The state of the campaign
+5
Kris
nevada
Marathadi-Saamiyaar
truthbetold
Idéfix
9 posters
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: The state of the campaign
Talking about a game changer, here is Nate Silver's estimate of the impact of the debate.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/oct-7-national-polls-show-signs-of-settling/#more-35662
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/oct-7-national-polls-show-signs-of-settling/#more-35662
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
Pp,
i am little more pessimistic than numbers because they do not reflect watercooler conversations, bar room discussions, and weekend kitchen table exchanges.
What bothered me was not romney's performance but the lack of it from obama. I heard a few snickering affirmative action jokes in the last few days.
Obama i observed and read about is a logical smart bright man. He needs to show up with a clever authoritative but not overtly aggressive debate performance. If he can catch romney flipflopping on the stsge he can nullify romney's positive perc eption.
i am little more pessimistic than numbers because they do not reflect watercooler conversations, bar room discussions, and weekend kitchen table exchanges.
What bothered me was not romney's performance but the lack of it from obama. I heard a few snickering affirmative action jokes in the last few days.
Obama i observed and read about is a logical smart bright man. He needs to show up with a clever authoritative but not overtly aggressive debate performance. If he can catch romney flipflopping on the stsge he can nullify romney's positive perc eption.
truthbetold- Posts : 6799
Join date : 2011-06-07
Re: The state of the campaign
Here is an update. As always, the methodology is to assign any state where there is "no contest" as solid for that candidate. For the battleground states:
Average poll margin < 2% = toss-up
Average poll margin between 2% and 5% = leaning toward that candidate
Average poll margin between 5% and 10% = likely that candidate
Romney has made big gains on the map, with FL and NC moving into his column. Obama has lost NH from his column and it is now a toss-up again. Obama still has an edge in the electoral college, although Romney has a slim lead in the national poll average. Most of the polls (both state and national) have data from before the second debate, although I have my doubts whether the second debate will change any undecided voters' minds because of the off-putting contentiousness. Any advantage Obama may gain would have to be through increased likelihood of his base to turn out.
The campaign now hinges on OH more than before. Obama still seems to have a small lead there, and if Romney can flip that state he wins the election. If Obama holds OH, then Romney needs to secure all three toss-up states of CO, VA and NH, and then flip at least 8 electoral college votes away from Obama (to get a tie in the college so the Republican House can vote him in). Since none of the light blue states has 8 votes, that means flipping at least two of those states: NV, IA and WI. If Romney maintains the momentum he has enjoyed for the last two weeks, he can conceivably do this.
Team Obama is probably banking on a few things to secure a win: maintaining that Ohio lead, early voting advantages and a strong ground game in most battlegrounds, going after the Libya terrorists before election day, and a good jobs report the Friday before the election. Team Romney is probably banking on continuing momentum, more revelations about the administration's bungling of the Libya response, a bad jobs report, and a botched operation against Libya terrorists.
Average poll margin < 2% = toss-up
Average poll margin between 2% and 5% = leaning toward that candidate
Average poll margin between 5% and 10% = likely that candidate
Romney has made big gains on the map, with FL and NC moving into his column. Obama has lost NH from his column and it is now a toss-up again. Obama still has an edge in the electoral college, although Romney has a slim lead in the national poll average. Most of the polls (both state and national) have data from before the second debate, although I have my doubts whether the second debate will change any undecided voters' minds because of the off-putting contentiousness. Any advantage Obama may gain would have to be through increased likelihood of his base to turn out.
The campaign now hinges on OH more than before. Obama still seems to have a small lead there, and if Romney can flip that state he wins the election. If Obama holds OH, then Romney needs to secure all three toss-up states of CO, VA and NH, and then flip at least 8 electoral college votes away from Obama (to get a tie in the college so the Republican House can vote him in). Since none of the light blue states has 8 votes, that means flipping at least two of those states: NV, IA and WI. If Romney maintains the momentum he has enjoyed for the last two weeks, he can conceivably do this.
Team Obama is probably banking on a few things to secure a win: maintaining that Ohio lead, early voting advantages and a strong ground game in most battlegrounds, going after the Libya terrorists before election day, and a good jobs report the Friday before the election. Team Romney is probably banking on continuing momentum, more revelations about the administration's bungling of the Libya response, a bad jobs report, and a botched operation against Libya terrorists.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
To add to the above... if Romney flips OH, he wins. But if Obama holds on there, Romney needs all three toss-up states of CO, VA, NH (and at least two of IA, WI and NV). In the current picture, CO and VA go to him with a slim lead, but Obama has the edge in NH. So we will likely see more action in NH from both sides.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
RCP back in obama's favor.
obama's odds up to 74% in nate silver's latest blog.
obama's odds up to 74% in nate silver's latest blog.
