# Obama in a Landslide?



## Lakhota

> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​



More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast


----------



## Trajan

who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.  

However, republicans will win control of the Senate.


----------



## OODA_Loop

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



This is almost better in a lot of ways.


----------



## Si modo

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...











Hey, are you going to sue me like you threatened or not?


----------



## Trajan

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



thats more probable than a landslide by anyone, agreed.


----------



## JakeStarkey

(1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.

If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.


----------



## Liability

Obama could easily lose 50 of 57 States.


----------



## OODA_Loop

Obama with a Republican and Tea Party controlled Congress.

_Imagine the greens fees, Hollywood parties and travel costs._


----------



## Si modo

Liability said:


> Obama could easily lose 50 of 57 States.


----------



## Sarah G

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


I really don't think Romney will even come close to winning.  Of course there's always a chance but I'm hoping for gains in the House and Senate.

I really wanted Bob Kerrey back in the Senate but it doesn't look like that's happening.


----------



## Lakhota

Si modo said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, are you going to sue me like you threatened or not?
Click to expand...


When and where did I threaten to sue you?  Prove it, you psycho liar.  BTW, which type of liar are you?

Pathological versus Compulsive Liars - Truth About Deception


----------



## Wolfsister77

My guess is Obama will win but not in a landslide, he'll comfortably will the electoral college but the popular vote will be closer, the Dems will keep the Senate but it'll be close there-close to 50-50, the House will stay Rep but the Dems will gain some, the Tea Party will pick up a couple seats in the House and one in the Senate.

From what I've seen, this is the likely outcome.


----------



## The T

Si modo said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey, are you going to sue me like you threatened or not*?
Click to expand...

 
Say what?


----------



## Lakhota

Wolfsister77 said:


> My guess is Obama will win but not in a landslide, he'll comfortably will the electoral college but the popular vote will be closer, the Dems will keep the Senate but it'll be close there-close to 50-50, the House will stay Rep but the Dems will gain some, the Tea Party will pick up a couple seats in the House and one in the Senate.
> 
> From what I've seen, this is the likely outcome.



That is also generally how I perceive the outcome.


----------



## JoeB131

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



Most pollsters and the fact the GOP hasn't won the state since 1988 in a presidential contest.


----------



## Trajan

JakeStarkey said:


> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.



reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.


----------



## The T

OODA_Loop said:


> Obama with a Republican and Tea Party controlled Congress.
> 
> _Imagine the greens fees, Hollywood parties and travel costs._


 
He'd get ZERO of his agenda to ruin us done.


----------



## Stephanie

JakeStarkey said:


> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.



stop your damn whining fake Republican, the Tea party isn't going anywhere...


----------



## The T

Trajan said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics. (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates. He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy. The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate. If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
Click to expand...

 
That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.


----------



## California Girl

Lakhota said:


> Wolfsister77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is Obama will win but not in a landslide, he'll comfortably will the electoral college but the popular vote will be closer, the Dems will keep the Senate but it'll be close there-close to 50-50, the House will stay Rep but the Dems will gain some, the Tea Party will pick up a couple seats in the House and one in the Senate.
> 
> From what I've seen, this is the likely outcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is also generally how I perceive the outcome.
Click to expand...


You blew your 'prediction credibility' by claiming the right wing were responsible for violence undertaken by Occupy. Remember that? Granted, it was over an hour ago you made that claim but try to think back.


----------



## Stephanie

So, the DAILYBEAST who employs that genius Meggie McCain is predicting Obama in a landslide..

what a hoot


----------



## Si modo

The T said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey, are you going to sue me like you threatened or not*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say what?
Click to expand...


Check it out:  http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/238412-whine-of-the-century.html


----------



## JoeB131

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


An electoral landslide is often still a 55-45% split, which isn't a landslide at all.  

I think that Romney will take all the states McCain won, plus Indiana and North Carolina. Which puts him nowhere near beating Obama.  I suspect the popular vote will be something like 52-48%.


----------



## Listening

JakeStarkey said:


> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.



Sorry Jake,

But your claims about Kerry taking Nebraska kinda put you in the "not credible" zone.

I am quite confident that much will be in play that does not seem to be right now after the conventions.

Romney hasn't been hitting hard because everyone who is interested now already has their mind made up.

It's when the latecomers show up that the real battle begins.

Romney appears to be holding back until it gets closer.  Then I forecast a blitz of media and issues you haven't even thought about.  

Obama won't know what hit him.  He is spending all his money now with very little to show for it.


----------



## Stephanie

oh darn I just noticed THIS





> Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast


----------



## The T

Si modo said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey, are you going to sue me like you threatened or not*?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Say what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Check it out: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/238412-whine-of-the-century.html
Click to expand...

 



Read a few of the pertinent posts...that's hillarious!

Maybe he'll get me for calling him 'Shitting Bull'?


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.



The TPM wins elections... so they aren't going away any time soon.  

Romney might get a boost from the convention, but that will be nullified almost immediately when teh Democrats have theirs. (Incumbant party goes last.)  

The debates, am I the only one who remembers the Primary Debates when Romney was barely holding his own against Newt and Rick?


----------



## EriktheRed

> Obama in a Landslide?



Highly doubtful.


----------



## Si modo

The T said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> Say what?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check it out: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/238412-whine-of-the-century.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read a few of the pertinent posts...that's hillarious!
> 
> Maybe he'll get me for calling him 'Shitting Bull'?
Click to expand...

Rat calls it Ruffled Feather.

I just call it, it, or Lakhota.  It seems to take offense.


----------



## Sallow

Liability said:


> Obama could easily lose 50 of 57 States.



You're forgetting Iraq, Grenada and Israel.


----------



## Sarah G

The T said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics. (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates. He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy. The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate. If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
Click to expand...


  As if.  Obama will be the only one who shows up.  Brain dead Romney will be in the parking lot trying to find his butt with both hands.


----------



## Ernie S.

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

How's your shyster lawyer neighbor today? Got grounds for a suit?


----------



## EriktheRed

The T said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics. (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates. He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy. The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate. If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
Click to expand...



Wow, you really ARE a fuckin' delusional wingnut, aren't you.


----------



## Liability

Sallow said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama could easily lose 50 of 57 States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're forgetting Iraq, Grenada and Israel.
Click to expand...



Steady,  boy.  We're talking about Electoral wins, not sources of campaign financing.


----------



## Lakhota

When wingnuts have nothing, you can always depend on personal attacks and deflection.


----------



## The T

EriktheRed said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, you really ARE a fuckin' delusional wingnut, aren't you.
Click to expand...

 
Nope. not at all. Obama is that arrogant. It's alright I understand your ignorance.


----------



## The T

Lakhota said:


> When wingnuts have nothing, you can always depend on personal attacks and deflection.


 
Like YOU?


----------



## Stephanie

Lakhota said:


> When wingnuts have nothing, you can always depend on personal attacks and deflection.



waa waa waa...


----------



## The T

Sarah G said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As if. Obama will be the only one who shows up. Brain dead Romney will be in the parking lot trying to find his butt with both hands.
Click to expand...

 
Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.

YOU are in for one rude awakening.


----------



## Liability

Lakhota said:


> When wingnuts have nothing, you can always depend on personal attacks and deflection.



When Dorkhota has nothing, you can always tell.  The moron posts to confirm it.

Every post.  Every time.

Hey, Chief Shitting Bull!  Get your "lawyer" to sue me, bitch!


----------



## Sarah G

The T said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As if. Obama will be the only one who shows up. Brain dead Romney will be in the parking lot trying to find his butt with both hands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
Click to expand...


He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad.  Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?


----------



## Dick Tuck

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


I think he's right.  If the the GOP wasn't scared shitless, why are they doing everything they can to keep blacks and Hispanics from voting?


----------



## Sarah G

Dick Tuck said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think he's right.  If the the GOP wasn't scared shitless, why are they doing everything they can to keep blacks and Hispanics from voting?
Click to expand...


A question for the ages.  It happens every election day though.


----------



## Zxereus

This is what happens when a country has reached the tipping point, of having so many people sucking on that big government nipple.
Everyone knows that if you want to retain your government handouts, you really have a much better chance of retaining them by re-electing the Gimmecrat.


----------



## The T

Sarah G said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if. Obama will be the only one who shows up. Brain dead Romney will be in the parking lot trying to find his butt with both hands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad. Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
Click to expand...

Only to leftists like you as Romey took on issues Obama refuses to, and as Obama capitulates to our enemies and  invites known terrorists into the Whitehouse.

YOU are an idiot Sarah. Romney didn't go around the world and apologize for us like your messiah did in '09 to which we see the 'Arab Spring' and see Obama doubling down on what Carter did with Iran.

YOU need a history lesson badly.


----------



## Zxereus

Sarah G said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if. Obama will be the only one who shows up. Brain dead Romney will be in the parking lot trying to find his butt with both hands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad.  Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
Click to expand...


The man is not a "laughing stock". He's accomplished more in one day than you will in your entire lifetime.
You just fell for what the msn wanted you to see. 
Romney's trip abroad went just fine overall.


