phdave wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:EXIT POLLS: RACE TIGHT
R: NC, FL
O: OH, NH, PA, MI, NV
TOSS UP: VA, CO, IA

/drudge

Rev_Beezer wrote:One guy running unopposed for State Senate up here in Shamokin. I wrote in my grandmother.

Trent Steele wrote:EXIT POLLS: RACE TIGHT
R: NC, FL
O: OH, NH, PA, MI, NV
TOSS UP: VA, CO, IA

/drudge

On FNC’s “Special Report” Monday night, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume said that many mainstream polls — which appear to indicate President Barack Obama will win a second term — may be fundamentally flawed.

“My sense about this is fairly simple,” Hume said. “We’re looking at a national race, which is, for all intents and purposes, tied. We are looking at a set of state polls in the battleground states that suggests President Obama is leading — he is leading in most of these polls. And most reporters would look at that and say, ‘Well, if that’s the case, it looks like President Obama is going to win.’ And that is what a lot of people think. That is kind of the conventional wisdom.”

“However, a number of those polls have a remarkably large number of Democrats in the sample — more Democrats, in some cases, than turned out by percentage on Election Day four years ago, which was a big year for the Democrats,” Hume continued. “They don’t expect to have as big a year. So, those polls are troubling. Now, it would be unprecedented for this many polls reflecting a similar outcome to be wrong, which is why I think people are reluctant to draw that conclusion. But there’s something wrong here.”

Werthless wrote:

Phan In Phlorida wrote:

Werthless wrote:Corporate tax rates and their effect on foreign investment repatriation of cash?

The effective corporate tax rate is around 12%, among the lowest of all developed nations. For at least the past 10-15 years, it has fluctuated between 12-14%. The repatriation tax holiday in 2004 had no effect on domestic job creation or domestic investment. The reason being basic business... if there isn't an increase in demand for a company's product or service, they just "bank" extra revenues/tax savings (cash reserves). Spending it otherwise would have a negative fiscal impact on the company and thus be bad business practice. If there is an increase in foreign demand but not domestic, they invest there and not here. Basically, companies will not create jobs they don't need to create nor will they invest when/where they don't need to invest.

The businesses holding money overseas do not have the 12% effective rate. These are the companies that are facing 35% marginal rates to bring cash back into the country. I like how the argument is "it won't necessarly create many jobs, thus we shouldnt change the silly status quo." Why should we have a tax code with a 12% effective rate, yet 35% marginal rates for those companies without effective lobbyists? Put that unfairness aside. So what would happen if half a trillion gets repatriated. Worst case, it gets paid out to the owners of the companies, who then spend the money on something else. It's not the most effective stimulus, but it's easy stimulus that is an artifact of our screwy tax code. I wouldnt be in favor of a repatriation holiday; I'd prefer a general lowering of the rate, alleviating the incentive for US companies to hold cash overseas waiting for the next repatriation holiday.

TenuredVulture wrote:Frankly, I think CNN might be getting punk'd.

TenuredVulture wrote:Why would a Romney guy leak very negative internal polls in OH? Frankly, I think CNN might be getting punk'd.

Trent Steele wrote:As a fairly liberal person, MSNBC's coverage is every bit as offensive to me as Fox.

Trent Steele wrote:EXIT POLLS: RACE TIGHT
R: NC, FL
O: OH, NH, PA, MI, NV
TOSS UP: VA, CO, IA

/drudge

td11 wrote:MSNBC being as bad as Fox is the falsest of false equivalencies, but i'm not getting into that tonight