MaxEntropy_Man- Posts : 14702
Join date : 2011-04-28
Re: The state of the campaign
Lot of prognosticators predict Obama has reached the lows in the middle of this week. They, including Nate and rcp are predicting an upswing for Obama.
More dirty tricks, huge money flow, church networks and race will push to front to confront Obama team.
The east coast storm may also cause some problems. Libya is still inthe background.
More dirty tricks, huge money flow, church networks and race will push to front to confront Obama team.
The east coast storm may also cause some problems. Libya is still inthe background.
truthbetold- Posts : 6799
Join date : 2011-06-07
Re: The state of the campaign
We are a week away from the election, and here is the current state of polling. I used the same method as earlier: solid to one candidate if the state is not being contested, likely to a candidate if he has 5% or larger lead, leaning to a candidate if he has 2% or larger lead, and tossup if the margin is less than 2%.
The change over the last week that impacts the electoral college vote count significantly is that Ohio has gone from an RCP average of 2.1 to 1.9. With margins of error of individual Ohio polls in the 4-5% range, this change may not be statistically significant. The Republicans are claiming that they will contest MN and PA, but that seems to be a move to force Obama to spend time there rather than in OH more than a genuine play for those states.
At this stage in the game, it is hard to move polls by 2% or more. That difficulty is compounded by early voting that has already occurred for weeks locking in the advantage for the leading candidate. Another, unforeseen factor that makes it harder is the current focus on the big storm. When people are focused on the storm and its aftermath, it is that much harder to make partisan appeals and convert people to your side. So it is a fair bet Obama can get to 263, holding on to the states where he has an RCP average lead of 2% or more. He then needs to get one of the four tossups: CO, OH, VA and FL. He has his highest lead in OH right now, at 1.9 and Romney has had his toughest battle to convince voters there. If Obama can keep a one-point lead going into next Tuesday, he will be president for four more years.
Nate Silver has a much more sophisticated methodology than this, and he gives Obama a 73% chance of winning next week. The betting markets also have Obama ahead; Intrade has his probability of winning at 62%, up from a low of 55% reached last week. This election is still too close for my comfort, but I think Obama will come out on top.
The change over the last week that impacts the electoral college vote count significantly is that Ohio has gone from an RCP average of 2.1 to 1.9. With margins of error of individual Ohio polls in the 4-5% range, this change may not be statistically significant. The Republicans are claiming that they will contest MN and PA, but that seems to be a move to force Obama to spend time there rather than in OH more than a genuine play for those states.
At this stage in the game, it is hard to move polls by 2% or more. That difficulty is compounded by early voting that has already occurred for weeks locking in the advantage for the leading candidate. Another, unforeseen factor that makes it harder is the current focus on the big storm. When people are focused on the storm and its aftermath, it is that much harder to make partisan appeals and convert people to your side. So it is a fair bet Obama can get to 263, holding on to the states where he has an RCP average lead of 2% or more. He then needs to get one of the four tossups: CO, OH, VA and FL. He has his highest lead in OH right now, at 1.9 and Romney has had his toughest battle to convince voters there. If Obama can keep a one-point lead going into next Tuesday, he will be president for four more years.
Nate Silver has a much more sophisticated methodology than this, and he gives Obama a 73% chance of winning next week. The betting markets also have Obama ahead; Intrade has his probability of winning at 62%, up from a low of 55% reached last week. This election is still too close for my comfort, but I think Obama will come out on top.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
In its current "no tossups" scenario, RCP shows Obama winning OH and CO among the tossups, and Romney winning FL and VA. That would make for a 290-248 Obama win. As we get closer to Election Day, the "no tossup" scenario gets more interesting.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
panini press wrote:We are a week away from the election, and here is the current state of polling. I used the same method as earlier: solid to one candidate if the state is not being contested, likely to a candidate if he has 5% or larger lead, leaning to a candidate if he has 2% or larger lead, and tossup if the margin is less than 2%.
The change over the last week that impacts the electoral college vote count significantly is that Ohio has gone from an RCP average of 2.1 to 1.9. With margins of error of individual Ohio polls in the 4-5% range, this change may not be statistically significant. The Republicans are claiming that they will contest MN and PA, but that seems to be a move to force Obama to spend time there rather than in OH more than a genuine play for those states.
At this stage in the game, it is hard to move polls by 2% or more. That difficulty is compounded by early voting that has already occurred for weeks locking in the advantage for the leading candidate. Another, unforeseen factor that makes it harder is the current focus on the big storm. When people are focused on the storm and its aftermath, it is that much harder to make partisan appeals and convert people to your side. So it is a fair bet Obama can get to 263, holding on to the states where he has an RCP average lead of 2% or more. He then needs to get one of the four tossups: CO, OH, VA and FL. He has his highest lead in OH right now, at 1.9 and Romney has had his toughest battle to convince voters there. If Obama can keep a one-point lead going into next Tuesday, he will be president for four more years.
Nate Silver has a much more sophisticated methodology than this, and he gives Obama a 73% chance of winning next week. The betting markets also have Obama ahead; Intrade has his probability of winning at 62%, up from a low of 55% reached last week. This election is still too close for my comfort, but I think Obama will come out on top.
With 263/206 on board, I would also put FL with Romney and potentially VA and NH as well. It gets tight once you put those numbers in.
southindian- Posts : 4643
Join date : 2012-10-08
Re: The state of the campaign
That is fair, I was just going by the poll numbers only. Obama is up 2.0 in NH, so I put it in the Obama column. Romney is up 1.3 in FL, and Obama is up 1.9 in OH. If we give FL to Romney, we have to put OH in Obama's column and he gets across the finish line. At this point, the real toss-ups are CO and VA, where RCP poll average is a tie between the two candidates.southindian wrote:panini press wrote:We are a week away from the election, and here is the current state of polling. I used the same method as earlier: solid to one candidate if the state is not being contested, likely to a candidate if he has 5% or larger lead, leaning to a candidate if he has 2% or larger lead, and tossup if the margin is less than 2%.
The change over the last week that impacts the electoral college vote count significantly is that Ohio has gone from an RCP average of 2.1 to 1.9. With margins of error of individual Ohio polls in the 4-5% range, this change may not be statistically significant. The Republicans are claiming that they will contest MN and PA, but that seems to be a move to force Obama to spend time there rather than in OH more than a genuine play for those states.
At this stage in the game, it is hard to move polls by 2% or more. That difficulty is compounded by early voting that has already occurred for weeks locking in the advantage for the leading candidate. Another, unforeseen factor that makes it harder is the current focus on the big storm. When people are focused on the storm and its aftermath, it is that much harder to make partisan appeals and convert people to your side. So it is a fair bet Obama can get to 263, holding on to the states where he has an RCP average lead of 2% or more. He then needs to get one of the four tossups: CO, OH, VA and FL. He has his highest lead in OH right now, at 1.9 and Romney has had his toughest battle to convince voters there. If Obama can keep a one-point lead going into next Tuesday, he will be president for four more years.
Nate Silver has a much more sophisticated methodology than this, and he gives Obama a 73% chance of winning next week. The betting markets also have Obama ahead; Intrade has his probability of winning at 62%, up from a low of 55% reached last week. This election is still too close for my comfort, but I think Obama will come out on top.
With 263/206 on board, I would also put FL with Romney and potentially VA and NH as well. It gets tight once you put those numbers in.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
If you are an Obama supporter, this is something that should reassure you that he is still the odds-on favorite to win the election. If Obama keeps Ohio, Romney can win FL, NC, NH, VA, CO and NV but will still fall short of 270.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
Nate Silver went out and summarized the latest predictions of all websites that do a state-level poll-based prediction of the election. The summary is that every one of these prediction methods has the same outcome: Obama wins.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
Another piece of good news for Obama supporters... latest polls from Florida show a closer race, with some of Romney's lead there evaporating.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
in another thread Charvaka has said something that needs to be thought through. I thought it might make sense to post Charvaka's views here.
-----
https://such.forumotion.com/t8507p50-was-rana-pratap-an-ass#64509
-----
panini press wrote:Not true. Jaziya was not communal at all.Rashmun wrote:Aurangzeb is communal because he imposed jaziya.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p100-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64500
This tax was not collected from women, nor from young males or from disabled or elderly non-Muslim male citizens. Muslims who paid zakat were not exempt from war duty and a similar form of war tax was also collected from able-bodied Muslim adult males who refused to join war efforts to defend the country. There was, therefore, no discrimination between able-bodied Muslim males and able-bodied non-Muslim males when it came to the payment of war-tax, as long as the person in question would not volunteer in war- efforts for defense of the Muslim- administered state.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64410
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb’s imposition of Jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated it.
Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb’s Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to note that Jizya is nothing more than a war exemption tax which was collected only from able-bodied non-Muslim young male citizens who did not want to volunteer for the defence of the country. There was no Jizya if they volunteered to fight for the country. No such tax was collected from non-Muslims who joined to defend the country.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64399
Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith). War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers.
Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy) Let us now return to Aurangzeb. In his book "Mughal Administration,” Sir Jadunath Sarkar [3] foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb’s reign, nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50 million rupees to the state treasury. It is also worth mentioning here that Aurangzeb did not impose Jizya in the beginning of his reign but introduced it after 16 years during which 80 types of taxes were abolished. Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished eighty taxes no one thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one, and not a heavy one at that, people began to show their displeasure. (Ref: Vindication of Aurangzeb).
It should be noted that Sir Jadunath Sarkar was quoted by Rashmun earlier today. The same reputed scholar who is the foremost historian on all matters Mughal mentions that what Aurangzeb did in fact was simplify the tax code, reduce rates, close deficits and eliminate the fiscal deficit. This is exactly the sort of plan Mitt Romney has for America. It seems to me that the people of Aurangzeb the Great's empire -- many of them from Uttar Pradesh -- were not smart enough to realize how good Aurangzeb's tax plan was for them.
https://such.forumotion.com/t8507p50-was-rana-pratap-an-ass#64509
Guest- Guest
Re: The state of the campaign
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html[/quote[/url]]panini press wrote:Another piece of good news for Obama supporters... latest polls from Florida show a closer race, with some of Romney's lead there evaporating.
[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/presidential-polls-obama-ohio_n_2048550.html
Good work here on Data Mining links. Once source for all surverys.
southindian- Posts : 4643
Join date : 2012-10-08
Re: The state of the campaign
Rashmun wrote:in another thread Charvaka has said something that needs to be thought through. I thought it might make sense to post Charvaka's views here.
-----panini press wrote:Not true. Jaziya was not communal at all.Rashmun wrote:Aurangzeb is communal because he imposed jaziya.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p100-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64500
This tax was not collected from women, nor from young males or from disabled or elderly non-Muslim male citizens. Muslims who paid zakat were not exempt from war duty and a similar form of war tax was also collected from able-bodied Muslim adult males who refused to join war efforts to defend the country. There was, therefore, no discrimination between able-bodied Muslim males and able-bodied non-Muslim males when it came to the payment of war-tax, as long as the person in question would not volunteer in war- efforts for defense of the Muslim- administered state.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64410
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb’s imposition of Jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated it.
Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb’s Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to note that Jizya is nothing more than a war exemption tax which was collected only from able-bodied non-Muslim young male citizens who did not want to volunteer for the defence of the country. There was no Jizya if they volunteered to fight for the country. No such tax was collected from non-Muslims who joined to defend the country.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64399
Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith). War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers.
Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy) Let us now return to Aurangzeb. In his book "Mughal Administration,” Sir Jadunath Sarkar [3] foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb’s reign, nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50 million rupees to the state treasury. It is also worth mentioning here that Aurangzeb did not impose Jizya in the beginning of his reign but introduced it after 16 years during which 80 types of taxes were abolished. Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished eighty taxes no one thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one, and not a heavy one at that, people began to show their displeasure. (Ref: Vindication of Aurangzeb).
It should be noted that Sir Jadunath Sarkar was quoted by Rashmun earlier today. The same reputed scholar who is the foremost historian on all matters Mughal mentions that what Aurangzeb did in fact was simplify the tax code, reduce rates, close deficits and eliminate the fiscal deficit. This is exactly the sort of plan Mitt Romney has for America. It seems to me that the people of Aurangzeb the Great's empire -- many of them from Uttar Pradesh -- were not smart enough to realize how good Aurangzeb's tax plan was for them.
https://such.forumotion.com/t8507p50-was-rana-pratap-an-ass#64509
this thread needs a new direction. We need to focus on Aurangzeb in this thread as per Charvaka's keen desire.
Guest- Guest
Re: The state of the campaign
I hope you have thought through it, Rashmun. Because I still don't see any response from you. Feel free to respond in any thread.Rashmun wrote:in another thread Charvaka has said something that needs to be thought through.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
Rashmun wrote:Rashmun wrote:in another thread Charvaka has said something that needs to be thought through. I thought it might make sense to post Charvaka's views here.
-----panini press wrote:Not true. Jaziya was not communal at all.Rashmun wrote:Aurangzeb is communal because he imposed jaziya.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p100-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64500
This tax was not collected from women, nor from young males or from disabled or elderly non-Muslim male citizens. Muslims who paid zakat were not exempt from war duty and a similar form of war tax was also collected from able-bodied Muslim adult males who refused to join war efforts to defend the country. There was, therefore, no discrimination between able-bodied Muslim males and able-bodied non-Muslim males when it came to the payment of war-tax, as long as the person in question would not volunteer in war- efforts for defense of the Muslim- administered state.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64410
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb’s imposition of Jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated it.
Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb’s Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to note that Jizya is nothing more than a war exemption tax which was collected only from able-bodied non-Muslim young male citizens who did not want to volunteer for the defence of the country. There was no Jizya if they volunteered to fight for the country. No such tax was collected from non-Muslims who joined to defend the country.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64399
Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith). War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers.
Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy) Let us now return to Aurangzeb. In his book "Mughal Administration,” Sir Jadunath Sarkar [3] foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb’s reign, nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50 million rupees to the state treasury. It is also worth mentioning here that Aurangzeb did not impose Jizya in the beginning of his reign but introduced it after 16 years during which 80 types of taxes were abolished. Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished eighty taxes no one thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one, and not a heavy one at that, people began to show their displeasure. (Ref: Vindication of Aurangzeb).
It should be noted that Sir Jadunath Sarkar was quoted by Rashmun earlier today. The same reputed scholar who is the foremost historian on all matters Mughal mentions that what Aurangzeb did in fact was simplify the tax code, reduce rates, close deficits and eliminate the fiscal deficit. This is exactly the sort of plan Mitt Romney has for America. It seems to me that the people of Aurangzeb the Great's empire -- many of them from Uttar Pradesh -- were not smart enough to realize how good Aurangzeb's tax plan was for them.
https://such.forumotion.com/t8507p50-was-rana-pratap-an-ass#64509
this thread needs a new direction. We need to focus on Aurangzeb in this thread as per Charvaka's keen desire.
Charvaka, let us discuss Aurangzeb in this thread if you wish.
Guest- Guest
Re: The state of the campaign
https://such.forumotion.com/t6982p50-the-state-of-the-campaign#64525Rashmun wrote:Rashmun wrote:Rashmun wrote:in another thread Charvaka has said something that needs to be thought through. I thought it might make sense to post Charvaka's views here.
-----panini press wrote:Not true. Jaziya was not communal at all.Rashmun wrote:Aurangzeb is communal because he imposed jaziya.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p100-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64500
This tax was not collected from women, nor from young males or from disabled or elderly non-Muslim male citizens. Muslims who paid zakat were not exempt from war duty and a similar form of war tax was also collected from able-bodied Muslim adult males who refused to join war efforts to defend the country. There was, therefore, no discrimination between able-bodied Muslim males and able-bodied non-Muslim males when it came to the payment of war-tax, as long as the person in question would not volunteer in war- efforts for defense of the Muslim- administered state.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64410
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb’s imposition of Jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated it.
Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb’s Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to note that Jizya is nothing more than a war exemption tax which was collected only from able-bodied non-Muslim young male citizens who did not want to volunteer for the defence of the country. There was no Jizya if they volunteered to fight for the country. No such tax was collected from non-Muslims who joined to defend the country.
---
https://such.forumotion.com/t8491p50-aurangzeb-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#64399
Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith). War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers.
Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy) Let us now return to Aurangzeb. In his book "Mughal Administration,” Sir Jadunath Sarkar [3] foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb’s reign, nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50 million rupees to the state treasury. It is also worth mentioning here that Aurangzeb did not impose Jizya in the beginning of his reign but introduced it after 16 years during which 80 types of taxes were abolished. Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished eighty taxes no one thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one, and not a heavy one at that, people began to show their displeasure. (Ref: Vindication of Aurangzeb).
It should be noted that Sir Jadunath Sarkar was quoted by Rashmun earlier today. The same reputed scholar who is the foremost historian on all matters Mughal mentions that what Aurangzeb did in fact was simplify the tax code, reduce rates, close deficits and eliminate the fiscal deficit. This is exactly the sort of plan Mitt Romney has for America. It seems to me that the people of Aurangzeb the Great's empire -- many of them from Uttar Pradesh -- were not smart enough to realize how good Aurangzeb's tax plan was for them.
https://such.forumotion.com/t8507p50-was-rana-pratap-an-ass#64509
this thread needs a new direction. We need to focus on Aurangzeb in this thread as per Charvaka's keen desire.