----------



## buckeye45_73

California Girl said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wolfsister77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is Obama will win but not in a landslide, he'll comfortably will the electoral college but the popular vote will be closer, the Dems will keep the Senate but it'll be close there-close to 50-50, the House will stay Rep but the Dems will gain some, the Tea Party will pick up a couple seats in the House and one in the Senate.
> 
> From what I've seen, this is the likely outcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is also generally how I perceive the outcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You blew your 'prediction credibility' by claiming the right wing were responsible for violence undertaken by Occupy. Remember that? Granted, it was over an hour ago you made that claim but try to think back.
Click to expand...

 

No fucking way, did he say that? I knew he was in the tank...but God his sheep mentality never ceases to amaze


----------



## The T

Dick Tuck said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think he's right. If the the GOP wasn't scared shitless, why are they doing everything they can to keep blacks and Hispanics from voting?
Click to expand...

 
Sacred shitless? hardly. Living under LAW that you ignore is what we fight.

YOU too are in for a rude awakening. And you should learn to project better. It is YOU and your leftist pals that are afraid of losing.


----------



## Zoom

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

You nailed it when you said the media wants it to be close.  They did the same thing with mccain.  The knew he would lose horribly and of course he did.  Obama is going to destroy Romney and everyone with a brain knows it.


----------



## The T

Liability said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> When wingnuts have nothing, you can always depend on personal attacks and deflection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When Dorkhota has nothing, you can always tell. The moron posts to confirm it.
> 
> Every post. Every time.
> 
> Hey, Chief Shitting Bull! Get your "lawyer" to sue me, bitch!
Click to expand...

 
Seconded!


----------



## Sarah G

The T said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad. Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only to leftists like you as Romey took on issues Obama refuses to, and as Obama capitulates to our enemies and  invites known terrorists into the Whitehouse.
> 
> YOU are an idiot Sarah. Romney didn't go around the world and apologize for us like your messiah did in '09 to which we see the 'Arab Spring' and see Obama doubling down on what Carter did with Iran.
> 
> YOU need a history lesson badly.
Click to expand...


You're delirious, he came running back here where his teaparty friends all accept his inadequacies.


----------



## EriktheRed

Zxereus said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad.  Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The man is not a "laughing stock". He's accomplished more in one day than you will in your entire lifetime.
> You just fell for what the msn wanted you to see.
> Romney's trip abroad went just fine overall.
Click to expand...


----------



## Mac1958

.

The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes.  It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._  Not exactly a scientific foundation there.

The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history.  I dunno.  As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?

.


----------



## The T

Sarah G said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad. Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to leftists like you as Romey took on issues Obama refuses to, and as Obama capitulates to our enemies and invites known terrorists into the Whitehouse.
> 
> YOU are an idiot Sarah. Romney didn't go around the world and apologize for us like your messiah did in '09 to which we see the 'Arab Spring' and see Obama doubling down on what Carter did with Iran.
> 
> YOU need a history lesson badly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're delirious, he came running back here where his teaparty friends all accept his inadequacies.
Click to expand...

 
he did? Really? DO tell?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Yep, I was wrong about Kerry, right about Cruz, and absolutely right about the TPM and the swing states.  I am right about what I project below.

I want Romney to win, but you are seeing only what you want to see instead of what is happening.

The convention and the debates.  Romney can win it there.



Listening said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Jake,
> 
> But your claims about Kerry taking Nebraska kinda put you in the "not credible" zone.
> 
> I am quite confident that much will be in play that does not seem to be right now after the conventions.
> 
> Romney hasn't been hitting hard because everyone who is interested now already has their mind made up.
> 
> It's when the latecomers show up that the real battle begins.
> 
> Romney appears to be holding back until it gets closer.  Then I forecast a blitz of media and issues you haven't even thought about.
> 
> Obama won't know what hit him.  He is spending all his money now with very little to show for it.
Click to expand...


----------



## Lakhota

The debates will seal Romney's fate!


----------



## buckeye45_73

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes. It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._ Not exactly a scientific foundation there.
> 
> The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history. I dunno. As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?
> 
> .


 
Well yeah if it's like this on the closing day....way too much time left....anyone that says they know...is a liar....


----------



## JakeStarkey

Romney sure isn't Reagan, Obama isn't Carter.

You TPM can cost Romney the election in the swing states if you don't start campaigning smartly.



Trajan said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reagan vs. carter, reagand own by 8 points into October, branded as an ' out there con' etc etc ...they and that one debate together, the week after reagan never looked back. Romney aint no reagan but I think people will really tune in after the conventions....if Romney debates well, and uses the cash he'll have in abundance wisely, he can win.
Click to expand...


----------



## Liability

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes.  It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._  Not exactly a scientific foundation there.
> 
> The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history.  I dunno.  As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?
> 
> .



;

For folks to take polling data seriously requires a leap of faith.

If you include DEMOCRAT voters at a much higher percentage of the polling sample than their corresponding (likely) numbers at the actual polling booths, then you will end up with some very skewed data.

The incumbent is going to lose because he sucks at the job, people know it, his base is disaffected and valid polling data shows that the incumbent is in deep doo doo in many of the needed "battleground States."

;


----------



## JakeStarkey

Liability, the skewing toward Democrats in polling has definitively been defeated elsewhere above.

Either the TPM gets squarely behind Romney on the issues the way he wants, or the TPM may well cost him the votes in the swing states.

What do you want: Romney victory or TPM ideological purity?  You can't have both.


----------



## The T

Liability said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes. It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._ Not exactly a scientific foundation there.
> 
> The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history. I dunno. As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ;
> 
> For folks to take polling data seriously requires a leap of faith.
> 
> If you include DEMOCRAT voters at a much higher percentage of the polling sample than their corresponding (likely) numbers at the actual polling booths, then you will end up with some very skewed data.
> 
> The incumbent is going to lose because he sucks at the job, people know it, his base is disaffected and valid polling data shows that the incumbent is in deep doo doo in many of the needed "battleground States."
> 
> ;
Click to expand...

 




​*Media Bias: NBC admits over-polling Democrats*​


----------



## Liability

JakeStarkey said:


> Liability, the skewing toward Democrats in polling has definitively been defeated elsewhere above.
> 
> Either the TPM gets squarely behind Romney on the issues the way he wants, or the TPM may well cost him the votes in the swing states.
> 
> What do you want: Romney victory or TPM ideological purity?  You can't have both.



Fakey:

Nothing anywhere has defeated the skewing of the polls towards the Dims.  Nothing.  You making that claim and it being true are mutually exclusive.

The Tea Party Movement wants our government to behave as though the Constitutional limits on Federal Governmental authority and power have actual meaning.  But, as I heard once on the original Star Trek television show, *'for now, only a fool fights in a burning house.'*

I anticipate that in the Presidential race, in order to remove the blight that we have, those Constitutionally loyal Tea Party participants will vote for Mitt.  For the time being, the Tea Party members will settle for Mitt and concentrate on getting more devout Constitutionalists into all the other offices.

On the other hand, there is going to be a mass defection from the Dim camp due to general dissatisfaction with The ONE.  He's fucking toast.

One can indeed have a closer approximation of Constitutional fidelity AND a Mitt win.  Indeed, the former *requires* the latter.  And Mitt had best take note of the fact that the Tea Party members and the Republicans in general are not going to give him a whole lot of lee-way.  He had better get used to the idea that compromising with liberal Democratics in order to be able to get bills passed is NOT what the voters want or need.  And if he tries that shit, he will be a one term-er (like The ONE is about to be).


----------



## Lakhota

> Romney-style capitalism means misery for working people and big money for the 1 percent.



How Mitt Romney Got Rich Destroying American Jobs and Promoting Sweatshop Capitalism | Alternet


----------



## Zxereus

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes.  It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._  Not exactly a scientific foundation there.
> 
> The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history.  I dunno.  As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?
> 
> .



30 years ago, Obama wouldn't have a chance of being re-elected, but then again it would have been doubtful he would have ever been elected in the first place.

The 8%+ unemployment rate certainly would have been enough to sink him by itself, but with changing demographics, and with so many people either on the dole or having no problem being on the dole, it looks like that historical trivia isn't going to be true this time around.
Sad, but probably true. This is what happens when you train the sheep to look to the government for their well being.


----------



## Mac1958

Liability said:


> I anticipate that in the Presidential race, in order to remove the blight that we have, those Constitutionally loyal Tea Party participants will vote for Mitt.  For the time being, the Tea Party members will settle for Mitt and concentrate on getting more devout Constitutionalists into all the other offices.




Based on that, how confident are you that Ron Paul's people will vote for Romney and not Gary Johnson, even though they can't possibly like Romney, just to get Obama out of office?  That would require some serious bending of their principles, wouldn't it?

.


----------



## Lakhota

Zxereus said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The empirical evidence - polling is all we have - definitely makes it look like Obama will get 300+ electoral votes.  It's weird to see people making predictions of a Romney win based purely on the basis that _they don't think he deserves to win._  Not exactly a scientific foundation there.
> 
> The righties point to excitement level favoring Romney, and they point to the 8%+ unemployment history.  I dunno.  As I recall, could be wrong here, the RCP poll average ended up being pretty close in 2008, wasn't it?
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 years ago, Obama wouldn't have a chance of being re-elected, but then again it would have been doubtful he would have ever been elected in the first place.
> 
> The 8%+ unemployment rate certainly would have been enough to sink him by itself, but with changing demographics, and with so many people either on the dole or having no problem being on the dole, it looks like that historical trivia isn't going to be true this time around.
> Sad, but probably true. This is what happens when you train the sheep to look to the government for their well being.
Click to expand...


Reagan couldn't be elected or re-elected today.


----------



## Liability

Mac1958 said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> I anticipate that in the Presidential race, in order to remove the blight that we have, those Constitutionally loyal Tea Party participants will vote for Mitt.  For the time being, the Tea Party members will settle for Mitt and concentrate on getting more devout Constitutionalists into all the other offices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on that, how confident are you that Ron Paul's people will vote for Romney and not Gary Johnson, even though they can't possibly like Romney, just to get Obama out of office?  That would require some serious bending of their principles, wouldn't it?
> 
> .
Click to expand...


Irrelevant.

They don't make up a big enough voting base to matter.


----------



## JakeStarkey

You have not answered the question: will you work for a Romney victory the way MR's people tell the TPM to work?  Will you put aside with ideological purity until after the election?  Not to worry, that will be dealt with after the election, come win or lose.



Liability said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liability, the skewing toward Democrats in polling has definitively been defeated elsewhere above.
> 
> Either the TPM gets squarely behind Romney on the issues the way he wants, or the TPM may well cost him the votes in the swing states.
> 
> What do you want: Romney victory or TPM ideological purity?  You can't have both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fakey:
> 
> Nothing anywhere has defeated the skewing of the polls towards the Dims.  Nothing.  You making that claim and it being true are mutually exclusive.
> 
> The Tea Party Movement wants our government to behave as though the Constitutional limits on Federal Governmental authority and power have actual meaning.  But, as I heard once on the original Star Trek television show, *'for now, only a fool fights in a burning house.'*
> 
> I anticipate that in the Presidential race, in order to remove the blight that we have, those Constitutionally loyal Tea Party participants will vote for Mitt.  For the time being, the Tea Party members will settle for Mitt and concentrate on getting more devout Constitutionalists into all the other offices.
> 
> On the other hand, there is going to be a mass defection from the Dim camp due to general dissatisfaction with The ONE.  He's fucking toast.
> 
> One can indeed have a closer approximation of Constitutional fidelity AND a Mitt win.  Indeed, the former *requires* the latter.  And Mitt had best take note of the fact that the Tea Party members and the Republicans in general are not going to give him a whole lot of lee-way.  He had better get used to the idea that compromising with liberal Democratics in order to be able to get bills passed is NOT what the voters want or need.  And if he tries that shit, he will be a one term-er (like The ONE is about to be).
Click to expand...


----------



## Mac1958

Liability said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> I anticipate that in the Presidential race, in order to remove the blight that we have, those Constitutionally loyal Tea Party participants will vote for Mitt.  For the time being, the Tea Party members will settle for Mitt and concentrate on getting more devout Constitutionalists into all the other offices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on that, how confident are you that Ron Paul's people will vote for Romney and not Gary Johnson, even though they can't possibly like Romney, just to get Obama out of office?  That would require some serious bending of their principles, wouldn't it?
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Irrelevant.
> 
> They don't make up a big enough voting base to matter.
Click to expand...



Could be, but I'd guess that given the choice, Romney would rather have them than not have them.

.


----------



## there4eyeM

Obama is probably a better debater.

I sincerely hope Americans get off their lazy derrières and find alternatives to these criminals currently in power and those of the identical ilk who would replace them.


----------



## The T

there4eyeM said:


> Obama is probably a better debater.
> 
> I sincerely hope Americans get off their lazy derrières and find alternatives to these criminals currently in power and those of the identical ilk who would replace them.


 
Obama is the better LIAR/Bullshitter.


----------



## Mac1958

.

Strict term limits.

Publicly-funded elections.

Balanced Budget Amendment.

Take the power to fuck us over AWAY from these people.

.


----------



## there4eyeM

"Obama is the better LIAR/Bullshitter."

How can you tell?


----------



## Stephanie

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> Strict term limits.
> 
> Publicly-funded elections.
> 
> Balanced Budget Amendment.
> 
> Take the power to fuck us over AWAY from these people.
> 
> .



I like those


----------



## The T

there4eyeM said:


> "Obama is the better LIAR/Bullshitter."
> 
> How can you tell?


 

Looked at the economy lately and hear him tell YOU 'The private Sector is just fine...as Unemployment ROSE with yesterdays figures?

Really?


----------



## Joshuatree

As Rasmussen polls show, Romney is wining the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college. And I think that is the probable outcome unless he manages to shake up the campaign, by decisevily wining the debates or something like that. I want Romney to win but I'm trying to be as much realistic as I can now and unfortunatelly I think Obama has more chances.


----------



## whitehall

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


Landslide? If lefties convinced themselves that man-made global warming exists it must be about faith vs reality. I wonder who agnostics pray to?


----------



## LoneLaugher

Mitt Romney


Funny.


----------



## Freewill

One thing we know, if the lying adminstration wins there is absolutely no reason they should have.


----------



## The T

Joshuatree said:


> As Rasmussen polls show, Romney is wining the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college. And I think that is the probable outcome unless he manages to shake up the campaign, by decisevily wining the debates or something like that. I want Romney to win but I'm trying to be as much realistic as I can now and unfortunatelly I think Obama has more chances.


 
Realistically? he doesn't. the people have had it with the 'cult Of personality'.

Mainstream Americans have had it...or wasn't this past week speaking to you? And YES. Obama speaks for those against 'Chick-Fil-A'...

Wake up...take heart...WE have won...FINISH THE JOB. Vote against Obama and the left.


----------



## Steelplate

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.

The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.


----------



## WillowTree

"Obama in a landslide"




he'll get brusies.


----------



## WillowTree

Steelplate said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
Click to expand...


A lot of us know how it will affect us. He stole 500 Billion dollars from medicare. You damn right we know how it's gonna affect us. Course don't forget he's giving us $250 bucks to help with our medicine while the death panel decides.


----------



## The T

WillowTree said:


> "Obama in a landslide"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he'll get brusies.


 
Obama is bruised before he was...


----------



## Stephanie

Steelplate said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
Click to expand...



would that be like the boy who cried racist thing?
and people aren't buying yours or anyone's propaganda about Obama, they are LIVING in it.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.



Correct. 

After almost three and a half years of the most vitriolic and inane accusations against Obama, theres nothing new the Romney campaign can use, or that the voters havent heard before  dozens of times  that theyd believe. 

And Romney clearly wont get the weak (Reagan) democrats needed to win.


----------



## there4eyeM

Looked at the economy lately.
Listened to Romney.

How can you tell?


----------



## LoneLaugher

Joshuatree said:


> As Rasmussen polls show, Romney is wining the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college. And I think that is the probable outcome unless he manages to shake up the campaign, by decisevily wining the debates or something like that. I want Romney to win but I'm trying to be as much realistic as I can now and unfortunatelly I think Obama has more chances.



I don't think Romney has a chance in hell of winning the popular vote. He is difficult to like.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I don't like the BBA, but I will go along if SCOTUS will approve the first two after the legislation is passed.  All three or nothing.



Stephanie said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Strict term limits.
> 
> Publicly-funded elections.
> 
> Balanced Budget Amendment.
> 
> Take the power to fuck us over AWAY from these people.
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like those
Click to expand...


----------



## Neotrotsky

Sure
this will be the outcome for Papa Obama
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN5-uykUbi8]Thelma and Louise Final Scene, Cliff - YouTube[/ame]


Gallup has just released Barack Obamas job approval rating for the first half of 2012, 
broken down by state, and the news is not encouraging for the president.

The 50 percent approval mark is significant because post-World War II incumbent presidents who have been above 
50 percent job approval on Election Day were easily re-elected, write Gallup.  
Presidents with approval ratings below 50% have more uncertain re-election prospects​


----------



## Steelplate

WillowTree said:


> Steelplate said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A lot of us know how it will affect us. He stole 500 Billion dollars from medicare. You damn right we know how it's gonna affect us. Course don't forget he's giving us $250 bucks to help with our medicine while the death panel decides.
Click to expand...


oh look the crazy cat lady is vomiting up a hairball again.


----------



## Lakhota

TPM Electoral College Scoreboard: Obama 310, Romney 206

TPM Electoral Scoreboard


----------



## Amazed

LoneLaugher said:


> Joshuatree said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Rasmussen polls show, Romney is wining the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college. And I think that is the probable outcome unless he manages to shake up the campaign, by decisevily wining the debates or something like that. I want Romney to win but I'm trying to be as much realistic as I can now and unfortunatelly I think Obama has more chances.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Romney has a chance in hell of winning the popular vote. He is difficult to like.
Click to expand...


well opinions are like.....you know.

Obama has failed and America knows it....we're coming like we did in 2010...and like we did in Wisconsin....member those??????

We're not just coming for Obama...we're coming to take out progressivism for the cancer it is.


----------



## Cowman

Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.

Will this be the case if Obama wins?

Are conservatives able to suck it up and wait another four years to try again to get their guy in? And despite all the retarded things you say about how there will be no more presidential elections cause Obama will blah blah blah... there will still be an election in 2016.


