# Obama is Cruising!!!



## candycorn (Sep 20, 2012)

*

Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
Romney writing off 47 percent of the vote and alienating more voters every day

Economy slowly getting better.
Car sales up.
Optimism up.

Obama campaign hitting on all cylinders
Romney coughing, sputtering, squabbling in the ranks; circling the drain

Cannot wait for election day!!!


*


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 20, 2012)

Notice now they LOVE fox news


----------



## candycorn (Sep 20, 2012)

Stephanie said:


> Notice now they LOVE fox news



What are you saying they're untrustworthy? 
When you get the GOP mouthpiece to admit chokingly that the GOP is getting their ass handed to them...it's quite fun to watch.  It's also noteworthy that it's the only retort that you have.  That must suck for you.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 20, 2012)

Even FoxNews is preparing to throw Romney under the bus


----------



## Rozman (Sep 20, 2012)

Stephanie said:


> Notice now they LOVE fox news



Excellent point....
Now fox is a credible news source. 
What a piece of work.


----------



## chikenwing (Sep 20, 2012)

Rozman said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Notice now they LOVE fox news
> ...



They are being told what they want to hear,thats all that matters.

The base wants style over substance.


----------



## chikenwing (Sep 20, 2012)

A statistical tie,nether candidate is knocking it out of the park.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 20, 2012)

Rozman said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Notice now they LOVE fox news
> ...



It not that...it really a frame of reference

If even FoxNews is saying the guy is toast.......Romney is TOAST


----------



## candycorn (Sep 20, 2012)

chikenwing said:


> A statistical tie,nether candidate is knocking it out of the park.



A statistical tie?  Much like the first and last place runners in the 100m dash being separted by about 1 second.  Obama is cruising!!!


----------



## candycorn (Sep 20, 2012)




----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 20, 2012)

Yesterday a number of the swing states had the President and the Governor seperated by less than a point. Today, the President is ahead in all of them by 2 or more, excepting North Carolina.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map


----------



## candycorn (Sep 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Yesterday a number of the swing states had the President and the Governor seperated by less than a point. Today, the President is ahead in all of them by 2 or more, excepting North Carolina.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map



The daily ebb and flow of the polls is one thing; the trend is that Obama is almost always on the winning end; all of the other signs point clearly to an Obama victory as Romney continues to struggle.  It's all coming up roses for Obama.  

The 2nd term should be better than the first.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



Still the case!


----------



## skookerasbil (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...




sweetie..............look for my PM to you around 10:30pm on election night. I'll be laughing my balls off when I click on SEND.



And 100% certainty that all the k00ks on here will be treated to the salt in the wound volumes of Gay MSPAINT Photobucket Classics brought to you by skooks........


............like this....................









By November 7th, I'll be the most hated fuck on this board!!!!


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



Yes, Obama is cruising all right.  Here he is pictured at a campaign stop in Key West as he campaigns in FL.


----------



## Missourian (Oct 29, 2012)

Denial,  it's not just a river in a former ally country now run by the Muslim Brotherhood.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 29, 2012)

Missourian said:


> Denial,  it's not just a river in a former ally country now run by the Muslim Brotherhood.



Oh the irony.


----------



## jillian (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



coasting?

that's as silly as the rightwingnut toons who are running all around saying the president should concede now and beat the rush.

you understand that this storm changes things. we don't know yet if that change will help or hurt the president.


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

I can't wait for the bottom to fall out and watch all the Obamabots scurry for shelter....literally.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

jillian said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



Cruising--sounds cooler.  Coasting is taking it easy.  Our President is making his case expertly, calling Romney out on his flip flops, highlighting Romney's casual relationship to honesty.  All aces.

Obama has been behind in only one reputable poll electorally and that has since swung back to Obama's side.  The storm affects both parties equally in terms of operations.  Obama is ahead.  If the storm solidifies the status quo, Obama wins.  If he fumbles the response...maybe thats a different matter.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



Did Perry ever get the fires put out?


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Truth hurts eh?


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Yesterday a number of the swing states had the President and the Governor seperated by less than a point. Today, the President is ahead in all of them by 2 or more, excepting North Carolina.
> ...



LOL, you are as bad as LilOleLady, just a broken record reciting your wish list as fact.
ONLY the hard left thinks this is anything but a horse race.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 29, 2012)

chikenwing said:


> Rozman said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Happens to both sides.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 29, 2012)

Missourian said:


> Denial,  it's not just a river in a former ally country now run by the Muslim Brotherhood.



where is the river denial again? Are u overly influence by country music?


----------



## Dr.House (Oct 29, 2012)

0bama is toast...

Even he knows it...


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



If this is a horse race, I see no steeds, only geldings.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Just going by the reputable electoral vote polling data.  If you can show me reputable polls (plural) that shows Romney winning the electoral votes, I'll change my tune.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



If a photoshopped picture is your version of truth, yes, your pain is evident.  

Are the fires out yet?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 29, 2012)

Dr.House said:


> 0bama is toast...
> 
> Even he knows it...



with butter and jam?


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

jillian said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



No, you are simply repeating the talking points you are hearing on TV.
The storm won't change anything at all.
God you people are no more than parrots.


----------



## Dr.House (Oct 29, 2012)

Moonglow said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> > 0bama is toast...
> ...



No...  0bama already packed that for moving day...


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 29, 2012)

Yep obama is cruising, to defeat.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 29, 2012)

does not matter who wins really, I enjoy the ability of our nation to have free elections and a peacefull transition of power.


----------



## JimH52 (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


>



Yes, Todd feels that Willard still has a 'legitimate" chance of winning.  He feels that if he holds his breath and keeps his legs close, there is a "legitimate" chance that he won't get screwed on November 6th.  But if he is, he can still lessen the effect with a fervent prayer to Joseph Smith...


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

I got $100 bucks Obama tries to start a war or do something totally stupid on America's behalf before he is ousted. 

any takers?

I heard on talk radio that the Obma Administration is already contemplating post-poning elections until after Hurricane Sandy makes landfall. 

Any ol excuse to postpone elections will do. Obama is desparate.


----------



## JimH52 (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



It could...the President is back at the WH acting Presidential, while Willard is off the campaign trail hoping that Obama will make a mistake and that things will be very bad.  Or, as many may say, acting like a typical Republican.


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 29, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> I got $100 bucks Obama tries to start a war or do something totally stupid on America's behalf before he is ousted.
> 
> any takers?
> 
> ...



An invasion of Syria is possible, even if he loses.   There's no reason why he couldn't order an invasion of Syria and leave Romney in a war with Russia.  Then democrats can blame republicans for starting another war.


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> 4Horsemen said:
> 
> 
> > I got $100 bucks Obama tries to start a war or do something totally stupid on America's behalf before he is ousted.
> ...



And you see how stupid that sounds after you wrote it?

You seem to think a war won't affect you just because Mitt would be taking over? that's dumb. *ANY *war affects us all and Obama's ignorant ass shouldn't try that move....unless he never really gave a damn about America anyway. to which, by your comments, you agree.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



I'm guessing no such polling exists...


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> I got $100 bucks Obama tries to start a war or do something totally stupid on America's behalf before he is ousted.
> 
> any takers?
> 
> ...



Talk radio...oh...okay.


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> 4Horsemen said:
> 
> 
> > I got $100 bucks Obama tries to start a war or do something totally stupid on America's behalf before he is ousted.
> ...



Yeah, you know the kind that have concerned citizens on it that speak their minds and chime in on politics and the Presidents' report card, etc... type stuff? or maybe you don't

One of them mentioned in passing the possibility of what if Obama trys to do this since he's losing. and the phone lines lit up...lol...


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > 4Horsemen said:
> ...




Talk Radio is like a trip to the zoo except the animals make more intelligent comments.  I will listen in on the drive home on Wednesday to hear the Throw-Romeny-Under-The-Bus-a-Thon.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



Sorry swetie, you don't get to decide what is "reputable" and what isn't


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



As I said, no such polling exists....otherwise you'd be producing it.  But you're not so there isn't any.  

he he he


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



An intellectual giant you aren't.


----------



## Political Junky (Oct 29, 2012)

Willard's call to put FEMA in the hands of 50 states is going to bite him in the ass with Sandy's devastation.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



Yeah but I'll be here after next Tuesday.  You won't be.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 29, 2012)

Political Junky said:


> Willard's call to put FEMA in the hands of 50 states is going to bite him in the ass with Sandy's devastation.



Actually it will prove he is right.
And how much has Obama called in cuts to FEMA?


----------



## Dr.House (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



God, I hope you are...  Mocking you during your grief will be epic....


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Thanks for proving my point...spouting your "wish" list as fact.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You can't do it.

Scoreboard.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



I am laughing at you....you are a silly little girl claiming its over and have no way to prove it...its ok, you are young and stupid with no real experience.

I know you like the RCP with no toss-ups...well except that there more than hundred which are toss-ups....sorry kid.

I will give you no quarter...you will be gone unless you reneg which is what I expect you to do.


----------



## Dr.House (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



do you have a bet with this flake?


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

Dr.House said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Yup, straight up win or lose.


----------



## Dr.House (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



sweet....  hope she sticks around long enough for us to mock her...


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



When have I ever endorsed RCP?  I think it's stupid that they had Texas and GA in a "leans Romney" column you dumb bitch. 

Back to the topic at hand...show a reputable poll that gives Romney an electoral lead much less 300 EVs.  You can't.  It's a simple as that.

You're gone; start packing your bags.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Poor kid...you have never been up to the back and forth with....and now you are mad 

YOU are the one saying its over and yet you can't show that it is 

Your boy king is done.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



Not surprising. You can't fix stupid.


----------



## Zoom (Oct 29, 2012)

Rozman said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Notice now they LOVE fox news
> ...



Are you saying fox is full of shit?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

PredFan said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



Of which you're living proof.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



The record shows you challenged my point but couldn't back it up. Poor little girl.


----------



## freedombecki (Oct 30, 2012)

Missourian said:


> Denial,  it's not just a river in a former ally country now run by the Muslim Brotherhood.


So true!


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...




Poor Candy, the record shows you are intellectually challenged


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

*Quote: Originally Posted by candycorn  
Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks  
Yesterday a number of the swing states had the President and the Governor seperated by less than a point. Today, the President is ahead in all of them by 2 or more, excepting North Carolina.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
The daily ebb and flow of the polls is one thing; the trend is that Obama is almost always on the winning end; all of the other signs point clearly to an Obama victory as Romney continues to struggle. It's all coming up roses for Obama. 

The 2nd term should be better than the first.*

The entirety of the media shows this "point" to be false....


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



You're the one making a statement without anything to back it up except insults.  I suppose since you've been insulted your entire life; with good cause.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



Update... 

Romney opens up 7-point lead over Obama, as electoral map begins to shift | Fox News




> Mitt Romney's national lead over President Obama grew even more Thursday, with the latest Gallup survey showing the Republican nominee up 7 points -- as polling in the battlegrounds indicates the electoral map may be shifting in Romney's favor.
> 
> In a significant development, the RealClearPolitics electoral map, which offers predictions of which states favor which candidates, for *the first time is showing Romney ahead in terms of electoral votes he is likely to win on Nov. 6*.
> 
> ...


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



You do realize that is over 10 days old, right?


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Certainly more current than the ops prediction, which didn't link a damn thing.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



Your link is 12 days old.  The RCP map has shifted back to our President's favor.  Thanks for playing.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 30, 2012)

You realize that Election Day the conservatives on this site are going to rag you to no end, right?


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2012)

Democrats admit that obama is losing the popular vote and are clinging to a false belief that he can hang onto the EV.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Where's your link in the op backing up your claim?  Can you explain where on RCP it's shifted back to Obama's favor?  I'm not seeing it?


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



You do realize that the election is not decided by the national vote totals but by the electoral college, right?  Right now every polling aggregate site besides unskewedpolls is indicating an Obama victory.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



No!   I didn't realize that!!! 

unskewedpolls?


----------



## Sarah G (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



  This guy thinks he has some intellectual capacity that we simply aren't seeing.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



I agree, unskewedpolls is to be laughed at.  Fortunately they are the only poll aggregation site indicating a Romney victory at this time.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Sarah G said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



Not sure you're talking about me or not but here are the facts:

We used electroal votes to elect a President. 
In only one tally from a reputable source, Obama has been in 2nd place.  And that source has since swung back in his favor. 

This includes Rasmussen.  

While it is true that there are undecided states  in all of these tallies, giving victory to the challenger only because you favor the challenger (or the incumbent for that matter) is nonsense.

So look at reputable polling in those swing states. 

Florida favors Romney as of late but it's always been close.
North Carolina is Romney's as well.

MI, WI, and PA have been in Obama's column for about a solid month now.  Ohio is the big prize and it's been trending Obama lately.  You can look at CNN's campaign explorer to see when Romney has last visited these states clearly indicating what he thinks his chances are there.


----------



## Oldstyle (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Yesterday a number of the swing states had the President and the Governor seperated by less than a point. Today, the President is ahead in all of them by 2 or more, excepting North Carolina.
> ...



What pray tell is going to make an Obama 2nd term better than the first?  We won't have any more Ambassadors killed?  We'll get unemployment to a steady 7.8%?  Gas prices locked in at a constant $3.95 a gallon?  GDP growth at a consistent 2%?  Barry will suddenly learn how to get along with the GOP?

I hate to point out the obvious here, Candy...but another four years of Obama is going to be pretty much like the LAST four years of Obama and that ISN'T a good thing.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



An easy statement to make without any actual data to back it up, isn't it?


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Where is RCP showing Obama ahead in EC votes for all states?


----------



## Sarah G (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



No, I was talking about the other guy.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



I have plenty of data.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

VOTAMATIC | Forecasts and Polling Analysis for the 2012 Presidential Election

Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map

Talking Points Memo

Then you have the redheaded stepchild of poll aggregating sites.

UnSkewed Polls -- erasing the bias to show an accurate picture of politics


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



RCP 'No Toss Ups'??? What the hell is that predicting exactly? 

Huffington Post??


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



You really have to be told what No Toss Ups means?  Here's an idea, maybe you should refute the OP with some actual data and not a 12 day old national poll.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



Yes, please explain how the 'no toss up' numbers are arrived at?  and then explain how they can be even the most slightly relevant?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



To quote a line from the Magnificent 7, "You remind me of the guy I knew out in El Paso who jumped off a building.  As he fell, people on every floor kept hearing him say, _'So far so good_'."


Here's a dose of reality using RCP since you brought it up.

Here is Wisconsin:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Wisconsin: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Michigan:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Michigan: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Pennsylvania:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Ohio and how close it is (it wasn't as close as I thought it was going to be):

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Ohio: Romney vs. Obama

All show the President ahead; 64 electoral votes right there.  


*OBAMA IS CRUISING!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Here is the RCP "no toss up".  Shockingly, Obama wins there too.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - State Changes


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



What's the margin of error?  Can you list the details of who is being polled in what percentages and where?  Just trying to drag you back to reality here.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


Shit happens.  We had thousands of men and women killed because they were looking for WMDs where there were none.  Shit happens.



Oldstyle said:


> We'll get unemployment to a steady 7.8%?


Hope it continues to get better.



Oldstyle said:


> Gas prices locked in at a constant $3.95 a gallon?


Current average price is $3.55 a gallon so it's already getting better.



Oldstyle said:


> GDP growth at a consistent 2%?


Economy is coming back around; too slowly but it's coming back.



Oldstyle said:


> Barry will suddenly learn how to get along with the GOP?


I hope not.  The GOP needs to learn to get along with him.


Oldstyle said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > I hate to point out the obvious here, Candy...but another four years of Obama is going to be pretty much like the LAST four years of Obama and that ISN'T a good thing.
> ...


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Because the aggregate of polls actually shows one candidate winning but RCP doesn't put them under a candidate unless they are up over 5%. 5% is well outside the margin of error when you are aggregating multiple polls.
I
Once again, I invite you to provide data to refute what you've been shown.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



There is a link to each poll within the provided links to provide you with everything you're looking for.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Just trying to make excuses for why the Governor is behind is more like it.  

In PA, all are over or right at the MOE--you'd know this if you were to look at the data skippy.  I know the truth is painful to the GOP so that is why you won't look.  

In MI, all are over the MOE in Obama's favor

In WI, 2 out of the 5 are inside the MOE

In OH, of the 8 different polls showing our President ahead of Governor Romney--8 polls--2 are outside of the MOE, the othe 6 are inside the MOE.  The one poll--ONE POLL--showing the Governor ahead is 1/2 the margin of error in percentage points.  Shock of shocks--the 1 poll showing Romney leading is a Rasmussen poll. 

One good thing for the Governor is that one of the tied polls is based out of Cincinnati and suburban Cincy/Hamilton County will decide Ohio.  

Let me guess, all 30 polls in 4 different states are over sampling Democrats, right?

I own you.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



It's okay ACE, I like demonstating where he is wrong.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



I'm sure you'd win the "hore" race.  

Obama is winning in electoral votes as I have demonstrated time and again.  Your personal insults will not change that fact.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Yawn......your assertion is that Bammy is "cruising", that its over....which may be your opinion...but there is nothing to back that up.

Its ok, ego and pride are tough things...they make you say things that simply aren't viable.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...




Again, we're back to the central point:

All polls (reputable ones anyway) show Obama leading in the electoral votes.  None show the Governor leading.  

Suck on that.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 30, 2012)

Actually, as of today, Romney is the one "cruising"  (The race is too close to say either one is cruising but as of today Romney is a little better off than Obama in both the overall general polls and the swing state polling)

RealClearPolitics - RealClearPolitics Poll Averages


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



I know you think you are bing clever, but really its silly.

You think you get to decide what is "reputable" and what isn't...sorry kid it doesn't work that way.

Obama isn't "cruising" and the election isn't "over"...and no matter how you try and spin nothing you can say or post changes any of that.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



That makes no sense?  Are you still talking about the 'no toss up' poll?  Clearly there are several states that are under the 5% margin, and they are clearly assigning them to whichever candidate they currently have showing as ahead.  Your link shows 290 vs 248, that is clearly counting every electoral vote.  Even if you aren't talking about the 'no toss up', there are still several states under the 5% margin.

I can link polls just like you can, it proves nothing.  I never understand why when people are quoting a poll and using it as evidence that they also don't include the statistics about how a poll has been conducted.  Many, many variables can be used to show a swing one way or the other.  For instance, since you're so up on RCP polls, are they using 2008 turnout in any of their algorithms?


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



They've been posting the "no toss-up" maps for weeks.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



So, why don't you give the thread audience a breakdown of how RCP is creating the polls?  Let's hear it.  Pick one and show how the raw data is acquired and tabulated?


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Obama isn't 'winning' in EV votes, the elections are next Tuesday.  Obama is winning in PREDICTIONS about the EV votes.  Post the information being used that determine what these predictions will be?  How are they acquired and tabulated? What is taken into consideration? Such as 2008 voter turnout? etc...


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



He's discussing EV predictions, and ignoring anything else.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Because 5% is actually a large margin when you are aggregating multiple polls.  If you are aggregating 5 polls that average out to a 3% margin for one particular candidates, odds are that person is going to win that particular state.  Could all of those polls be wrong?  Possibly but highly unlikely.

RCP doesn't actually poll.  They use polls that others conduct and they aggregate them.  Very simple stuff that a grade school kid who has learned about averaging in match class could do.  They also link to the statistics about a poll.

No polls use 2008 turnout in their algorithms.  They call a number of people who identify what party they belong to.  The pollster then reports on this information.  This lie that pollsters use turnout from previous elections has been the biggest lie told on this board for the last few months.


----------



## Sarah G (Oct 30, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...



Not even a tiny edge.  Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want.  It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...




Like I said, you're the guy who fell off the building and thought everything was going fine on the way down.  

"If the signals are flashing and the gates are all down, and the whistle is blowing in vain, if you stay on the tracks, ignoring the facts, then you can't blame the wreck on the train."  -- Greg Tamblyn (Singer/Songwriter)

Soon you'll be asking "did they call them after watching the movie, _Bambi_?"


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



So you're saying that the averages of all the polls they (RCP) are using all average to a percentage greater than five percent for every state in the 'no toss up' poll?  If they're averaging to a 3% margin, then they are being thrown into that candidate's total, regardless of margin of error.

I haven't looked at specifics for RCP, but they don't seem to make it easy to see exactly how they're getting their numbers, nor would I go to each poll they're using to average and research exactly how they're getting their numbers, way too much work, time and effort.  Needless to say, these numbers can be influenced by many things in fine print that tend to be overlooked.  And that's why when it's as close as this race is, it's silly to use a poll or an average of polls to make any proclamation, especially the one that was made in the op.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Amazed said:
> ...




The election was "over" when Romney got nominated.  I think, deep down, most republicans knew that.  

You'll learn on 11/6 when you unveil your new sock puppet.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Whatever, dude. Go back to your happy place.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Sarah G said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



It still is a good indicator--state polls.  What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...



I think the polls are fine as well, they've shown Romney overtaking Obama for the last several weeks, and the trend will continue.  I just don't think they're accurately reflecting how much he is pulling ahead.


----------



## Sarah G (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...



Rasmussen hasn't been fine for a long time and this campaign season, Gallup is right up there with them.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Again with your opinion....and not one scrap of evidence to prove otherwise.

You are like a child simply screaming "Nuh-Uh"!!!!!


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



In one breath:  They're fine.
In the next breath; They're not accurate.

A microcosm of the 2012 GOP.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



This is my happy place.  Obama is cruising and you can only ask, "What were the pollsters wearing" when those who were polled  deemed Obama superior to Romney?


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



They're accurately showing the trend of Romney pulling steadily ahead, saying they're not showing the swing as strongly as it actually exists, is not saying that it's 'inaccurate'.  But, whatever makes you happy dude.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



She is a moron who can't see past her own nose.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Oh so "not accutate" is different than "inaccurate"?
Does it dawn on you that if you have to try this hard to prop up your candidate it's a lost battle?


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

Here's a clue, I'm not the one here 'trying hard' to prop up my candidate.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> Here's a clue, I'm not the one here 'trying hard' to prop up my candidate.



No, you are just making things up.  

VA, CO & NH were all trending towards Romney at one point and since then the polls have started moving back towards Obama.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> Here's a clue, I'm not the one here 'trying hard' to prop up my candidate.



You're performing microsurgery on trying to differentiate between "not accurate" and "inaccurate"...  

The polls, by and large show Obama ahead.  I demonstrated that.  

You came back with "margin of error".  I demonstrated how the leads our President has in those polls are outside of the MOE quite often.  

You came back with "how were they tallied"--30 polls in 4 different states--indicating that they have some sort of sampling issue

Yes, you're working overtime trying to find a reason why Romney is losing.


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a clue, I'm not the one here 'trying hard' to prop up my candidate.
> ...



What exactly have I 'made up'?  I guess it depends on how you define 'trend', doesn't it?  How long is your 'trend'?  Mine is over weeks..  How big of a movement constitues a 'trend'?  Romney's movement has been significant over a matter of 3 to 4o weeks.  Obama's not so much.  His 'trend' can be caused by polling different people each day.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 30, 2012)

Newby said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



C'mon man, Candy and ACE have declared the election over....thats it.

We've lost.

(rolling eyes)


----------



## Newby (Oct 30, 2012)

Amazed said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...



Yeah, no point in voting, RCP already says Obama is ahead on EV's...


----------



## Misty (Oct 30, 2012)

Obama will be cruising to his 32 million dollar home in Hawaii, cannedham. Lol. Loser.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Misty said:


> Obama will be cruising to his 32 million dollar home in Hawaii, cannedham. Lol. Loser.



Maybe in 2016.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Misty said:
> 
> 
> > Obama will be cruising to his 32 million dollar home in Hawaii, cannedham. Lol. Loser.
> ...



Affter he loses his presidential election.  In Kenya.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Misty said:
> ...



Ahh, birtherism; the gift that keeps on giving to Obama.


----------



## George Costanza (Oct 30, 2012)

Rozman said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Notice now they LOVE fox news
> ...



Boy, you hit that one right on the head.  Of COURSE Fox News is not a credible news source!  Glad you recognize that.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Actually Obama is so unpopular all over the world in Kenya they're spreading the rumor he was born in Hawaii.


----------



## Oldstyle (Oct 31, 2012)

I hate to burst your bubble, Candy but the reason Bill Clinton is campaigning in Minn. today and Joe Biden is  stumping in Penn. is that both States have slipped from being "locks" for Barack Obama to being very much in play.  That isn't Obama "cruising" to victory...that's Obama desperately trying to keep his ship above water as the campaign winds down.  Right now this is anyone's race.  I still think it's going to go down to undecideds voting their pocketbooks and the economy...which ISN'T a good thing for Barry!


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> I hate to burst your bubble, Candy but the reason Bill Clinton is campaigning in Minn. today and Joe Biden is  stumping in Penn. is that both States have slipped from being "locks" for Barack Obama to being very much in play.  That isn't Obama "cruising" to victory...that's Obama desperately trying to keep his ship above water as the campaign winds down.  Right now this is anyone's race.  I still think it's going to go down to undecideds voting their pocketbooks and the economy...which ISN'T a good thing for Barry!



Obama is cruising.  I will say that Clinton going to Minnesota was probably just to make sure nothing burned down--its been ignored by both parties pretty much.  

Biden going home to Scranton?  No.  

Gonna be fun on 11/6 (if I don't have to work late).


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > I hate to burst your bubble, Candy but the reason Bill Clinton is campaigning in Minn. today and Joe Biden is  stumping in Penn. is that both States have slipped from being "locks" for Barack Obama to being very much in play.  That isn't Obama "cruising" to victory...that's Obama desperately trying to keep his ship above water as the campaign winds down.  Right now this is anyone's race.  I still think it's going to go down to undecideds voting their pocketbooks and the economy...which ISN'T a good thing for Barry!
> ...


I can only surmise that you don't have a grasp of the word "cruising". I think you're looking for a word more of the nature of "panicking".


----------



## Si modo (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Obama is cruising.  ...


135 posts later and the broken record still is stuck.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Nah...cruising is what he's doing.  The map looks great.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Si modo said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Obama is cruising.  ...
> ...



Have you figured out that the US Embassy was in Tripoli yet?

The record still shows Obama winning.  Pretty easily too.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...



If you want to be honest you would say the patisans on both sides do this.  I've heard it from both the liberal and the conservative voices in our local and national media outlets.  Regardless of party if a poll doesn't give the results people want for their canidate they will find a reason for the poll to be invalid.

That being said, current polling, on average from Real Clear Politics, have Romney ahead in the national "popular" vote and a "too close to call" situation for the swing states/electoral college.  That is just the overall facts of the averages of all the polls.


----------



## MeBelle (Oct 31, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwiwEdTZ-7c]Cruisin&#39; - Smokey Robinson - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 31, 2012)

Sarah G said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



Sarah which polling institution was the most accurate for the 2008 election?  (the answer is Rasmussen)  Analysis: Most Accurate polls from 2008 presidential election | NowPublic News Coverage http://www.politisite.com/2012/10/0...itical-polls-from-2008-presidential-election/
The List: Which presidential polls were most accurate? | Texas on the Potomac | a Chron.com blog

So you can trash Rasmussen all you want but their polling has been proven to be solid.


----------



## Article 15 (Oct 31, 2012)

RCP No Toss Up: Obama 294 Romney 244
Nate: Obama 77.4% Romney 22.6%
In Trade: Obama 64.3 Romney 35.9

6 days left.

Tic, toc.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

Article 15 said:


> RCP No Toss Up: Obama 294 Romney 244
> Nate: Obama 77.4% Romney 22.6%
> In Trade: Obama 64.3 Romney 35.9
> 
> ...



Three cherry picked left wing polls don't mean much, s0n.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 31, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > RCP No Toss Up: Obama 294 Romney 244
> ...



RCP is anything but left wing.  Intrade is a betting site.  Try again.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Try this, shitbag.


> Tuesday, October 30, 2012
> 
> The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 49% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 47%. One percent (1%) prefers some other candidate, and another two percent (2%) remain undecided. See daily tracking history.
> 
> ...


Those are all the numbers that matter.  It comes down to who votes.  Romney voters will walk hot coals to vote for Romney and get rid of the idjit in charge.  Obama voters will need to be bussed off their couches.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 31, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Thanks for the negative rep for this post calling you out on your bullshit, Rabbi.  You are a real douche.


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 31, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



Hey, it isn't my fault you looked like an idiot in your previous post.

Rasmussen showed Romney with a 4 point lead on Saturday, down to 2 on Monday.  The only problem for Romney here is that our election isn't awarded to the winner of the popular vote.  We have the electoral college and state polling still looks good for Obama right now.  Talk about cherry picking as well, using a single poll.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

Article 15 said:


> RCP No Toss Up: Obama 294 Romney 244
> Nate: Obama 77.4% Romney 22.6%
> In Trade: Obama 64.3 Romney 35.9
> 
> ...



Well except only morons tout the "no toss up" crap.

Even ole Nate has the solid EV count at 185-180.....why must you childrn lie?


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

AceRothstein said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > AceRothstein said:
> ...


You're projecting, Einstein.
This will be a GOP blow out to rival 1980.  Romney's positives are above Obama's.  This is something the Left swore could never happen.  2010 should have been a lesson to you clowns.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 31, 2012)

I think it wont be a blowout.  I think Romney does have a slightly better chance than Obama of winning but that is just based on polling over the last few months (basically watching the same company's polling to see how it trends...sure people skew their polls but the same company should skew it the same all the time which will reveal which way things are changing...it looks good for Romney as of yesterday)


----------



## AceRothstein (Oct 31, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



I'm projecting?  You do realize there are only 6 days left in the campaign at this point?  Not much is likely to change.  Your prediction isn't even based in reality and has zero chance of happening.

I don't think Obama has anything in the bag.  I think if the election were held today, I think he would win with around 285-290 EV.  I do concede that Romney may end up winning the election but it will be nowhere near 489 EV, not even within 150 EV of that.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> I think it wont be a blowout.  I think Romney does have a slightly better chance than Obama of winning but that is just based on polling over the last few months (basically watching the same company's polling to see how it trends...sure people skew their polls but the same company should skew it the same all the time which will reveal which way things are changing...it looks good for Romney as of yesterday)


Aye matey, change is in the wind.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

Talking Points Memo

Polls from Florida in the last week, with Obama's margin

Zogby  +1
Quinn  +1
CNN  -1
PPP  +1
Mellman +2
SurveyUSA  0
Ras  -2

That's why Romney is running back to Florida to play defense. VA and CO have already moved into the Obama column. The only swing state still with Romney is NC.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...


I think the OP's real name is Pollyanna.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

The poll aggregators, 10/31/2012. 10 out of 10 put Obama out front. Must be a liberal conspiracy.

RCP  O281-R257
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Pollster.com  O253-R206
Pollster: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News

Five-thirty-eight.com (Nate Silver)  O299-R239
Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com

Princeton Election consortium  O318-R220
Princeton Election Consortium &#8212; A first draft of electoral history

AP  O271-R206
AP Analysis: Advantage Obama in race for electoral votes

InTrade  O294-R244
2012 Electoral Map - The Intrade Forecast 10/31/2012

BetFair  O305-235
US Presidential Election: Seven days to go, where do we stand? | Betting @ Betfair

Electoral Vote  O280-R206
ElectoralVote

270 to Win  O275-R263
America's Electoral Map: A 2012 Election Forecast

Votamatic  O332-R206
VOTAMATIC | Forecasts and Polling Analysis for the 2012 Presidential Election


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



Popular vote matters not in the Presidential election.  
As for "Too Close to Call"...maybe Florida and Ohio.  Two big states, granted but nowhere else of major consequence.  NC is Romney's, PA, WI, MI is Obama's.  FL and OH...too close but I think the President's chances in OH are much better than Romney's chances in Florida.  

One good thing for Romney is that one of the RCP polls cited that has it closer than other polls in Ohio  is from Cincy/Hamilton County.  Suburban Cincy will likely determine how Ohio goes.  

As for "both sides do it", I don't recall many dems complaining about the moderators, the press, the BLS, etc...  I did about pollsters with my tongue in cheek but compared to the excuse-a-thon from the right, it barely registers.


----------



## Oldstyle (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > I hate to burst your bubble, Candy but the reason Bill Clinton is campaigning in Minn. today and Joe Biden is  stumping in Penn. is that both States have slipped from being "locks" for Barack Obama to being very much in play.  That isn't Obama "cruising" to victory...that's Obama desperately trying to keep his ship above water as the campaign winds down.  Right now this is anyone's race.  I still think it's going to go down to undecideds voting their pocketbooks and the economy...which ISN'T a good thing for Barry!
> ...



Think about what you just posted, Candy...you've got an election a week away and battleground States like Ohio, Florida and Colorado are neck & neck, yet the Obama campaign sends Joe Biden to Penn. and arguably their "ace in the hole", Bill Clinton, to Minn.  They didn't send them there on a whim.  They were sent because those two States have slipped towards Romney.  You're right about Clinton going to Minn. to make sure a fire is put out but you need to think about why that would even need to happen if Barack Obama was indeed "cruising".

My personal opinion is that the Obama negative ads are slowly eroding the undecided vote.  People are tired of hearing all the nonsense about what a "bad man" Mitt Romney is...they want to hear what the President is going to do differently to fix the economy than what he tried in his first term and they aren't getting any answers on that topic.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

Exactly.  Romney is the new Obama c.2008.  He has ideas.  He has momentum.  Obama looks like he's blown his wad and is out of ideas going forward.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...


A guy has got to rest at some point.  Scranton is as god a place as any.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



I cannot find a reason to be pessemistic about our President's chances on 11/6


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Obviously, thus the suggestion. It really isn't that complicated.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Okay...please show me reputable polling showing Obama behind in EVs.  Then I'll be happy to change my tune.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

Can't be bothered. Pollyanna, you can google the changes in the electoral college predictions over the past few months yourself. If they stayed as they were in September, then Obama would in fact be cruising. But now he's just cruisin' for a bruisin'.


----------



## Oldstyle (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



So you're now saying that the Obama campaign sent Joe Biden to Scranton to "rest" on the final week before the election?

LOL...not one of your more intelligent posts, Candy.  Admit it...Biden is in Penn. and Clinton is in Minn. because both States have moved toward Romney.  If they hadn't...then the Democrats wouldn't be wasting precious time and money there.  That's a sign that Obama is in trouble...not that he's "cruising".


----------



## paravani (Oct 31, 2012)

Before the election in 2008, it looked like McCain actually had a chance.  In fact the polls then looked pretty much as the polls do now -- McCain had a lead in many of the toss-up states, and we all thought it would be pretty close.

What happened from the West Coast perspective is that Obama won by a landslide.

The thing is, a lot of people who will vote for him aren't loud or argumentative, but just quietly thoughtful.  You won't hear them on the political boards, you won't see them rushing to cast their vote in online polls, you won't find them trying to skew results...  but on election day, they will simply stand quietly in line at the polls and cast their votes...  for Obama.

...  And no amount of loud GOP histrionics, screaming rhetoric, and voter ID laws are going to stop those quiet people from being counted.

-- Paravani


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



No, I think it was a dual purpose; he needed rest as we all do from time to time (they guy is near 70 y/o right?) and why not send him to a state somewhat important at the same time.  

Races for President usually tighten as we get closer to Election Day.  Minnesota, I'll give you.  Few were paying attention to MN.  According to the CNN  campaign explorer, Obama was last there in June and Romney was last there in August.   It's still a blue state as is PA, WI, MI,.....  You'll see on election day.

Obama-rama is cruising.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Can't be bothered. Pollyanna, you can google the changes in the electoral college predictions over the past few months yourself. If they stayed as they were in September, then Obama would in fact be cruising. But now he's just cruisin' for a bruisin'.



Translation:

You can't.

You're dismissed.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



I'm confused as to why anyone on either side would complain about the BLS...yes I understand most unemployment reports have been revised after release and revised in such a way that portray's things as "worse for obama" but they have always revised their numbers.  

As for the press, well, dems don't complain about a liberal bias in the media for the same reason reps don't complain about FOX news...the bias is in their favor.   Do you deny the majority of print and television media outlets have a liberal bias?

The moderators.....well this debate all 3 have shown some liberal leanings but I think all 3 did a very fair job and did not show much bias, the 2nd debate Candy Crowley screwed up on Bengazi (which she later corrected herself on about an hour after the debate) but overall I think they moderators did a fair job this time.  

And polling, well, all polling is biased in my opinion BUT if you follow the same polls you can get an idea about trends which is what I do.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Can't be bothered. Pollyanna, you can google the changes in the electoral college predictions over the past few months yourself. If they stayed as they were in September, then Obama would in fact be cruising. But now he's just cruisin' for a bruisin'.
> ...


You're obviously a novice in politics, but If you honestly think Obama's cruising, you're just goofy.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

paravani said:


> Before the election in 2008, it looked like McCain actually had a chance.  In fact the polls then looked pretty much as the polls do now -- McCain had a lead in many of the toss-up states, and we all thought it would be pretty close.
> 
> What happened from the West Coast perspective is that Obama won by a landslide.
> 
> ...


That's the most wrong post I've seen in a while.
In fact, McCain was gaining on Obama, although none showed him winning, until the financial crisis hit.  Once it became an issue of the economy, which was McCain's weakest area, Obama had it all over him.  Not least because there wasn't much difference between them.

To say that people who voted for Obama are quiet and thoughtful is a laugh and a half.  They are the most partisan, loudest group out there.  These are the same people who went on OWS.
It is the tea partiers who are quiet and collected.  The Romney voters.  You don't see Mormons rioting in the streets.  You don't see entrepreneurs from the middle class staging sit ins.

The crowds and enthusiasm of Obama c.2008 are gone.  Yes We Can has become We Maybe Could Have.  If it hadn't been for the other guys.  Obama promised to change the tone in Washington.  All he did was make things worse.


----------



## Oldstyle (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



So explain to me why a "blue State" like Minn. is suddenly in play if Obama really is "cruising"?  I'm sorry, Candy but common sense tells you that when the Democrats have to switch major campaign assets like Clinton and Biden to so called "blue States" like Minn. that they are slipping, not "cruising".

Common sense also tells you that if many people now feel Romney will win the popular vote that the electoral college race is going to be tight with just a few key States deciding the contest similar to Gore/Bush.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

paravani said:


> Before the election in 2008, it looked like McCain actually had a chance.  In fact the polls then looked pretty much as the polls do now -- McCain had a lead in many of the toss-up states, and we all thought it would be pretty close.
> 
> What happened from the West Coast perspective is that Obama won by a landslide.
> 
> ...



You go ahead and run with that, I know it comforts you.

But it will only last until about 9 e.s.t. next Tuesday.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



She is about 12 years old emotionally.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 31, 2012)

Amazed said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Even most 12-year olds aren't that goofy.


----------



## Newby (Oct 31, 2012)

paravani said:


> Before the election in 2008, it looked like McCain actually had a chance.  In fact the polls then looked pretty much as the polls do now -- McCain had a lead in many of the toss-up states, and we all thought it would be pretty close.
> 
> What happened from the West Coast perspective is that Obama won by a landslide.
> 
> ...



You just described the majority of the conservative movement..   And they won't be voting Obama.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

Goofy is thinking Minnesota in play. Or PA or MI.

Romney has just made a panic retreat to play defense in Florida, being that he's slipped behind there. The only swing state where Romney still leads is NC, and there just barely.

Obama has been slowly and consistently gaining all over for the past two weeks. He's got the momentum, and is on track to win comfortably.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Goofy is thinking Minnesota in play. Or PA or MI.
> 
> Romney has just made a panic retreat to play defense in Florida, being that he's slipped behind there. The only swing state where Romney still leads is NC, and there just barely.
> 
> Obama has been slowly and consistently gaining all over for the past two weeks. He's got the momentum, and is on track to win comfortably.



LOL....uh sure Candy.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Goofy is thinking Minnesota in play. Or PA or MI.
> 
> Romney has just made a panic retreat to play defense in Florida, being that he's slipped behind there. The only swing state where Romney still leads is NC, and there just barely.
> 
> Obama has been slowly and consistently gaining all over for the past two weeks. He's got the momentum, and is on track to win comfortably.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

A good polling day for Obama, so look for an improvement in his EV tallies with the poll aggregaters tomorrow. And after Obama's storm surge/bump hits, things will get even better.

Quinn shows Obama +5 in Ohio, +1 in Florida, +2 in VA. No wonder Romney has given up on Ohio.

Marquette U, who called the Walker recall perfectly, puts Obama at +8 in WI.

PPP shows Obama +5 in Iowa, +5 in WI.

National Journal Poll shows Obama +5 nationally.

Once more, the 10/31/2012 poll aggregator tally. The kooks can rage at me all they want, but that won't change the data. It is what it is.

RCP  O281-R257
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Pollster.com  O253-R206
Pollster: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News

Five-thirty-eight.com (Nate Silver)  O299-R239
Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com

Princeton Election consortium  O318-R220
http://election.princeton.edu/

Election Analytics O291.6-R246.4
Presidential Election 2012 | University of Illinois

InTrade  O294-R244
2012 Electoral Map - The Intrade Forecast 10/31/2012

BetFair  O305-235
US Presidential Election: Seven days to go, where do we stand? | Betting @ Betfair

Electoral Vote  O280-R206
ElectoralVote

270 to Win  O275-R263
America's Electoral Map: A 2012 Election Forecast

Votamatic  O332-R206
VOTAMATIC | Forecasts and Polling Analysis for the 2012 Presidential Election


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

Dupe post deleted.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

Spamming now eh 

No such thing as no "toss ups"...unless one is stupid.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...


Yes I do.  Absolutely.  If there is a bias; it's toward engaged and intelligence; not political ideology.



PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> The moderators.....well this debate all 3 have shown some liberal leanings but I think all 3 did a very fair job and did not show much bias, the 2nd debate Candy Crowley screwed up on Bengazi (which she later corrected herself on about an hour after the debate) but overall I think they moderators did a fair job this time.
> 
> And polling, well, all polling is biased in my opinion BUT if you follow the same polls you can get an idea about trends which is what I do.



The moderators were not biased at all unless a bias toward correctness is a baneful to your stance.  

As for the polling, the point of the entire thread is that the polls show the EVs clearly in favor of our President.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Well, prove me wrong then sport.  Oh yeah, you couldn't.  You're obviously a novice when it comes to making your point.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Wow.  You're really setting yourself up for some serious ribbing come Tues night.


----------



## Amazed (Oct 31, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



It will be her last night on the board.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Don't think so...can't find a reason to be doubtful of a convincing Obama victory.


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 31, 2012)

Interesting point. Hurricane Sandy pointed out something critical. When it became apparent that there was going to be a major disaster from this storm, the President started calling the Governors of the states involved, many Republican, and asking what they needed, and where they wanted it staged. The Governors responded in kind, and the state governments and the federal government worked together to create what has so far been an exemplary response to a huge disaster.

Yet what we have seen in Congress and the Senate is the blind opposition to anything at all that the President proposes. So nothing gets done, and there is gridlock. But when the President works with these Governors, we see government working the way it should. And now we have the wingnuts cursing the Republican Governors that worked with the President for the benefit of their citizens. Seems to me that we now know where and with whom the problem with the governance of this nation lies.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 31, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Interesting point. Hurricane Sandy pointed out something critical. When it became apparent that there was going to be a major disaster from this storm, the President started calling the Governors of the states involved, many Republican, and asking what they needed, and where they wanted it staged. The Governors responded in kind, and the state governments and the federal government worked together to create what has so far been an exemplary response to a huge disaster.
> 
> Yet what we have seen in Congress and the Senate is the blind opposition to anything at all that the President proposes. So nothing gets done, and there is gridlock. But when the President works with these Governors, we see government working the way it should. And now we have the wingnuts cursing the Republican Governors that worked with the President for the benefit of their citizens. Seems to me that we now know where and with whom the problem with the governance of this nation lies.



Exactly. 

And that one of the governors involved is planning a run at the WH in 2016, after Obamas second term, is part of the answer as well.


----------



## The Rabbi (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Would help if you stopped looking here:


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Interesting point. Hurricane Sandy pointed out something critical. When it became apparent that there was going to be a major disaster from this storm, the President started calling the Governors of the states involved, many Republican, and asking what they needed, and where they wanted it staged. The Governors responded in kind, and the state governments and the federal government worked together to create what has so far been an exemplary response to a huge disaster.
> 
> Yet what we have seen in Congress and the Senate is the blind opposition to anything at all that the President proposes. So nothing gets done, and there is gridlock. But when the President works with these Governors, we see government working the way it should. And now we have the wingnuts cursing the Republican Governors that worked with the President for the benefit of their citizens. Seems to me that we now know where and with whom the problem with the governance of this nation lies.



Well gee..if Obama had chosen to work with the GOP members of Congress when he first took office instead of following Rahm Emanuel's advice of..."We've got the votes...fuck 'em!"...then he probably would have been able to get a lot more accomplished.  But he didn't...and now the Republicans he told to go sit in the hall while Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid wrote the Obama Stimulus and ObamaCare can't stand his guts and nothing is getting done.  For some reason, you progressives think that is going to magically CHANGE if Barry wins another term.  Why, I have no idea.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting point. Hurricane Sandy pointed out something critical. When it became apparent that there was going to be a major disaster from this storm, the President started calling the Governors of the states involved, many Republican, and asking what they needed, and where they wanted it staged. The Governors responded in kind, and the state governments and the federal government worked together to create what has so far been an exemplary response to a huge disaster.
> ...



Who cares.  The GOP can start working with Obama if they lose; again.  One would think they would take their 2nd straight loss in presidential politics as a sign that they've been rejected but, we know better.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


There's that little matter of next Tuesday to consider first.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



You must have slept through the 2010 mid-term elections then, Candy...because the electorate sent progressives about as strong a message as possible that they didn't like their policies.  If you'll recall the Obama line in 2009 was "Elections have consequences...we won!"...a viewpoint which they immediately abandoned once the 2010 elections happened.  From 2010 on their NEW line became..."We know better than you so this LAST election doesn't count!"


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting point. Hurricane Sandy pointed out something critical. When it became apparent that there was going to be a major disaster from this storm, the President started calling the Governors of the states involved, many Republican, and asking what they needed, and where they wanted it staged. The Governors responded in kind, and the state governments and the federal government worked together to create what has so far been an exemplary response to a huge disaster.
> ...



Interesting spin.  But that's ALL this is - spin.


----------



## Dick Tuck (Nov 1, 2012)

ADP: 158,000 private-sector jobs added in October - Economic Report - MarketWatch


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

George Costanza said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Was that NOT Rahm Emanual's response when asked about working with the GOP during the very first few weeks of the Obama Administration?  Let's be honest here, George...they DID have the votes...and they DID tell the Republicans that "Elections have consequences...we won!" and then write both ObamaCare and the Obama Stimulus behind closed doors with zero input from Republicans.  Hard to see how I've "spun" anything.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Nov 1, 2012)

Dick Tuck said:


> ADP: 158,000 private-sector jobs added in October - Economic Report - MarketWatch



Well that sucks, another shitty month for jobs.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

Or did you disagree with my premise that Obama has "poisoned the well" to such an extent by his actions in the first two years of his Presidency that it's going to almost impossible for him to forge compromise legislation with an opposition that basically LOATHES him?


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

Seriously, how does he turn that around?  I'm curious to learn how that's going to occur.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 1, 2012)

After the way obama is fucking up the post hurricane efforts, he could lose New York and New Jersey.  He gave speeches, he hugged a few crying women, but there is no real help and people are getting pretty pissed about that.


----------



## Conservative (Nov 1, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> > ADP: 158,000 private-sector jobs added in October - Economic Report - MarketWatch
> ...



did you see ADP's 'revised' September numbers??

New ADP Count Slashes Job Creation Total for September - US Business News - CNBC


> Revisions to the way payroll data firm ADP counts private sector job creation have resulted in a sharp drop in the September employment count.
> 
> ADP's new calculations put the monthly job creation at just 88,200, down from the 162,000 the firm originally reported earlier this month.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

Wow, I expected a change but not almost a 50% reduction!  Anyone care to wager that the latest jobs report will also get "adjusted" downwards?


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> Wow, I expected a change but not almost a 50% reduction!  Anyone care to wager that the latest jobs report will also get "adjusted" downwards?



A 50% margin of error is atrocious.  How does anyone get away with that?  People will lose confidence in the numbers.


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



My take has been that the Republicans in Congress have been knee-jerk obstructionists from the git go here.

Let's face it - once the fight is over, everyone has a different version of who started it.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

George Costanza said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



Unfortunately your take is wrong.  Look how many in the GOP voted for the Porkulus compared to Obamacare down the road.  Something cost those GOP votes.  And it wasn't the GOP.  It was an attitude of "fuck you, we have the votes."
Since the House is unlikely to turn over, how will Obama be able to work with the GOP, given he has failed to do so for 2 years already.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



And what happened exactly? The GOP took the House and gained 3  or 4 seats in the Senate.  Big whoop.  

So I guess it's a chicken-and-the-egg dynamic...is that what you're saying?  Obama and the Dems won handly in 2006 and 2008.  Right?  Agree?  So when the GOP digs in it's heels in 2008, 2009, and 2010 before the midterms...were you here on this board saying, "Guys, the Dems have a mandate..work with them."  I doubt it.  But somehow, the GOP takes the house and has minor gains in the Senate in 2010 and it's supposed to be a watershed moment for the Dems to come over and lay down for the GOP?  

Not one of your more intelligent posts but pretty average none the less.

When Obama wins on Tuesday, that will be a mandate.  If the GOP continues to be the party of "no", the public should blame them.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...


.

The House is welcome to work with the President for a change.  But we know that won't happen.  The public knows who is to blame; the GOP.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Yeah, the biggest turnover in 50 years, one the president admitted was a "shellacking" just isn't a big fucking deal.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



No honey.  They did that with the Porkulus and look where it got them.  Nowhere.
Now it's time for the president to work with the GOP.  He can start by apologizing for all the nasty things he's said.  Even just the ones he said to their faces.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

George Costanza said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



But George...if Barack Obama's Chief of Staff is making comments like "We've got the votes...fuck 'em." at the START of their administration then why is it that Republicans get blamed for being "knee jerk obstructionists"?  Progressives LOVE to quote Mitch McConnell saying that his number one priority was to make sure Barack Obama was a one term President as "proof" that the GOP was unwilling to work with Obama but the truth is that McConnell made that statement a full YEAR after Obama had been in office...a year in which Republicans were locked out in the hall while Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid wrote ObamaCare and the Obama Stimulus.  At that point the Obama agenda was quite clear and Republicans were only too aware that this was an Administration that wasn't going to seek a bi-partisan compromise on anything.

I'm amused by the howls of protest from the far left about how the GOP controlled House is refusing to compromise with Obama and the Democratically controlled Senate when for two YEARS those same people had no problem at all with an agenda driven solely by progressives.  The voters sent those GOP House members to Washington because they were unhappy with the direction that Obama was taking the country but our current Administration ignored the "mandate" for change that was delivered in 2010.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Not when you still control 2/3 of the government dumbass.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



I don't think Obama really cares what the GOP house thinks.  He used to be that naive to think he could work with the GOP but now he should know better.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



The GOP needs to finally come to terms with Obama being in the White House and swallow what little pride they have left and begin to compromise.  Take it like a man cons.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Big whoop?  The gains by the GOP in the House and Senate were the largest Party "swing" in recent history.  It was indeed a "big whoop".  The truth is Barack Obama did come into power with a mandate for "change" from the American people but what the mid-term elections two years later proved without question is that the vast majority of the electorate weren't happy with the version of change they received from the Obama Administration and made that displeasure abundantly clear with their votes.

So did Obama listen to the voters?  Or did "he" dig in his heels and threaten to veto any legislation that the House passed that he felt was too conservative?  Did he use "Executive Orders" in order to circumvent the elected representatives that the people sent to Washington?  Did he continue to blame Republicans or the former President for the shortcomings of his own policies?

I'm sorry, Candy but the Party of No has been the Democrats for the past two years because they have refused to accept the message that the voters sent to them LOUDLY AND QUITE CLEARLY.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

So many progressive here like to bring up Bill Clinton's successes as President but totally ignore that what brought about much of that success was his pivot to the center following the crushing defeat that the Democrats took during HIS first mid-term elections.  Clinton was a savvy politician that responded to the message that the voters sent him.  Barack Obama ignored the voter's message...basically telling us that HE knew what was best for the country and he would continue to push the same agenda as before.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You're right.  He does not.  He never did.  That's the whole point.  Thanks for confirming it.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> So many progressive here like to bring up Bill Clinton's successes as President but totally ignore that what brought about much of that success was his pivot to the center following the crushing defeat that the Democrats took during HIS first mid-term elections.  Clinton was a savvy politician that responded to the message that the voters sent him.  Barack Obama ignored the voter's message...basically telling us that HE knew what was best for the country and he would continue to push the same agenda as before.



Most of Clinton's successes came from taking GOP programs and making them his own.  His failures came from the Democrats.
Obama's failures come from the Democrats too.  His successes--well, he'd have to have some first.


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 1, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Nothing unfortunate about it at all, because my take is not wrong.  I'll tell you what, though.  You are going to have every opportunity to prove me wrong during the next four years.  Let's hope that the Republicans in Congress will change their attidue and will work with President Obama as he completes his second term.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Well there was that whole healthcare thing before the midterms which received 0 support among republicans of any stripe.  

But whatever....you know you're wrong and everyone else does too.  

When Obama wins on Tuesday, are you saying that is a mandate and that the GOP should now finally come around to his way of thinking?  
Yes or no?


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You mean the whole "healthcare thing" that a majority of Americans didn't want?  There is a REASON why the Democrats took that "shellacking" (to use Barry's own description) in the mid-term elections.  They didn't listen to what the people wanted.

From the looks of things the race on Tuesday is going to be a squeaker...in which case whoever wins will not have a "mandate" from the people.  I think that's something that Mitt Romney will understand if he wins...Barack Obama on the other hand thought he still had a "mandate" AFTER getting thrashed in the mid-term so I'm guessing that won't be the case with him.


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 2, 2012)

As for me coming around to Barack Obama's "way of thinking"...

I'm sorry, Candy but I can't support policies which aren't rational.  If you're telling me that we should raise taxes in the midst of a down economy and I've learned from my economics classes all those years ago that  doing so is a recipe for even slower growth and less revenue...then why would I "come around" to what is simply an irrational approach to our problems based on political dogma rather than sound economic principles?

I didn't like Bill Clinton's morals but I respected his understanding of economics and thought he did a nice job handling the economy.

Barack Obama on the other hand, doesn't seem to understand basic economic principles and has done an awful job with creating growth.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 2, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> As for me coming around to Barack Obama's "way of thinking"...
> 
> I'm sorry, Candy but I can't support policies which aren't rational.  If you're telling me that we should raise taxes in the midst of a down economy and I've learned from my economics classes all those years ago that  doing so is a recipe for even slower growth and less revenue...then why would I "come around" to what is simply an irrational approach to our problems based on political dogma rather than sound economic principles?
> 
> ...



I know facts are uncomfortable for the right wing.

But....

Fact is, since early 2010, until the present... there has not been a single month without positive private sector job creation.  Corporate profits have skyrocketed.  The DOW has come close to doubling.

I know the Goopers always like to claim they are better for the economy... but all real evidence points to the exact opposite.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

Obama fans miss the obvious point. A great leader has the ability to reach over partisan divides and forge consensus regardless of resistance, In this Obama has clearly failed. In light of that failure, the default position is to whine about the intransigence of the opposition.

That pretty much covers the abject failure of Obama's four years.


----------



## auditor0007 (Nov 2, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > As for me coming around to Barack Obama's "way of thinking"...
> ...



First jobs reports by Gallup and ADP are out.  Tomorrow's official numbers are expected to be the same.  Obama wins in a landslide.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Obama fans miss the obvious point. A great leader has the ability to reach over partisan divides and forge consensus regardless of resistance, In this Obama has clearly failed. In light of that failure, the default position is to whine about the intransigence of the opposition.
> 
> That pretty much covers the abject failure of Obama's four years.




Honestly, when your "other side of the aisle" is backwards, obstinate, stubborn, and worthless, it's time to stop giving a shit what they think.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Obama fans miss the obvious point. A great leader has the ability to reach over partisan divides and forge consensus regardless of resistance, In this Obama has clearly failed. In light of that failure, the default position is to whine about the intransigence of the opposition.
> ...


You really haven't got a clue as to what leadership is, have you? Obama was never qualified for much beyond community organizing anyway.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...


I'm sure people want to pay $0.00 in taxes.  Should the government accommodate what is wanted?



Oldstyle said:


> From the looks of things the race on Tuesday is going to be a squeaker...in which case whoever wins will not have a "mandate" from the people.  I think that's something that Mitt Romney will understand if he wins...Barack Obama on the other hand thought he still had a "mandate" AFTER getting thrashed in the mid-term so I'm guessing that won't be the case with him.



Okay, so either party is justified in shutting down any and all legislation because of the margin of victory?  

After 2010, the Dems still controlled 2/3 of the government.  What had happened was that several congressional districts switched seats; some only a few miles wide in some places.  

Try again.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 2, 2012)

auditor0007 said:


> Cheddarmelon said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Another crappy jobs report, no doubt subject to massive revision, will give Obama a landslide victory?

Just how fucking stupid are you?


----------



## Amazed (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > Cheddarmelon said:
> ...



Apparently the single pre-requisite for being an Obamaite is to be stupid.

NOTHING says landslide for anyone yet these moron's simply cannot help themselves...ANYONE who thinks 7.9 is "good news" simply hasn't a brain in their head.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > Cheddarmelon said:
> ...



No.

Mitt flip flopping all over the place will. That and his aloof aristocracy, amateurish campaign, programs that have no hope of working, lies about Obama etc...

 The "landslide" depends on what you call a landslide.  

Get used to it beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeotch


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > auditor0007 said:
> ...



This election isn't about Mitt.  It is about Obama.  It is a referendum on his performance. And that performance is dismal, the worst of any president elected by white people.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



It's a shame that facts actually indicate otherwise.  Those darn, inconvenient facts!


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...




Ahh, the racist/birther tendencies comes out when the chips are down.  I'm surprised you kept it under wraps for so long.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 2, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



What fact would that be, genius?


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> Cheddarmelon said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



that depends.  What area would you like to focus on?


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> I'm sure people want to pay $0.00 in taxes.  Should the government accommodate what is wanted?


The government does accommodate them. Who do you think the 47% are?


----------



## Old Rocks (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure people want to pay $0.00 in taxes.  Should the government accommodate what is wanted?
> ...



Senior citizens. The men and women serving in our military. People that have been out of a job for a long time. Those with severe disabilities. People working for minimum wages.

Strange that in this economy your side chooses to demonize those who have the least, and work for the enrichment of those who already have vast wealth. Priorities.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 2, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Cheddarmelon said:
> ...



Oh, the economy, Obamacare, etc. Bad poll numbers on every issue for Obama.

But I'll look at any evidence you have that the election is not a referendum on the incumbent.  Like they always are.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


You think all senior citizens and military people are in the 47%?! A far greater percentage of the 47 are crack whores, junkies, single moms with God knows many kids on the public dole and people who milk the system. That is the tired and self-righteous hackery of mediocre minds. I empathize with people who disabilities and those who've been out of work for a long time (thanks to Obama's incompetence), but very little with the parasitic element.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...


I know it's long but it may help you
[ame=http://youtu.be/rN5XEn0N55w]"Preparing for the NEW America: Obama&#39;s Next Four Years" by Nutnfancy Pt 1 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Old Rocks (Nov 2, 2012)

Who are the 47%?

That 47% number applies only to federal income taxes, and does not include payroll taxes -- used to fund Social Security and Medicare -- or any state and local taxes. About 18% pay neither a federal income tax nor payroll taxes. But 45 states have a sales tax, so it's nearly impossible for even low-income Americans to avoid paying at least some taxes.

Who are the 47%? The Tax Policy Center's Donald Marron said they fall into three main groups:

The working poor. The earned income tax credit and the child credit can help families making $50,000 or more pay no taxes or get money back. About 60% of those not paying income taxes do contribute to payroll taxes -- which means they must have some source of earned income.

The elderly. An increased standard deduction for those over 65, and an exemption on part of Social Security earnings, means that many older Americans pay no income taxes -- even though most of them paid into the system through decades of paying taxes.

The low-income. A family of four claiming only the standard deduction and personal exemptions pays no federal income tax on its first $27,000 of income.

But not all non-taxpayers fit into those categories. Even the ultra-wealthy can avoid paying taxes -- for example, if their income comes from tax-exempt bonds. Tax Policy Center data show that perhaps 24,000 of the top 1% of earners pay no federal income taxes. 

"There are certainly people all through the income distributions who don't pay taxes," Marron said. He said the 47% figure has risen because of high unemployment, and will fall again during the recovery.


----------



## Old Rocks (Nov 2, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...



Now Brabble, why don't you go down in the basement and hug your guns.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Who are the 47%?
> 
> That 47% number applies only to federal income taxes, and does not include payroll taxes -- used to fund Social Security and Medicare -- or any state and local taxes. About 18% pay neither a federal income tax nor payroll taxes. But 45 states have a sales tax, so it's nearly impossible for even low-income Americans to avoid paying at least some taxes.
> 
> ...


Quoting the Tax Policy Center is like quoting Keith Olbermann or some other such idiot. Why on earth would you bother?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


You commented but never watched the video. how stupid.


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

No one is obligated to waste an hour watching some retard blabber nonsense.

Stop being such a lazy moocher and summarize the main points in your own words. You know, show everyone how you're not actually the brainless cut-and-paste parrot that you appear to be.


----------



## auditor0007 (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > Cheddarmelon said:
> ...



I'm not just saying this because I want Obama to win; it's in the numbers.  Whether you like it or not, the momentum is now with Obama and it's going to get him to well over 300 in the EC.  As for the popular vote, I think Obama wins by a margin of three or four percentage points, 52 - 48, somewhere in that vicinity.  That is not a massive landslide, but it will give Obama almost every swing state.

If you are objective, all you have to do is look at RCP's numbers and remove Gallup because their Romney +5 is no longer in play.  It was a bad number to begin with, but even with that, it would now be down to Romney +2 or Even just like Rasmussen has it now, if they had continued polling.  

If you look at Rasmussen's numbers, they went from Romney 49 - Obama 47 yesterday, to Romney 48 - Obama 48 today.  Based on a three day rolling average of 1500 voters, this means that yesterday, Rasmussen polled Obama at 50% and Romney at 46%.  This means one of two things.  Either it is an anomaly or it is a new trend.  If it is a new trend, then the momentum has definitely moved to Obama and there is no time for Romney to get back in the game.  

Internal polls from the individual campaigns tend to see this before the public sees it.  I believe Romney knows he's in serious trouble and now all he has left is the Hail Mary.  So that does not make me stupid, just analytical.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2012)

mamooth said:


> No one is obligated to waste an hour watching some retard blabber nonsense.
> 
> Stop being such a lazy moocher and summarize the main points in your own words. You know, show everyone how you're not actually the brainless cut-and-paste parrot that you appear to be.



No one but you mentioned people being obligated to watch anything. 



> Stop being such a lazy moocher and summarize the main points in your own words.


Stop being a lying piece of shit stop being a true fucking moocher and calling others one.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure people want to pay $0.00 in taxes.  Should the government accommodate what is wanted?
> ...



I know of no one who pays zero taxes.  You should quit while you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

auditor0007 said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > auditor0007 said:
> ...




This is what I've been saying all along since I have revived this thread.  

I cannot see a reson to be optimistic if I'm Governor Romney.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 2, 2012)

auditor0007 said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > auditor0007 said:
> ...


So we ignore Gallup when he shows ROmney ahead but heed it when it's even?
Sorry.  Everyone, Dem and GOP, agrees the election will be won on turnout.  Which side is more energized?  Hint, it's not the Democrats.


----------



## AceRothstein (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



Gallup stopped polling early this week.  They do a 7 day average so some of that +5 is 10 days old now.

Plus, you need to start looking at the state polls.  The national polls really don't mean dick at this point since this isn't a national election.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



National polls are meaningless.  But if you find it consoling...I guess you just don't understand how elections work.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> National polls are meaningless.  But if you find it consoling...I guess you just don't understand how elections work.


This, from a person that thinks "Obama is cruising"?! Good Lord!


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > National polls are meaningless.  But if you find it consoling...I guess you just don't understand how elections work.
> ...



Yet again, I challenge you to present learned evidence to the contrary.  It would be nice if you would back up your talk skippy.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


To "cruise" as you meant it is to go forth effortlessly which Barry was until the first debate. Since he's been staggering like a lost drunk who was floored in a bar fight. That certainly is not cruising.

You really haven't got the slightest grasp of the concept of irony, do you?


----------



## Amazed (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



No she doesn't, classic example of the ill-informed.


----------



## EriktheRed (Nov 2, 2012)

For all who liked to post those photoshopped images combining Obama and Carter:


----------



## EriktheRed (Nov 2, 2012)

auditor0007 said:


> Cheddarmelon said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Come on, ya still gotta be realistic. At best this just means it won't get any worse for him in the next few days. An extremely bad  - or good - jobs report would have made a difference; not one like this. IOW, if Obama wins, it will very likely *not* be a landslide. 


Still, a win's a win.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2012)

EriktheRed said:


> For all who liked to post those photoshopped images combining Obama and Carter:


This is much better


----------



## EriktheRed (Nov 2, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> EriktheRed said:
> 
> 
> > For all who liked to post those photoshopped images combining Obama and Carter:
> ...



Except once again it's only stupid wingnuts such as yourself who believe that.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2012)

EriktheRed said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > EriktheRed said:
> ...



I can't help that you're to stupid not too see it.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



It's funny that you think any of this matters.

You're not worth getting worked up over so I'll simply say again in hopes it sinks through your cranium to the one or two working brain cells that may still be there.

Your President is not behind in any credible poll that counts electoral votes.  Not a single poll.  Electoral votes is what this republic uses to elect a new President.  Therefore, he will be the next president.  Feel free to look it up or wait until Wednesday and I'll be happy to explain it to you yet again.


----------



## Amazed (Nov 2, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Sorry kid, you'll be gone.


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

Meathead said:


> You really haven't got the slightest grasp of the concept of irony, do you?



Much like Alanis Morrissette, you don't seem to understand what the word "irony" or "ironic" means.

And no, it's not ironic that you don't understand "ironic". It's just dumb.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 2, 2012)

So cruising is now defined by ahead with 1% in a poll with a 4% + or - degree of certainty.  Yeah, right.


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

No, cruising is defined as being ahead in every swing state except NC and FL, and trending updwards. In multiple polls that, when combined, have a very small error margin.

Any Romney backers want to claim with a straight face that they wouldn't prefer Romney to have Obama's current poll numbers?


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 2, 2012)

I prefer an overconfident Obama thanks.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 2, 2012)

Sandy is going to cost Obama big.  Pics of thristy, hungry, dead and dying New Yorkers won't play well nationally either.  Back to campaigning though.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 3, 2012)

Incumbent "Cruising" since 1960:

LBJ                    64
Nixon                 72
Reagan              84
Clinton               96

Incumbent Staggering:

Ford                  76
Bush I                92
Bush II               04
Obama              12

Whether popular vote or electoral, look it up.


----------



## auditor0007 (Nov 3, 2012)

EriktheRed said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > Cheddarmelon said:
> ...



It will be a landslide based on where things stand now.  Obama will take 332 or more in the EC, and he will take around 52% in the popular vote.  That isn't a real landslide, but considering all the movement will take place over the last weekend before the election, it's going to leave Republicans scratching their heads wondering what happened.  Obama will take all the swing states except NC, and he might even take NC.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 3, 2012)

Ya know why they are called battleground states?  Because the candidates both have a chance of winning there.  If the difference is only 1% nationally, then a hotly contested state is going to also be very close.  The polls are obviously wrong in those states.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 3, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Ya know why they are called battleground states?  Because the candidates both have a chance of winning there.  If the difference is only 1% nationally, then a hotly contested state is going to also be very close.  The polls are obviously wrong in those states.



Ahhh..... so the polls in 8 states are wrong.  You prob had the dog eating your homework quite a bit.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Ya know why they are called battleground states?  Because the candidates both have a chance of winning there.  If the difference is only 1% nationally, then a hotly contested state is going to also be very close.  The polls are obviously wrong in those states.
> ...



How did that 2010 polling go for ya?


----------



## candycorn (Nov 3, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Apparently pretty well.  The voters learned from their mistakes it seems.  The GOP can win gerrymandered districts and some statewide races.  When the macro is the sample, you guys are quickly becoming a non factor.  Women hate you.  Latinos hate you. Blacks hate you. Asians hate you.  The 47% hate you.  This is why Obama is cruising and you cant cite a credible electoral vote tally in your favor


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Apparently pretty well.  The voters learned from their mistakes it seems.  The GOP can win gerrymandered districts and some statewide races.  When the macro is the sample, you guys are quickly becoming a non factor.  Women hate you.  Latinos hate you. Blacks hate you. Asians hate you.  The 47% hate you.  This is why Obama is cruising and you cant cite a credible electoral vote tally in your favor



Even the main stream media admits this is the closest race in a long time.  I prefer you to be over confident, so please continue.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


With all this hate, it's amazing that Romney is polling at about 48%. I am not sure of the national demogaphics, but I would be shocked if 48% of the population is white males (and presumably straight to boot), and that all white males are voting Romney.

Lady, you're not just a bit goofy, you're a full-blown ditz.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 3, 2012)

Not to mention she's a huge hater.


----------



## Amazed (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Ya know why they are called battleground states?  Because the candidates both have a chance of winning there.  If the difference is only 1% nationally, then a hotly contested state is going to also be very close.  The polls are obviously wrong in those states.
> ...



Too funny....youth makes you stupid.


----------



## Amazed (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Wow, all those folks elected you to speak for them.....

Nobody hates anybody except silly little twits like you.

Frankly kid you don't even know what hatred is....to you its just a word to toss around at people YOU don't like.....soon you'll call us all Nazi's.....another word that you have no idea about.

It is sad really...it really is.

This board will be better off without you.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 3, 2012)

It's all about turnout.  We learned that in 2010.  The conservatives will turn out for Romney in record numbers.  Obama's supporters are waiting for their phones and Obamamoney.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 5, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 5, 2012)

...and when the president loses, they will say it was voter intimidation and race...

...the script is well known.


----------



## The Rabbi (Nov 5, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> ...and when the president loses, they will say it was voter intimidation and race...
> 
> ...the script is well known.



Voter intimidation (like black people don't have drivers' licenses), race mongering, and plutocrats buying the election.  You can just about write the stories before they even come out.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 5, 2012)

Do I get to be a Nazi or racist this time?


----------



## candycorn (Nov 6, 2012)

Told ya!


----------



## Lakhota (Nov 6, 2012)




----------



## candycorn (Nov 6, 2012)

The Rabbi said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



Don't know....why don't you tell us?


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 7, 2012)

Time for the Resistance to begin.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 7, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Time for the Resistance to begin.




Yes by all means, purchase more chicken sandwiches and flood the White House switchboard with phone calls.  That'll show them.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 8, 2012)

candycorn said:


> *
> 
> Fox News has our President ahead in large swing states.
> People cannot relate to 1%er Romney
> ...



Never Any Doubt


----------



## candycorn (Nov 8, 2012)

Amazed said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



They should have, I was right.


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 9, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Time for the Resistance to begin.



Resistance against a President who, as I have been told 24/7 by the Right during the past several months, is an obstructionist president, unwilling to engage in the bipartisan conduct of government or communicate with Republicans in any way?  That president?


----------



## Statistikhengst (Aug 14, 2015)

The Rabbi said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...








Time for some hard, cold facts:
GE, 2012:

Obama 51.01%
Romney 47.15%
Margin: Obama +3.86%

332-206, margin: Obama +126 EV.

By 11:15 PM on election night, it was over. It only took the networks 15 more minutes to call the election in 2012 than in 2008.

I predict that just a about 2 1/4 years after this stellar prediction of yours, you will make a stellar prediction about Greece!!!  Just ask President Romney!!!


----------