Charvaka, let us discuss Aurangzeb in this thread if you wish.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
Nate Silver now has Obama's chances at 85%: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
Based simply on the less sophisticated RealClearPolitics polling averages, it looks like Obama will come out with a decent victory. He is now ahead in the national polls by 0.5%. Four national polls in their average find the national race a tie, while all other polls in the last week show Obama ahead by a point or more. The only polls that have Romney up are Gallup (which suspended polling last week) and NPR which last polled on Oct 25.
The more important polling averages are those in the contested states. Here is how the map looks with a little over a day left before Election Day.
Obama has at least a 2% RCP average lead in enough states to put him over the top. From this mix, he can afford to lose either Iowa or Nevada -- but not both -- and still win. In the toss-up states (where the average gap between candidates is less than 2%), Romney is ahead in Florida and Virginia while Obama is ahead in Colorado and New Hampshire. Ohio is the big battleground, and the only poll that shows a tie is Rasmussen. Eleven other polls in the RCP average show Obama ahead, by a point or more, and Obama's average in Ohio has improved over the last week. It is difficult to imagine how Romney can peel away Ohio at this point.
Obama's lead in the other light blue states is stronger than his lead in Ohio, so it will be a big surprise if Romney can flip any of those states. I haven't been watching cable news so I don't know if they are still calling the overall race a toss-up or too-close-to-call, but I think at this point a Romney win will be very surprising.
Based simply on the less sophisticated RealClearPolitics polling averages, it looks like Obama will come out with a decent victory. He is now ahead in the national polls by 0.5%. Four national polls in their average find the national race a tie, while all other polls in the last week show Obama ahead by a point or more. The only polls that have Romney up are Gallup (which suspended polling last week) and NPR which last polled on Oct 25.
The more important polling averages are those in the contested states. Here is how the map looks with a little over a day left before Election Day.
Obama has at least a 2% RCP average lead in enough states to put him over the top. From this mix, he can afford to lose either Iowa or Nevada -- but not both -- and still win. In the toss-up states (where the average gap between candidates is less than 2%), Romney is ahead in Florida and Virginia while Obama is ahead in Colorado and New Hampshire. Ohio is the big battleground, and the only poll that shows a tie is Rasmussen. Eleven other polls in the RCP average show Obama ahead, by a point or more, and Obama's average in Ohio has improved over the last week. It is difficult to imagine how Romney can peel away Ohio at this point.
Obama's lead in the other light blue states is stronger than his lead in Ohio, so it will be a big surprise if Romney can flip any of those states. I haven't been watching cable news so I don't know if they are still calling the overall race a toss-up or too-close-to-call, but I think at this point a Romney win will be very surprising.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
the cable channels are still calling it too close to call. i don't see why they're doing that.
MaxEntropy_Man- Posts : 14702
Join date : 2011-04-28
Re: The state of the campaign
i suppose ballot boxes could magically disappear, get damaged unfortunately, or be invalidated because voters in ohio didn't write their driver license numbers properly. anything is still possible.
MaxEntropy_Man- Posts : 14702
Join date : 2011-04-28
Re: The state of the campaign
I guess it's for their ratings. A cliffhanger produces more ratings than a done deal. The good thing is that Obama's base is more fickle about showing up to vote, while Romney's base votes more regularly. The perception of a close race might help Team Obama with get-out-the-vote efforts.MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the cable channels are still calling it too close to call. i don't see why they're doing that.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Re: The state of the campaign
I think someone should so a study: Predict the win by some IQ-based regression of all the voters..
I have a feeliing it will be a more reliable model....looking at the blue/red map
I have a feeliing it will be a more reliable model....looking at the blue/red map
Marathadi-Saamiyaar- Posts : 17675
Join date : 2011-04-30
Age : 110
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics
» Bihar Muslim State; Gujarat Hindu State?
» Terror State building an iSlamic State
» The Indian state with the highest number of riot cases is not Uttar Pradesh. It is a South Indian state.
» State failure or failed state?
» The Most Messed Up State aka Chicago State
» Terror State building an iSlamic State
» The Indian state with the highest number of riot cases is not Uttar Pradesh. It is a South Indian state.
» State failure or failed state?
» The Most Messed Up State aka Chicago State
Page 2 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum