euronews the network - Issues in the French presidential run-offwww.euronews.com In the first round of the French Presidential election there was a mixture of tactical voting and votes cast in anger. According to the pollsters, Francois Holland should win the second round. Voters who in the last presidential election had approved Nicolas Sarkozy's call for change have turned their backs on him. Many of them voted for other candidates, party leaders who will play a key role in the outcome of the second round. What are the messages which voters have sent out? And how will the two candidates use those messages to win? The economy is struggling, unemployment still overwhelming, exports slipping. Security and immigration concerns have led many French voters to the extreme right. How will the candidates sell their the energy policy and environmental policies in a country that produces up to 80% of its electricity by nuclear power? The guests to answer those questions are Frederic Simon, France 24 corresponde nt in Brussels, Aurelien Renard, marketing director at Gallup Europe and Stephan Simons, a correspondent for Spiegel Online. Find us on: Youtube bit.ly Facebook www.facebook.com Twitter twitter.com
David Horsey / Los Angeles Times
I watched the Wednesday night's presidential debate with a group of wine-sipping West Coast Obama fans who were stunned by the way Mitt Romney dominated the stage.
Over the 90 minutes of the debate, Romney submerged the right-wing image he had adopted in the Republican primary race and came off as a reasonable, moderate technocrat who differs with President Obama only about the means to get to the ends they both seek.
For his part, Obama was pleasant and professorial, as if he were merely engaged in a ponderous academic discussion, rather than a political grudge match with enormous consequences. Faced with the chance to deliver the coup de grace to Romney’s flailing campaign, Obama appeared to have left his rhetorical weapons at the door.
Without the president calling him on it, Romney expressed a newfound concern for the poor that differed dramatically from the disdainful tone of his private remarks about the 47% of Americans he describes as dependent, indolent victims. He rolled over debate moderator Jim Lehrer and took the fight to Obama on everything from green-energy funding to Obamacare.
To be fair to the friends and acquaintances who gathered around the TV with me, they are not knee-jerk acolytes of the Hope and Change Messiah. Highly educated, they hold a range of political views and come from diverse backgrounds. Still, I'm pretty sure there were no Romney voters in the group -- at least not when the debate began.
When it was over, we went around the room and everyone offered an analysis of what had just happened.Â
Our hostess, Cindy, had been whispering under her breath throughout the debate that Romney was wiping the floor with Obama. Cindy is a Hillary Rodham Clinton fan and has never believed Obama possesses the same political skills as either one of the Clintons.
This night, she said she thought the president had missed numerous opportunities to go on the attack, instead merely waiting to respond to whatever Romney threw at him. Romney, meanwhile, was smart, calculated, well-coached and commanding, she said. If she were an undecided voter and all she knew about Romney was what he showed in the debate, she would vote for him.
Cindy, by the way, was probably the most liberal person in the room.Â
Colleen observed that Romney looked like he wanted to be there while Obama did not. Her husband, Richard, was a little harder on Romney. Sure, Romney was good on the riposte, he said, but he is unconnected with the real life of the country. "Mitt Romney is as inauthentic as I can imagine," he said. After months of speaking nary a word about his healthcare program in Massachusetts, suddenly he was embracing it on debate night in his guise as a reborn moderate.
Lisa thought body language was a huge factor. "Obama was listless," she said, while Romney was expansive and "advancing." Lisa invented a new word to describe Romney's facial expressions: "schmearziness" -- the half-smiling, smarmy look Romney gave Obama as he listened to him talk.
Natalie thought people uneducated on the issues would have a hard time deciding who won the debate, but Ed said it was not hard to pick a winner. "Obama was in the driver's seat this morning," he said, "I don't think so anymore." For those without a command of policy details, "facts are facts, but perception is reality." The perception of Romney as a winner will inspire people to start writing checks for his campaign, Ed concluded.
Stan agreed, observing that the big money from conservative political action committees that had been moving away from Romney will now move back.
One big question in the room after the debate was whether Romney would get away with what amounted to another round of flip-flops and denials of plain facts -- such as his contention that his trillions of dollars of proposed revenue reductions would not reward the rich and add to the deficit.Â
It is not always easy to predict how a debate performance will play among the broader electorate, but if the reaction of the folks in my friends' living room is an indicator, it appears that a race that had been running the president's way has just taken a sharp turn in the opposite direction.
A few days ago, Obama told a crowd that Romney is a very good debater while characterizing himself as just "OK." Apparently, he was not just being modest.
Suggest Obama fans are shocked by Mitt Romney's dominance in debate - Los Angeles Times Topics Question by pennelope: What is a "declared value policy" and how do you" plan ahead" when your car is stolen. To Dimples Hope to get an explanation from Dimples as the answer raised more questions. thanx Best answer for What is a "declared value policy" and how do you" plan ahead" when your car is stolen. To Dimples:
Answer by Apple
I'm sorry - im not dimples. First; if you're dealing with a company that is talking about agreed value; you're probably are in excellent shape. Here's the deal (in a scenario): You have an AWESOME 2003 Ford Taurus; with less than 10,000 miles, in excellent condition. If you insure with State Farm (or most other major carriers) - they will value your vehicle at NADA rates; which will probably be around $ 9000 (or whatever it is). But; if you have an agreed value carrier, you can name your own value (within reason) for the vehicle -- so if you think the vehicle is worth $ 12,500; they will issue that much coverage. State Farm generally won't do that. Then (and if) your vehicle get totaled - this is where your above decision comes to head - If you selected an "agreed value" carrier - you will receive the "agreed value" for your vehicle. However; if you are with a "standard" carrier, you will receive what they believe is the fair value (generally NADA rates). As a recommendation; if whomever spoke to you stated the term "agreed value" they are probably a premium insurance agent. All of my vehicles are covered under an agreed value policy. A 2001 Ford and a 2005 Chrysler.
Answer by Dimples_in_NJ
Apple is correct- Declared value means that you have already pre-negotiated the value of your car with the carrier so that there is limited contestability. This insurance is nothing new to the market just non-routine. These types of policies rolled out many years ago and were popular in the car collection communities. The car collectors found themselve getting cut down prices for classic cars with signifcantly more street value. In order to protect their investments they shopped out declared value policies. In current market, I am seeing more and more of these policies pop up given the defficencies that an adjuster can make at time of settlement. It is not out of the ordindary to see someone paying for a car they still don't own as a result. This policy will be higher price and often has a depreciation schedule built into it.
Answer by mbrcatz17
I'm not Dimples, either. Regarding the declared value. There are THREE types of "valuations" on an auto policy. ACV, actual cash value, is the usual - it's how much that exact car can be sold for. What it's worth now. Then, there's Stated Amount. Stated amount is tricky, because USUALLY a policy says, we'll pay the LESSER of stated amount or actual cash value. Stated amount is when you say, ok, this car is worth $ 3,000. You pay MORE for stated amount. Then, the last valuation is Agreed Value. That's when you and the company agree, this car is insured for $ 15,000. In a case of a total loss, there's no quibbling - that's what they pay. It's common on antique, collector, or high end vehicle policies - but it's NOT common with most carriers. Many insurers won't do it on the Joe Average auto policy. So when Dimples says, declared value, I'm not sure if he means stated amount, or agreed value - but it's NOT something that is going to be offered casually with every carrier. Now, on planning ahead . . . although most people actually buy car insurance because it's required by a loan agreement, it's ACTUALLY a financial planning tool. Whenever you buy your insurance, you need to look at possibilies, and how you are equipped to handle them, and whether you want to self insure some things, or take higher deductibles, etc. So "planning ahead" really means, thinking more about your insurance and how you're going to deal with a theft, or a total car accident where you get crippled for life, or your house burns to the ground, etc.
JoyceIRL News 01/04/12FACEBOOK! www.facebook.com TWITTER! www.twitter.com PS Vita sales are skyrocketing in Japan. Syndicate is banned from Australia and it's not even out yet. Sony being sued over its "no sue" policy! LINKS! PS Vita gamasutra.com Syndicate Banned kotaku.com www.kotaku.com.au Sony Gets Sued Again gamasutra.com kotaku.com au.gamespot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment