Put aside partisanship for just a moment...

[Eraserhead]

Can we all just agree that this election night is going to be incredibly exciting for us political junkies?

This thing could very well end up being "2000 close". Plus there will a bunch of interesting Senate and Houses races worth following too. This is the Superbowl for me, I'm looking forward to it.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I sort of agree, but Ohio is definitely going to be tough cookie. Until there's some indication that Ohio is actually in real toss-up territory, I'm not holding my breath.

[Stirring Wolf🥣🐺]

It's more stressful than exciting for me.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It certainly could be a 2000-like nailbiter, though right now it seems to be more in line with a 2004-like, close-but-not-tossup situation. Many Senate races are going to be extremely thrilling, indeed.

However, my political views and my strong feelings make it hard for me to really enjoy a close election in this case. I can't get myself to think of the entertainment value, while the well-being of over 200 million people is at stake.

[Oakvale]

However, my political views and my strong feelings make it hard for me to really enjoy a close election in this case. I can't get myself to think of the entertainment value, while the well-being of over 200 million people is at stake.

^ Pretty much this, yeah.

[Wonkish1]

It's more stressful than exciting for me.

This goes to you and anybody else that freaks out or gets stressed out because of politics, elections, etc.

You need to make your peace with any outcome way in advance. Even if you absolutely hate the other side there are always a couple of positives that come with losing and their are limits to what the other side can do in a given amount of time.

The other party will win the presidency often. That isn't going to change.

[Stirring Wolf🥣🐺]

^Oh, it's all fine after the election results (regardless of which way they go). Before the election it's stressful though.  Same with football games.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It's more stressful than exciting for me.

This goes to you and anybody else that freaks out or gets stressed out because of politics, elections, etc.

You need to make your peace with any outcome way in advance. Even if you absolutely hate the other side there are always a couple of positives that come with losing and their are limits to what the other side can do in a given amount of time.

The other party will win the presidency often. That isn't going to change.

Couldn't agree more, live to fight another day.

[BringinTheTruth]

Don't bet on it.  In 1980, '92, '04, the polls broke late.  I predict in the last 3-4 days, the polls in Virginia, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Iowa break clear and this close election will be close, but it will not be 2000 or even as late as 2004.  A 2-3 point win everywhere will be sufficient to call every race.

[J. J.]

I think that there will be a major shift in the last week to last fortnight.    Halloween may bring some clarity.

[Torie]

I kind of feel sorry for Obama if he is reelected. It is going to be hell for him as he has to choose between ramping up middle class taxes, slashing entitlements, or facing a further erosion of confidence and economic stagnation if he kicks the can down the road some more.

I had the pleasure of listening this morning to Vanguard Mutual Fund's economist today point out that we are spending 24% of GDP and collecting revenues equal to 15% of GDP, for a 9% of GDP deficit - obviously a road to disaster. He is of my opinion that the key here is a lack of confidence by investors as to what the future holds, and thus they are keeping their wallets in their pocket and not investing.

The silver lining is the emerging technology of 3D imaging manufacturing. Is anyone familiar with that? I was not, and it seems pure Scifi to me. You can make anything by putting the raw material in a box, and out comes the fabricated product like magic. It will revolutionize manufacturing. If is the best thing since Intel in 1971 invented the microchip.

[Oakvale]

The silver lining is the emerging technology of 3D imaging manufacturing. Is anyone familiar with that? I was not, and it seems pure Scifi to me. You can make anything by putting the raw material in a box, and out comes the fabricated product like magic. It will revolutionize manufacturing. If is the best thing since Intel in 1971 invented the microchip.

Yes! I've been becoming kind of obsessed with 3D printing lately. We're a few years away from being able to download clothes.

[Wonkish1]

I kind of feel sorry for Obama if he is reelected. It is going to be hell for him as he has to choose between ramping up middle class taxes, slashing entitlements, or facing a further erosion of confidence and economic stagnation if he kicks the can down the road some more.

I had the pleasure of listening this morning to Vanguard Mutual Fund's economist today point out that we are spending 24% of GDP and collecting revenues equal to 15% of GDP, for a 9% of GDP deficit - obviously a road to disaster. He is of my opinion that the key here is a lack of confidence by investors as to what the future holds, and thus they are keeping their wallets in their pocket and not investing.

The silver lining is the emerging technology of 3D imaging manufacturing. Is anyone familiar with that? I was not, and it seems pure Scifi to me. You can make anything by putting the raw material in a box, and out comes the fabricated product like magic. It will revolutionize manufacturing. If is the best thing since Intel in 1971 invented the microchip.

It is one of the coolest things I've ever seen. A truly groundbreaking technology that is going to disrupt many industries and quite likely usher in a reshaping of our productive world.

Some people are actually talking about it like it will bring on a new industrial revolution.

I would gladly bet the vast majority of my net worth on that industry. Game changer!


Keep in mind that this technology is still very much in its infancy and likely still wont be a huge player even 4 years from now.

[BM]

Objectively speaking, Romney winning would be a definite loss for political junkies. Wide open races with no incumbent are always more exciting.

[Phony Moderate]

This thread has kind of failed in it's original intentions, no?

[Beet]

I kind of feel sorry for Obama if he is reelected. It is going to be hell for him as he has to choose between ramping up middle class taxes, slashing entitlements, or facing a further erosion of confidence and economic stagnation if he kicks the can down the road some more.

Most likely he will do #2. #1 is not going to happen because the Republicans in Congress are opposed to it. #3 is not going to happen simply because confidence won't be eroded during the next four years no matter who wins, nor will the economy stagnate (as far as I can say without precisely defining the terms of words). It's possible that he or Romney would kick the can down the road further, as you say, but I think Romney is far more likely to do so, because he would have his reelection to look forward to and I think he subscribes to Keynesian views that cutting the deficit is bad for the economy, and not Torie views. He has practically said as much. Obama, freed from having to face the voters again, will embrace his inner centrist out of concern for his legacy.

In the next four years, no matter who wins, and no matter whether they sign a 'grand bargain
 or not, the following things will happen: 1) the economy will continue to grow, jobs will be added at a modest but steady clip, and unemployment will fall 2) the stock market will go up, barring overseas events 3) the deficit will go down, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP 4) more people will feel we are headed in the right direction 4 years from now than today.

Obama has put in place the foundations for a strong and lasting recovery, regardless of who wins.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind most people who work in finance are conservative, particularly fiscally. Hence, most people on Wall Street don't actually care that they've raked it in under Obama. People who work at places like Vanguard and talk to people like you, Torie, are salesmen. Their job is to sell their product (their mutual fund) to investors on the premise that you will get a good risk-return for the situation you are in. The better the product, the easier the sell. Hence, all the charts of past performance. At the end of 2008 the poor hapless souls like him were having to travel around from company and company and tell people why their 401k's had fallen by half in little over a year. But he doesn't care that because of Obama, he has a job, he has a good product to sell, he can say that Vanguard has done well for his clients. Just like Jack Welch doesn't care that GE wouldn't exist without Obama, Rick Santelli didn't care that he wouldn't have a job without Obama because CNBC is also a subsidiary of GE, or Lee Iaccoca doesn't care that Obama just did what he did in spades. They don't care- their minds are set and they'll believe based on their preconceived notions. As far as Vanguard, it's just the nature of people who go into fields such as finance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There used to be this guy back in 2009 or so called Einzige who talked about this stuff. Then I looked into it. It's not there yet, but it's getting there.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

If we win in 2012, I'd be fine going down in 2016. A close election that's wide-open on both sides is always fun.

[Eraserhead]

This thread has kind of failed in it's original intentions, no?

Yes. Yes, it has.

[Gustaf]

I agree. I've been saying all along that I'm sort of cheering for Romney simply because I like the race to be close.

Also, I know people say every election that it's the most important election ever, but really? Does anyone think Romney or Obama are likely to do much? I'm unconvinced on whether it matters that much who wins, to be honest.

[Joe Republic]

Does anyone think Romney or Obama are likely to do much? I'm unconvinced on whether it matters that much who wins, to be honest.

Congress is expected to stay divided, so no, not really.

The only flashpoint I could see is a potential Supreme Court vacancy during a Romney presidency, at least as long as the Senate is under Democratic control.  I'd like to see another Bork/Thomas debacle.

[Mr. Morden]

Also, I know people say every election that it's the most important election ever, but really? Does anyone think Romney or Obama are likely to do much? I'm unconvinced on whether it matters that much who wins, to be honest.

I don't think it's "the most important election of our lifetimes", but I do actually think that on economic policy, there's more at stake within the next year than there is in the first year of most presidential terms, simply because the "fiscal cliff" means that there's more in flux right now with both spending and taxes than there has been in quite some time.

On foreign policy, though, the differences between the candidates seem rather unremarkable, and I'm anticipating a rather boring debate on the subject on Monday.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

It's going to be a blast. Quite a few close races that will have nationwide effects, especially in the Senate.  And then there's the presidential race, with a good possibility of it being close, a number of real toss-ups that actually matter, and the outside chance of a tie or other craziness. (Such as Ohio being too close to call, for example.)

As for the significance of this election in particular? Precious damn little, imo. Obama and Romney are far more alike when it comes to policy than their partisans prefer to believe. Although it will be interesting to see if Bill Clinton gets to remain the only Democratic president since WWII elected to serve two terms.

It will also be fun to watch the Republican party tear itself apart over the next four years if Romney loses.