----------



## Steelplate

Stephanie said:


> Steelplate said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> would that be like the boy who cried racist thing?
> and people aren't buying yours or anyone's propaganda about Obama, they are LIVING in it.
Click to expand...


you and slobber on my pillows willow should get a room. Hell, you guys don't know enough to STFU even when I'm disagreeing with the "librul" OP.

You don't like the content? too fucking bad. Truth hurts, I guess.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Unemployment went UP 8.3%


----------



## Stephanie

Cowman said:


> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?



omg, who is out doing all the Occupying? so now you have your answer to your stupid question who is going to riot WHEN Obama loses


----------



## WillowTree

Steelplate said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steelplate said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of us know how it will affect us. He stole 500 Billion dollars from medicare. You damn right we know how it's gonna affect us. Course don't forget he's giving us $250 bucks to help with our medicine while the death panel decides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh look the crazy cat lady is vomiting up a hairball again.
Click to expand...


Hairball=truth for which you have no damn answers. suck it up libtard.


----------



## Cowman

Stephanie said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> omg, who out doing all the Occupying? so now you have your answer to your stupid question
Click to expand...


What does Occupy have to do with that I said, you sweet sweet retard?


----------



## WillowTree

Steelplate said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steelplate said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know lahkota. I think it's going to be tight. The AHCA isn't in full swing, so people aren't going to realize how it will affect them till after the election, the economic recovery, while happening, is a slow process, and the far right is doing a masterful job instilling fear into people about the kenyanmarxistmuslimapologistfromhell thing.
> 
> The only saving grace for Obama is that these people are so far over the top and so consistent in their propaganda, that even if they do happen to stumble upon something truly and completely factual, people are so de-sensitized to all of it, that it's almost a "boy who cried wolf" thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> would that be like the boy who cried racist thing?
> and people aren't buying yours or anyone's propaganda about Obama, they are LIVING in it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you and slobber on my pillows willow should get a room. Hell, you guys don't know enough to STFU even when I'm disagreeing with the "librul" OP.
> 
> You don't like the content? too fucking bad. Truth hurts, I guess.
Click to expand...


We don't have to "shut up" asswipe.


----------



## bripat9643

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is almost better in a lot of ways.
Click to expand...


No, it won't.   The only way to get rid of Obamacare is to defeat Obama.


----------



## The T

Lakhota said:


> TPM Electoral College Scoreboard: Obama 310, Romney 206
> 
> TPM Electoral Scoreboard


 
Conventions haven't Happened yet...^^^

Arrogance is rampant from the left.


----------



## Stephanie

Cowman said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> omg, who out doing all the Occupying? so now you have your answer to your stupid question
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does Occupy have to do with that I said, you sweet sweet retard?
Click to expand...


you and your question is the retard..go milk yourself


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> (1) The TPM makes it harder every day in the swing states for Romney, and Romney can't get the discussion focused on economics.  (2) Romney gets two more tries: the convention and the debates.  He will win or lose the election on whether he can talk successfully about the economy.  The President will win if he can keep Romney pinned on any other and all issues, which he has been doing quite well.
> 
> If Obama wins, I think the Dems will still have the Senate.  If so, then both sides have to compromise, or everyone will be thrown out in 2014.



All this speculation is Silly, Romney has not even been able to Spend the Bulk of the Money he has Raised yet, and wont be able to until the Convention. Be Assured he will spend it where he needs it. On the Other Hand Obama has blown his Financial Wad so to speak and is now hurting for money. 

anyone who thinks they can Predict based on polls today, what will happen in NOV is a fool. Especially some of the Liberal Presses polls lately. CBS I think it is, has Obama up in several Key Battle Ground States, and have been ranting about it for a couple days, But a Rudimentary Inspection of the Sample Demographics shows they Routinely Over Samples Democrats. In Ohio for Instance, where in 2010 Turn out was almost even among Dems and Reps, they samples 9% more Democrats than Republicans. That Pattern Repeated for each state. It's pretty silly to be making Predictions based on Polls this far out, Before the Conventions, especially when those Polls Deliberately Over Sample Democrats.


----------



## The T

Lakhota said:


> TPM Electoral College Scoreboard: Obama 310, Romney 206
> 
> TPM Electoral Scoreboard


 
hey Shitting BULL? I think your a fucking moron and a XXXXXX

GET your 'Lawyer Friend' to take me to COURT...

IDIOT!


----------



## Steelplate

WillowTree said:


> Steelplate said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of us know how it will affect us. He stole 500 Billion dollars from medicare. You damn right we know how it's gonna affect us. Course don't forget he's giving us $250 bucks to help with our medicine while the death panel decides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh look the crazy cat lady is vomiting up a hairball again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hairball=truth for which you have no damn answers. suck it up libtard.
Click to expand...


truth is relative....especially when a sucker.like you buys into everything the Beckster says. You haven't a fucking clue and you don't want one...You'd rather have everything spoonfed to you because Thinkin's hard.


----------



## Steelplate

Next time please don't quote offending post, just report it. Thanks.

xXXX not cool man.


----------



## bripat9643

Neotrotsky said:


> Unemployment went UP 8.3%



If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.


----------



## JakeStarkey

That makes sense to me, bripat, but the numbers in PA, FL, OH show Obama slowing pulling away.  Something is wrong somewhere: the polls, the numbers, or something else we are not seeing.



bripat9643 said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment went UP 8.3%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
Click to expand...


----------



## bripat9643

JakeStarkey said:


> That makes sense to me, bripat, but the numbers in PA, FL, OH show Obama slowing pulling away.  Something is wrong somewhere: the polls, the numbers, or something else we are not seeing.
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment went UP 8.3%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Wrong, dude, just wrong.  You are better than that.



The T said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> TPM Electoral College Scoreboard: Obama 310, Romney 206
> 
> TPM Electoral Scoreboard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Shitting BULL? I think your a fucking moron and a XXXX.
> 
> GET your 'Lawyer Friend' to take me to COURT...
> 
> IDIOT!
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Romeny is spending the $$$ as well.



bripat9643 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> That makes sense to me, bripat, but the numbers in PA, FL, OH show Obama slowing pulling away.  Something is wrong somewhere: the polls, the numbers, or something else we are not seeing.
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.
Click to expand...


----------



## Charles_Main

Cowman said:


> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?



When is the Last time you Saw a Group of Conservatives Rioting? Did they Riot when Obama one the First time? Did they Riot at tea Party Rallies?

No sorry Lawless rioting, Looting and Arson is what the Left does when they are upset. Conservatives just put their Heads down, Go back to work, and Keep on trying to change things for what they see is the better.

In General anyways, there are always exceptions


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> Romeny is spending the $$$ as well.
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> That makes sense to me, bripat, but the numbers in PA, FL, OH show Obama slowing pulling away.  Something is wrong somewhere: the polls, the numbers, or something else we are not seeing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


No he is not, don't you know how it works? Romney has Raised a SHIT TON of money that he can not legally spend until he is officially the GOP nominee, After the Convention. So Romney has been out raising Obama lately, but he has not been able to out spend him. 

While Obama has been out spending Romney, but not out Raising him, The Tables are about to turn on the Spending Front.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Not so, kiddo, in the battle ground states the TPM is losing ground regularly, every week, every month.  The far righty extremists have to stop the shouting and name calling for a change, and work your asses off for MR the way your are told to work by his handlers.



Amazed said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joshuatree said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Rasmussen polls show, Romney is wining the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college. And I think that is the probable outcome unless he manages to shake up the campaign, by decisevily wining the debates or something like that. I want Romney to win but I'm trying to be as much realistic as I can now and unfortunatelly I think Obama has more chances.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Romney has a chance in hell of winning the popular vote. He is difficult to like.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> well opinions are like.....you know.
> 
> Obama has failed and America knows it....we're coming like we did in 2010...and like we did in Wisconsin....member those??????
> 
> We're not just coming for Obama...we're coming to take out progressivism for the cancer it is.
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Time will tell, but will it be too late?

And I am worried about the taxes.  The Dems are doing their damnedest to turn them into a "swift boat" attack on MR.



Charles_Main said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romeny is spending the $$$ as well.
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he is not, don't you know how it works? Romney has Raised a SHIT TON of money that he can not legally spend until he is officially the GOP nominee, After the Convention. So Romney has been out raising Obama lately, but he has not been able to out spend him.
> 
> While Obama has been out spending Romney, but not out Raising him, The Tables are about to turn on the Spending Front.
Click to expand...


----------



## Charles_Main

Only a complete Retard could look at the way the US is so Divided Down Party Lines and think that anyone is going to win by any margin that is even Close to a Land Slide. A Land Slide Requires a lot of Cross over Voting, Neither of these guys are going to attract a Large Chunk of the Other sides votes.

Reagan was the Last real Land slide, and a Huge Number of people who were termed Reagan Democrats where the Reason it happened.


----------



## JakeStarkey

We had some acting very stupidly, very loudly, very disruptive at town meetings in 2009 and 2010 in our region.  Some quick arrests took care of that.

No, there will be no significant conservative "rioting" if Obama is re-elected.

No, there will be no significant liberal "rioting" if Romney is elected.



Charles_Main said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When is the Last time you Saw a Group of Conservatives Rioting? Did they Riot when Obama one the First time? Did they Riot at tea Party Rallies?
> 
> No sorry Lawless rioting, