling data, which many sites do (FiveThirtyEight, Oct. 31). But think of all the headlines you have seen about "Romney ahead nationally," "Obama pulls ahead in Wisconsin," "it's a dead heat," and other permutations. Each of these headlines was based on a single poll. But aggregation would lead to fewer news stories - and less of the breathless horserace coverage we are used to.

Today Wang stuck to his guns, writing:

President Obama is peeling away. As you can see from the electoral vote (EV) estimator, he is the candidate with the momentum, not Romney. In terms of EV or the Meta-margin, he's made up just about half the ground he ceded to Romney after Debate #1. And the indicators are still headed straight up.
A few days ago, the word was that Team Romney was buying ads in Minnesota and Pennsylvania. If he wins either of those states I will eat a bug. Ohio...a really big bug. And yes, I will post a photo.
Today I'll address a common concern among the commentariat: will President Obama lose the popular vote? Steve Lombardo is on the case with some Excel curve fitting of a quality that cannot even identify the Debate #1 bounce. Hmmm, someone take his keys away.
Anyway, the short answer: I estimate Romney's chance of winning the popular vote at 6%, odds of 16-1 against.

Here is the Princeton breakdown of states and electoral votes. Looks like Sam Wang won't have to eat a bug.


Another projection by the University of Illinois, Urbana, Election Analytics gives a similar result as Wang and Nate Silver:


Still not convinced? How about four different oddsmakers on Predictwise.com:



So there it is.

David Rothschild writes on Yahoo's The Signal: All eyes on—where else?—Ohio

Since the final presidential debate, 15 polls have surveyed voter opinion in Ohio, the state that is more likely than any other to determine the election. President Barack Obama leads former Gov. Mitt Romney in 13 of them. The candidates tied in one, and Romney leads in one. Those last two polls were both conducted by Rasmussen, one of the more right-leaning polling institutions, as FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver has documented.

No one is saying Ohio is a walk for the president. The Huffington Post's Pollster and the RealClearPolitics average both have Obama leading with 51.2 percent among those who express a preference for either major candidate. There is still time for a shift toward Romney, and it's always possible that there is a systematic bias in the polls.

But I don't think it's likely. Historically, polls have been pretty accurate this close to the election. Based only on these surveys, the Signal gives Obama a 75 percent chance of victory in Ohio. When we factor in prediction markets, that figure ticks up a small amount, to 77 percent.

None of these analysts should be vilified for doing simple mathematical algorithms based on dating that other people provide to them. What is much more worrying is the press spinning numbers in a way they know to be DISHONEST just three days before a major election.

Mitt Romney Debates . . . Mitt Romney

Hilarious but also maddening! I am really tired of the etch-a-sketch thing.

The Big Bird Debate

This debate wasn't what anyone really expected.

Poor Jim Lehrer of PBS lost control after about 5 minutes as Mitt Romney ran over him like a amroller.

I've seen Democrats on Twitter and the blogs going nuts over the fact that Romney was more forceful than Obama. The gang on MSNBC were overwhelmingly negative to the point of apoplexy, and I can see their point - Obama didn't bring up the war on women or immigration or any number of topics that affect millions of people. So the second-
guessing and armchair-quarterbacking will go on for days. Why didn't Obama zing Romney over the 47% video? There were many wasted opportunities.

But there's another way to look at this. We also saw was a more calm and gentlemanly President Obama watching Mitt Romney growl about the debate limits while bullying the moderator and lying through his teeth about all his previous positions.

The fact checkers are going to have a field day with this. And I can't imagine what the Tea Party base thought of Romney's sudden interest in the elderly and schoolteachers, not to mention Obamacare.

None of it really makes sense, and if Obama seemed stunned or distracted, he was probably wondering why he was having to debate such an insidious politician who will literally say anything to win. "Lying for the Lord" some call it. I just call it craven.




The most nonsensical point of the debate came early on when Romney said he would do away with PBS, the network they were on, and fire both Big Bird and Jim Lehrer. It just seemed to come out of nowhere and you could hear people in the audience gasping. I think it was supposed to be a Romney "zinger" but came out harshly and almost cruel, even more so when you realize that his grandchildren were in the audience. I wonder what they thought about Grandpa firing Big Bird?

In effect, Big Bird became the latest version of Clint Eastwood's Chair that usurped Romney at the Republican convention. Tumblr has gone crazy with pictures, of course, and Big Bird has his own twitter.






However, Obama did hold Romney's feet to the fire several times, for instance when Romney strongly denied that he has a $5 trillion tax cut in his plan, Obama gave him a smackdown:

Talking Points Memo

“I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut — I don’t have a tax cut of the scale you’re talking about,” Romney said. “My view is that we ought to proide tax relief to the middle class. … High income people are doing just fine in this economy, they’ll do fine whether you’re president or I am.”

But Obama countered that Romney has refused to specify which deductions and tax breaks he would eliminate to counterbalance the 20 percent rate cut, which Romney claims would not reduce overall revenues.

“Well, for 18 months he’s been running on this tax plan, and now five weeks before the election, he says his big bold idea is ‘never mind,’” Obama said. “And the fact is that if you are lowering the rates the way you describe, governor, then it is not possible to come up with enough deductions and loopholes that only effect high-income individuals to avoid raising the deficit or burdening the middle class. It’s math — arithmetic.”

Romney also insisted that he never means to lower taxes for the wealthy. which seems out of character and disingenuous. And he made an unfortunate analogy that seemed to brand his own children as liars while labeling Obama a "boy" - a word that seems all too familiar as a racial dog whistle. At any rate, even if he meant to make Obama sound like a lying juvenile, that's still not good. So I don't think Romney won anything in this debate, and after people can get a transcript and see the effect on the polls they may change their verdict. I think Romney might get a slight bump in states where he is already winning, so who cares?

Mediaite

Romney went on to say that he would also not reduce the tax rates paid by the rich. “I know that you and your running mate keep saying that, and I know that’s a popular thing to say with some people, but it’s just not the case.”

“Look, I’ve got five boys,” Romney added. “I’m used to people saying something that’s not always true but just keep repeating it and ultimately hoping I’ll believe it. But that is not the case.”

Paul Ryan Caught in Another Lie by Norah O'Donnell on CBS

Why does he do it? Why does he lie about things that can be easily confirmed with a minimum of research?

From Think Progress

O’DONNELL: Now you’re criticizing the President for those same defense cuts you’re voting for and called a victory.

RYAN: No, no — I have to correct on you this, Norah. I voted for a mechanism that says the sequester will occur if we don’t cut $1.2 trillion in government. … We can get into this nomenclature; I voted for the Budget Control Act. But the Obama Administration proposed $478 billion in defense cuts. We don’t agree with that, our budget rejected that, and then on top of that is another $500 billion in defense cuts in the sequester.

O’DONNELL: Right. A trillion dollars in defense spending, and you voted for it!

RYAN: No, Norah. I voted for the Budget Control Act.

O’DONNELL: That included defense spending!

RYAN: Norah, you’re mistaken.

O’Donnell is, in fact, not mistaken. The Budget Control Act, as passed, included both the roughly $600 billion in “sequestration” cuts that will happen if there’s no compromise on the budget by December as well as the $487 billion of military-supported cuts that will take place regardless. The fact that Ryan may have wished that the bill didn’t contain said defense cuts does not absolve him of the fact that he and 201 other Republicans voted for the bill as-passed.

Republican Insiders Bemoan Lyin' Ryan

Put this in the "we tried to tell you" file: Republican insiders knew Ryan was a liar and just a troublemaker when he was being vetted, but Mitt wouldn't listen. And not only does Ryan lie about automotive plants closing in Janesville, and about rewriting the definition of rape, he lies about simple things in his past such as how fast he ran in a marathon back in 1990.

In fact, the marathon story has legs . . . pardon the pun . . . because to lie to a perfect stranger on the radio when nothing is at stake is a sign of a sociopath. They were talking about sports in that interview. There was no reason to make up a braggadocio statistic about running a marathon in under three hours, which Ryan had to know was faster than he can actually run. Paul Ryan Watch Blog called it "Performance-Enhancing Rhetoric," LOL.

But Ryan's claim that he ran a sub three-hour marathon when he finished the one marathon he ran at just over four hours, records show was flat-out and unnecessary political plastic surgery to make himself look more accomplished than he really is.
Call it a dose of self-administered performance-enhancing rhetoric.
At how many campaign bean feeds and on how many first dates or in bull sessions at the gym or the deer stand has Ryan been impressing people with that story?

Exactly, and since he's been around Washington for quite a few years, people in the Republican Party surely witnessed this type of dishonest story-telling before.

And indeed they have and are speaking out - anonymously.

From Capital Hill Blue

Campaign insiders say Romney was so determined to capture support of the tea party that reveres Ryan that he was “more than willing” to overlook the Congressman’s casual relationship with the truth.

“Paul Ryan is a loose cannon. He’s Mitt Romney’s Sarah Palin and his involvement with the campaign will sink the Republican Party in this election,” said another GOP pro, who also asked to remain anonymous.

“When I heard Ryan was on the short list, my first reaction was ‘oh, Christ, here we go again,’ ” the longtime GOP operative said Sunday. ”The man tells so many whoppers so often that I’m not sure he even knows when he’s lying.”

People back home in Wisconsin are still wondering why he would keep lying about things that are easily verified.

Madison.com: Ryan's Dumb Lie Will Taint Him Forever

Assume that Mitt Romney loses this November. Who will be first in line in 2016? You guessed it. Ryan will be a frequent guest on “Meet the Press” and other talk shows. It is so obvious that he will be the nominee in four years if Romney can’t deliver that he might be nominated by acclamation. No primaries needed!

Here is the mystery. Why would Ryan tell a doozy of a lie on national television that will taint him forever?

. . . Fast forward to 2016. First question: “Congressman, you lied to the American people when you blamed Obama for the GM plant closing in Janesville. You lied about your concern for your high school buddies who lost out. Why did you lie to us?”

All Ryan had to say was, “We tried to save the plant but could not.” The real reason he lied? To tell the truth about the plant closing would have jeopardized his love affair with the tea party.

Joe McCarthy lied, and lied, and lied. “I have a list of communists in the State Department,” he said, and that claim helped him to national fame. “Tail Gunner Joe” was the sentry offering to save America from communist plots. But it was a whopper of a lie. And when prominent broadcaster Edward R. Murrow, the Cap Times, and others — in particular attorney Joseph Welch — asked, “Have you no shame, sir?” it was all over for Joe.

Ryan’s lie will get loud applause at GOP functions, where no one will ask Ryan: “What in the hell were you talking about?”

Paul Ryan Gave Us a Pack of Lies

Journalists and pundits across political lines agree that Paul Ryan was lying to the American People last night.

Transcript of Paul Ryan's Speech

Even Fox News Admitted:

. . . to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention to facts, Ryan’s speech was an apparent attempt to set the world record for the greatest number of blatant lies and misrepresentations slipped into a single political speech. On this measure, while it was Romney who ran the Olympics, Ryan earned the gold.

For all their smarmy kissing-up to the Romney/Ryan camp that CNN has done this week, such as the icky-sweet interview Wolf Blitzer had with the five strapping Romney sons - ack - last night even the CNN team had to admit Ryan was Lyin' - although they explained it as "motivation."

Via Talking Points Memo

Blitzer: So there he is, the republican vice presidential nominee and his beautiful family there. His mom is up there. This is exactly what this crowd of republicans here certainly republicans all across the country were hoping for. He delivered a powerful speech. Erin, a powerful speech. Although I marked at least seven or eight points I’m sure the fact checkers will have some opportunities to dispute if they want to go forward, I’m sure they will. As far as mitt romney’s campaign is concerned, paul ryan on this night delivered.

Burnett: That’s right. Certainly so. We were jotting down points. There will be issues with some of the facts. But it motivated people. He’s a man who says I care deeply about every single word. I want to do a good job. And he delivered on that. Precise, clear, and passionate.

Yes, Erin, sometimes liars are "passionate" about their lying so they can "motivate" people. Think Richard Nixon or Bernie Madoff or Ted Bundy or Dick Cheney or Jerry Sandusky.

The bottom line is, we shouldn't elect a liar and possible sociopath to be one heartbeat away from the Presidency. We need people who will tell us the truth, and not a pack of lies so they can fool us into submission with all their plans.

The Six Worst Lies in Paul Ryan's Speech
~ Think Progress

Pants on Fire: The The False Truths Paul Ryan Told During The RNC (LIST)
~ Global Grind

The Lies People Are Willing to Accept From VP Nominee Paul Ryan
~ Hyper Vocal

Paul Ryan's speech: a round-up of his most audacious untruths
~ Guardian UK



As for Ryan, it’s scary that he could lie so brazenly to the millions of people around the country who tuned in to watch the Republican National Convention. But what’s scarier? That quite a few of those millions will have hung on to and believed every word he said.
~ Tracy Bloom on Truth Dig

The sanctimonious V.P. nominee seems to have forgotten the Fourth Commandment: “Thou shalt not lie.” Ryan believes he can say anything and get away with it.
~ Joan Walsh on Salon

But really, the proper response to a speech like [Paul Ryan’s] isn’t to carefully analyze the logic, or to find instances of hypocrisy; it’s to call the speaker out for telling flat-out lies to the American people. Paul Ryan has had what I’ve long thought was an undeserved good reputation among many in the press and in Washington. It shouldn’t survive tonight’s speech.
~ Jonathan Bernstein in Washington Post

Ryan talked about moral creed, but his budget slashes programs aimed at protecting those that he said we have an obligation to protect. If that is the Romney/Ryan American dream, then voters -- young, old, middle class, African-American, Latinos and women -- would do well to say thanks, but we'll keep our hope and change even if it takes four more years to get there.
~ CNN

Ryan actually pushed the envelope, peddling new fantasies, like the spin that says: “Obamacare comes to more than 2,000 pages of rules, mandates, taxes, fees, and fines that have no place in a free country."
This will come to news as news to Britain, Canada, Germany and other American allies that somehow keep the light of liberty shining even as they guarantee all citizens access to quality healthcare.
~ John Nichols on The Nation

So the Democrats have to raise their game. They’ve never had to encounter this kind of buttery demagoguery before. Their campaign is going to have to be almost as much against Ryan as against Romney. (Does anyone think Romney’s speech is going to be more effective to the intended audience? I’d be awfully surprised if it is.) They have to rebut his lies, and they have to do it without sounding bitter or afraid or superior or haughty. That’s not easy to do. But it’s the challenge of this campaign. If they can’t win the Ryan war, they’re done.
~ Michael Tomasky on Daily Beast

But here's the thing: Most of the millions of people who watched the speech on television tonight do not read fact-checks or obsessively consume news 15 hours a day, and will never know how much Ryan's case against Obama relied on lies and deception. Ryan's pants are on fire, but all America saw was a barn-burner.
~ Dan Amira on New York Magazine

Retro Romney in Retroactive Mode

Hmmm, just what can we believe about Romney? Not much. He changes from year to year, day to day. Even if you believe him today, just wait a few hours.

Romney & Ryan Use Steve Martin's "I Forgot" and "Excuuuuse Me!"

Comedian Steve Martin did a comedy skit on Saturday Night Live back in the 1970s that seems to be prophetic about the way both Mitt Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, deal with problems. First they say "I Forgot" then they say "Excuuuuse Me!"

SNL Transcript Here

You.. can be a millionaire.. and never pay taxes! You can be a millionaire.. and never pay taxes! You say.. "Steve.. how can I be a millionaire.. and never pay taxes?" First.. get a million dollars. Now.. you say, "Steve.. what do I say to the tax man when he comes to my door and says, 'You.. have never paid taxes'?"

Two simple words. Two simple words in the English language: "I forgot!" How many times do we let ourselves get into terrible situations because we don't say "I forgot"? Let's say you're on trial for armed robbery. You say to the judge, "I forgot armed robbery was illegal."

Let's suppose he says back to you, "You have committed a foul crime. you have stolen hundreds and thousands of dollars from people at random, and you say, 'I forgot'?"

Two simple words: Excuuuuuse me!!"

"Excuuuse ME!" is the seventies version of Mitt Romney's "retroactively" apologizing or scrubbing records.

For instance, Mitt Romney probably hasn't paid much - if anything - towards income taxes for the past ten years. First he said he paid "plenty of taxes," but didn't indicate what kind of taxes he meant. Then last week he said this via AtlanticWire:

I did go back and look at my taxes and over the last 10 year I never paid less than 13 percent. I think the most recent year is 13.6 percent or something like that. I paid taxes every single year. Harry Reid's charge is totally false. I'm sure waiting for Harry to put up who it was that told him what he says they told him. I don't believe it for a minute by the way. Every year I've paid at least 13 percent, and if you add in addition the amount that goes to charity, why, the number gets well above 20 percent.

But some are asking, 13% of what? Just his net worth, or his total portfolio? How much is sheltered overseas? We will probably never know.

Instead of risking being caught in another lie, he is simply not releasing his tax returns. When Harry Reid and the Dems call him out on it, he says "Excuuuuse Me, I have done the legally required minimum." His wife Ann vows "there will be no more returns for you," and figuratively "off with their heads if they ask" in every interview. "You People just don't deserve to know. Trust us, we're rich."

It's a classic Steve Martin defense. "Excuuuuuse Me!"

When Mitt was running for Governor of Massachusetts, he insisted that he had legally declared that state as his home on his income taxes instead of Utah where he actually resided. He needed to be a legal resident of Massachusetts in order to be the Governor - that makes sense, right? At one point, he listed his residence as the unfinished basement of his son Tagg. It was only when Romney got caught that he said "Excuuuse Me" and "retroactively" refiled his taxes with a Massachusetts address that he could run for governor. Whoops - I just forgot!

Romney was questioned about documents and letters he signed as CEO of Bain Capital when he was supposedly no longer involved in that company, having technically "quit" to work on the Utah Olympics, even though he was listed as CEO and Top Shareholder. Back in July, his top advisor Ed Gillespie explained to Candy Crowley of CNN that he had "Resigned Retroactively."
As Politicus snarks:

. . . Oh, and of course, he gets to tell you whatever he wants and you have to believe. Just trust. You wouldn’t understand. He’s a businessman (aka, divine, untouchable God).
Also, he can claim he was in Massachusetts to conduct business for Bain and therefore eligible to run for Governor, but years later he can say he had retired retroactively and just forgot to get around to filing stuff.
So, hey, Americans! Those tax returns you have to be so careful on, heck, you can just forget to file that you left that company you’re making all of that profit from — and you can forget to tell the SEC . . .

As Steve would say "I forgot!" That should be enough for anyone, right?

And now his sidekick and veep pick Paul Ryan is using the same defense. As a Congressman he spoke out against Obama's stimulus package for the states, and told a radio caller that he never requested funds, only then the AP found a bunch of letters signed by Ryan requesting jobs from the Department of Energy for his district in Wisconsin.

Ryan's repsonse ~ "Oh, those letters."

Yes sir - the ones with your signature, the ones you can see HERE.

ABC New Story

After repeated denials, Paul Ryan has admitted he requested stimulus cash even after sharply criticizing the program.
Ryan had denied doing so as recently as Wednesday, when he spoke to ABC’s Cincinnati affiliate, WCPO, in Ohio.

“I never asked for stimulus,” Mitt Romney’s new running mate said. “I don’t recall… so I really can’t comment on it. I opposed the stimulus because it doesn’t work, it didn’t work.”

Two years ago, during an interview on WBZ’s NewsRadio he was asked by a caller if he “accepted any money” into his district. Ryan said he did not.
“I’m not one [of those] people who votes for something then writes to the government to ask them to send us money. I did not request any stimulus money,” the congressman answered.

But as we’ve now learned, Ryan did write letters. He did request stimulus funds.
“The Olympics may be over but Paul Ryan could have gotten a gold medal in hypocrisy,” a senior administration official told ABC’s Jake Tapper. “As someone who spends all day every day railing against government spending, but then secretly seeks millions in funds for pet projects, he is as Washington as it gets.”

But that's okay ~ he just forgot! "Excuuuuuuuuuse MEEEEEEEEEEEE!"

The Stimulating Stimulus of Paul Ryan

Paul Ryan has been caught in a big lie. He spoke out against Obama's stimulus package in 2009, then requested the money for his district after all. And even though other Republicans such as Eric Cantor did the same thing, nothing justifies lying when it is politically expedient. But as with Mitt Romney, this is a pattern with Paul Ryan. He is a Catholic when it suits him, and an Ayn Rand Anti-Church Capitalist when it suits him. He is a hometown boy or a Washington insider, a public university graduate or an anti-intellectual Tea Party booster.

And that's fine as long as you can fly under the radar, or fool some of the people some of the time and never the twain shall meet. All the "guys on the block" are doing it anyway, right?

But now Ryan is exposed on a national level, and his boss's etch-a-sketch just won't save him in this age of information. I am getting sick of these guys saying they "weren't aware" of what they were doing, or signed papers they didn't understand, or blaming their staffs for blatant lies. Stop the song and dance! Most of us are not that stupid, and we certainly aren't impressed. There is such a thing as integrity.

Story from Think Progress

According to the reports, the documents showed that Ryan also brought in $5.4 million for local bus services. His requests came at the same time he was publicly calling the stimulus a “wasteful spending spree.”

However, in an interview with a local Ohio television news station, Ryan claimed he never secured funding through the program, saying “I never asked for stimulus.”

When the AP dug up four letters to the Energy Department in which Ryan requests stimulus jobs, he backpeddled with this statement:

“After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled. This is why I didn’t recall the letters earlier,” he continued. “But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that. Regardless, it’s clear that the Obama stimulus did nothing to stimulate the economy, and now the President is asking to do it all over again.”

Okay - whatever! *eyeroll* Admit you are . . . Busted!!!

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Did Romney Pay 13% Income Tax Each Year?

Romney still won't release the tax returns and expects us to trust him. I'm with Harry Reid - I'm not drinking the kool-aid. That is echoed in the message from the Obama Campaign: Prove It!

From CNN Political Ticker

"I did go back and look at my taxes and over the past ten years I never paid less than 13%. I think the most recent year is 13.6 or something like that. I paid taxes every single year," Romney said, explaining he had gone back to check his records after being asked by a reporter about the tax rates he had paid. "Harry Reid's charge is totally false. I am sure waiting for Harry to put up who it was that told him what he says they told him – I don't believe it for a minute by the way – but every year I paid at least 13% and if you add in addition the amount that goes to charity, why, the number gets well above 20%."

~~~~~~~~~~

A spokesman for Reid, Adam Jentleson, said in a statement Thursday after Romney's press conference, "We'll believe it when we see it. Until Mitt Romney releases his tax returns, Americans will continue to wonder what he's hiding. Romney seems to think he plays by a different set of rules than every other presidential candidate for the last thirty years, all of whom lived up to the standard of transparency set by Mitt Romney's father and released their tax returns."

The Obama Campaign Response: Prove It!

"Mitt Romney today said that he did indeed 'go back and look' at his tax returns and that he never paid less than 13% in taxes in any year over the past decade," Obama campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith said in a statement. "Since there is substantial reason to doubt his claims, we have a simple message for him: prove it. Even though he's invested millions in foreign tax havens, offshore shell corporations, and a Swiss bank account, he's still asking the American people to trust him."

Harry Reid Responds to Republican "Henchmen" and "Cowards"

Harry Reid has responded to all the Republican accusations on the Sunday Talk Shows, as posted here: Journalism Derp and Question Fail

Give 'em Hell, Harry Reid!!!

From Politico

“They’re a bunch of cowards and they’re avoiding the issue,” said David Krone, Reid’s chief of staff, in an interview with POLITICO on Sunday night. “Lindsey Graham, Reince Priebus - they’re a bunch of henchmen for Romney and they’re all reading off the same talking points. They couldn’t hold a candle to Harry Reid.”

Krone added: “What Harry Reid said is the fact of what he was told. To turn it around, all their childish rants this weekend about calling Reid a ‘liar’ and all that, it just shows you how scared they are that Harry Reid was telling the truth.”

Via Talking Points Memo

Late Sunday morning, Reid’s spokesman Adam Jentleson responded via email to TPM.

“Republicans can try to cover up for Mitt Romney’s stonewalling all they want, but this issue is not going away until Romney decides to be straight with the American people and release his tax returns. It is sad that the most secretive candidate since Richard Nixon has forced his party to defend his decision to hide the truth about his tax returns. As Senator Reid has said, an extremely credible source informed him that Mitt Romney did not pay taxes for ten years. From the one year of returns Romney has released, we’ve seen that he uses secret offshore accounts in places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands to avoid paying U.S. taxes. It’s clear Mitt Romney is hiding something, and the only way for him to clear this up is to be straight with the American people and release his tax returns.”

Some stories are so juicy that you wish they would never end. I almost hope Mitt Romney never releases his income taxes so that Harry Reid can keep the Republicans in an uproar about this, Sunday after Sunday, till the election, LOL.

Sunday Talk Shows ~ Journalism Derp and Question Fail

The Sunday talk shows were horrible this week, with even seasoned journalists lined up in bipartisan support with Republican pundits, trying to save Mitt Romney from the dastardly clutches of the evil Harry Reid, who dared ask the national candidate to do something every other politician or federal employee has to do and release his taxes.

Both Bob Schieffer and George Will said Reid is practicing McCarthyism. Hmmm, I don't remember them ever saying anything about Michele Bachmann and her witch hunts.

. . . isn't this kind of like Joe McCarthy back in the era when he said, "I have here in my hand the names of 400 people in the state department who are communist?" It turned out he didn't and he was saying the way to prove that they're not is for them to come forward here. I mean, asking somebody to come forward to, to just because there's been an unsubstantiated charge, that's a little thin to me.
~ Bob Schieffer on CBS Face the Nation

Look, in 1950, Joe McCarthy went to West Virginia, didn’t know what to tell to the Women’s Republican Club of Wheeling, West Virginia, so he said I have in my hand a list of 205, we think that are — 205 communists in the State Department. Didn’t have a list. Harry Reid doesn’t have any evidence either. This is McCarthyism from the desert (ph).
~ Republican pundit, George Will on This Week

Nice to see you both got your talking points straight, fellas. Does Reince Priebus email them to you directly? And speaking of our favorite Republican leader (not), here is Priebus on ABC This Week calling Reid a "dirty liar" and saying he hasn't released his taxes either. Oh yeah?

RNC Chairman, Reince Priebus: And as far as Harry Reid is concerned, listen, I know you might want to go down that road, I’m not going to respond to a dirty liar who hasn’t filed a single page of tax returns himself. Complains about people with money but lives in the Ritz Carlton here down the street. So if that’s on the agenda, I’m not going to respond to that. This is just a made-up issue. And the fact that we’re going to spend any time talking about it is ridiculous.
George Stephanopolous: Mr. Chairman, you say you're not going to respond, but you just called him a 'dirty liar.' You stand by that, you think Harry Reid is a dirty liar?”
Priebus: I just said it.
ABC News This Week with George Stephanopolous

Most Democrats were probably screaming the obvious point at the TV, which Stephanopoulos ignored - it's easy to prove whether Reid has released his taxes as a member of the Senate. Why didn't George just say that? And you know what? Reid has released his taxes for many years.  Going back to 1995. Yet George Stephanopoulos didn't question that outrageous statement at all, even after cuckoo Ann Coulter repeated the lie, and she was babbling like an idiot.

Must be a good gig to get on these shows and lie your brains out week after week with no "journalist" to call you on it. Coulter also tried to deflect the criticism back on Obama and even on Bill Clinton for some unknown reason, but all of it still begs the question of why Coulter  is so afraid for Romney to release his taxes. She might as well have been talking to herself for all the questioning anyone gave her. She even implied that people are asking for Romney's taxes because he is a Mormon, which is absurd because Harry Reid is also a Mormon, LOL. Derp de Derp.

He absolutely should not release any more tax returns. He has released two years. Bill Clinton wouldn’t release his medical records. You know, people kind of wondered about that. We know after the JFK presidency, you could have an issue with a drug addict president, but he just dug in his heels. We have two years on Romney. You know perfectly well, the media, this is Obama’s modus operandi, and unfortunately Romney isn’t divorced. Hopefully, his vice presidential candidate won’t be divorced. It’s always dirty politics. You remember when Romney was — or Obama was running against McCain and Sarah Palin. What did we get? False rumors of a McCain affair. We had investigations into the Palin marriage, claims they were getting divorced. They have nothing on this Mormon, and they want his tax records. If they releases 10 years, they’ll demand 20 years.
~ Ann Coulter on This Week

Everyone expects Coulter to sound like a partisan wingnut, but what about a so-called "Senior White House Reporter," in this case Jonathan Karl of ABC News? What's his excuse for protecting Romney? And how does this guy "know" that Mitt Romney paid any taxes at all? He doesn't know!

It's one of the most outrageous charges that I've ever seen actually made on the Senate Floor. . . . When Harry Reid takes to the floor of the Senate and makes this outrageous charge that has absolutely no evidence. . . I mean Mitt Romney paid $3 million in the one tax return we've seen. He's paid taxes, so it's a completely false charge.
But Reid loves this. The Democrats love this. Because no matter how he digs in, no matter how much he gets attacked, you know - here or by John Stewart - or anywhere else, it gets the story out there again and again.
And I tell you - Mitt Romney played right into this by telling Harry Reid to 'put up or shut up,' so it becomes this back-and-forth. Instead, he should have laughed it off, he should have made a joke about Harry Reid's imaginary friend, and moved on . . .
Jonathan Karl, ABC senior White House reporter, on This Week

Over on CNN, Senator Lindsey Graham, R-SC, also called Reid a liar, and "journalist" Candy Crowley was just too busy and in a hurry to ask any follow-up questions. *snort* What a joke! These alleged "interviews" are like little commericials for the Mitt Romney campaign.

Senator Lindsey Graham: I think he's lying about his statement about knowing something about Romney's . . .
Candy Crowley of CNN: That's pretty stiff. You think the leader of the Senate is lying?
Lindsey Graham: I really do - I think he's created an issue here, I think he's making things up. And at a time when the country is just about to fall apart.
. . . I just can't believe that the Senate Majority Leader would take the floor twice, make accusations that are absolutely unfounded in my view, and quite frankly making things up. . . .
Candy Crowley: Senator Lindsey Graham, I wish we had more time. I've got to run. Thank you so much.
From CNN's State of the Union with Candy Crowley

Of course, CNN as usual had "two sides" so everything could cancel out evenly, and at least Robert Gibbs got in a few lines of truth:

We can put all of this to rest tomorrow. Mitt Romney can go to Kinko’s, he can photocopy his tax returns, they’re several hundred pages. He can hand them out to people like CNN, he can hand them out to reporters all over the country, and you know what? We wouldn’t talk about this tomorrow.
~ Robert Gibbs on CNN, quoted by Politico

Indeed! Come on Mitt - show us the taxes!!!

Bain is Plain and Mitt Needs to Explain

If you can't get enough of the Romneylicious Bain Denials, here are some links to peruse this Saturday:

Full Text of Mitt Romney's CBS Interview

Huffington Post: Romney's Five Network Blitz

Here's a Daily Kos Diary explaining that Romney can dismiss and deny his interactions with Bain after 1999, but the proof is in the rather old-fashioned but searchable database.
Mitt meet EDGAR Hammer meet Nail by 8ackgr0und N015eFollow

Rachel Maddow's Interview with the Boston Globe Reporter who wrote the original viral article that started all this:

Wonderfully effective new ad, found Via Political Carnival
 

Romney Brought A Black Entourage to the NAACP

You can't make this stuff up. I saw this on the Ed Show last night and was staring at the TV in disbelief, and because it is such a strange story held it until today to see if more information was available.

According to NAACP members on the ED Show, Romney brought his own entourage of African Americans to the convention, either bussed or flown in. You can see the original article and video below, but here is the new information from this afternoon:

MSNBC ~ Romney Brought in Black Supporters

The Romney campaign Wednesday night denied to Lean Forward that it brought in supporters to cheer during the candidate's speech to the NAACP, as several attendees have claimed. But one prominent black Republican told us she was invited to the event by the Romney campaign, and another African-American conservative said he was urged to go by people connected to the campaign.

"I was invited by Governor Romney," Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll of Florida, a Republican, told Lean Forward in a phone interview Thursday afternoon.

Asked who paid Carroll's way, her office referred Lean Forward to the Romney campaign's press office, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

. . . Niger Innis, a conservative activist, told Lean Forward Thursday that he was encouraged to attend the Houston speech by friends in the NAACP, as well as "some folks that were aligned with the Romney campaign," declining to elaborate. Innis said he paid his own way.

. . . The TV host Roland Martin, Hilary Shelton of the NAACP, and the radio host Mark Thompson all have claimed that the Romney campaign brought in supporters to the speech. Shelton said on MSNBC Wednesday that the goal was "to provide the cheering for [Romney]." Thompson said the supporters served as "applauders for his applause lines."

Andrea Saul, a Romney campaign spokeswoman, told Lean Forward Wednesday night that Shelton's claims were "not true." Asked Thursday about Carroll's statement that she attended the speech as a guest of the Romney campaign, and Innis's that he was urged to go by people connected to the campaign, Saul did not immediately respond.

No joke, folks. Romney is one weird candidate. If he brought in people to clap and support him, maybe they were also the ones booing him on cue as well. Honestly - it begs the question. The whole thing stinks to high heaven, if you ask me.

From The Ed Show Blog

Romney said today that after the speech, at which he was booed for saying he'd repeal the Affordable Health Care Act, he met with black leaders who told him they support his policies but are afraid to do so publicly.

But on The Ed Show, (Hilary) Shelton said those were likely people brought in by the Romney camp "to actually provide the cheering for him."

"Quite frankly, the campaign actually gave me a list of African-American VIPs that they brought into the NAACP meeting," Shelton told Ed Schulz. "So we were aware that they had people brought in specifically for the campaign. So I'm sure those were the ones they sat down with, because quite frankly none of the rank-and-file NAACPers met with him."

Indeed, despite the boos, cheering can be heard at various points during the speech, including when Romney criticized President Obama over the economy and education.

Shelton said that none of the people Romney met with were active NAACP leaders, and that Romney's referring to African-American conservative politicians like Niger Innis who "was brought in from New York."

Pressed by Ed Schultz about whether Innis and the others were actually members of the NAACP, Shelton said: "They're bringing people in that they know will support his agenda from other places, that aren't active with the NAACP. These are people who are brought in to actually provide the cheering for him, so there will be some support along those lines."

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy