Well... that's awkward.

1. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago

   *Disclaimer* I just saw this posted, haven't read it, passing it along anyway.
   
   http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49528284/#.UIdUK4ZAo6M

   replyreport
   1. 93

      habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I think something's wrong with my computer - it says this report is on NBC. Are they turning on the POTUS?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         The first report I saw was on Fox, but I wasn't going to post that. I think they were covering it on MSNBC on the telly.
         
         Any thoughts habee?
         
         I honestly don't understand this whole situation. The next day Obama mentions attacks on religion, and acts of terror. For two weeks, his administration talks about these videos. On Sept 25, Obama stood before the UN and said these attacks were because of the video...
         
         "There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy."
         
         As he said in the final debate... as POTUS, you have to be clear.

         replyreport
         1. 93

            habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It confuses me, too, Jax. It looks like a coverup, but I'm trying to give the prez the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he wasn't told the whole story. Maybe his staff didn't want to upset him right before the election. Maybe they didn't want to say anything until they were absolutely sure of what was happening. I do think, however, it looks bad for Obama to have missed security briefings. I read somewhere that someone (White House, CIA, State Dept?) was watching the event in real time. Do you know anything about that?

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               There was a drone, assigned I believe, to the attack, which was transmitting video for most of the attack. Dunno, seems only right-wing news sites wrote about it.
               
               That's another point I'm confused on. I've heard it lasted anywhere between 2 and 7 hours...

               replyreport
               1. 93

                  habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Sorta OT, but what do you think Romney's chances are? I still think O will pull it out because of Ohio.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Lol, posted at other thread.
                     
                     My 'be cautious' side is putting it at
                     
                     Romney +5% popular vote, 283 vs 255 EC vote.
                     
                     My honest-to-goodness prediction is ~9% popular vote, 311-227.
                     
                     
                     I've detailed my thoughts on this before on other boards, but I'd probably be called a racist if I did that here

                     replyreport
                     1. 93

                        habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Do you think R will win Ohio - or make gains in other (unexpected) paths?

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Honesty: http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p … ?mapid=Qfg
                           
                           Conservative: http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p … ?mapid=Qfm
                           
                           On the conservative map, I would have switched Iowa and Ohio, but I like to show that Romney can actually, realistically win without it.
                           
                           Nevada looks worse in the polls than it is, because Johnson is taking away about 3% from Obama, but that's not what they are reporting.

                           replyreport
                           1. 93

                              habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              You don't think Johnson will take votes from Romney? I do.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Rassmussen got something like this from polling
                                 
                                 Obama - 48
                                 Romney - 45
                                 
                                 With Johnson included
                                 
                                 Obama - 45
                                 Romney - 45
                                 Johnson - 3
                                 
                                 I don't know what it will be like in other states. Rassmussen's new NV poll today has
                                 
                                 Obama - 48
                                 Romney - 50
                                 
                                 There are libertarians on both sides... the difference I think is that left-leaning Ls don't like Obama, and they don't like Romney. Right-leaning libs don't like Romney either, but they hate Obama, so they are more likely to vote the lesser of two evils.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 93

                                    habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Thanks for the info!

                                    replyreport
                        2. 60

                           Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           I like this it's the averaging of all the major polls
                           
                           Here is the popular vote. Romney Ahead by 0.9% today.
                           http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls … -1171.html
                           
                           And this is the electoral college Obama ahead 281 to 257
                           http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls … anges.html

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Just averaging the polls is a pretty bad idea, there are good polls and bad polls.
                              
                              On top of that, they only report the Obama/Romney portion of the polls. So Rassmussen has NV with Obama up by 3, but when they include Johnson in the polling, it's a dead heat.

                              replyreport
   2. 60

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      A group claiming responsibility is not in any way definitive groups falsely claim responsibility all the time, it takes time to figure out what actually happened.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         So, there is an attack.  Pretty much immediately, a known organization takes credit for it.
         
         So, the rational thing to do, is spend the next two weeks calling it a spontaneous protest to a video?
         
         "Our only evidence is X. However, since we aren't sure that X is correct, we'll just say it is Y, for which there is no evidence"

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            *sigh* You used to be so interesting. Obviously there were other reports indicating Y and the Whitehouse feeling that people needed answers went with the one that was on balance most likely. The thing people are ignoring is it makes absolutely no sense for this to be a cover up, it was still ages until the election and the whole story would come out sooner or later with negative consequences for backing the wrong story. So there is no reason to lie, the logical conclusion is they got bad data and went with the data they had available.
            
            But there is a sad lack of reason or logic in the political debate.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Ok, let's see data, intel, or reasoning for why they called it spontaneous.
               
               For fun, go look at the briefing given, where they state that it was clear this was planned.
               
               My best guess is that Obama jumped on this as an opportunity to appear sympathetic to Islam.

               replyreport
2. 60

   Repairguy47posted 11 years ago

   Not that hard to figure out, if NBC is telling the truth its because they see the handwriting on the wall. The don't want to be seen as protecting him. If he was up in the polls they wouldn't say a thing and berate FOX news for reporting it.

   replyreport
3. 60

   movingoutposted 11 years ago

   What has this country become? People want to know of another's death before a family member? Too much news too quick in my opinion. Oh, that's right, they want to know if it was a terrorist attack! Baloney, nothing more then political bs! If your loved one had been killed, would you want it all over the national news and internet before you were notified? I hope not! There was a time when the American people were notified of an incident after all information was gathered. Too much information, too fast in my opinion! This is all about ALL the news shows wanting the BEST RATINGS!

   replyreport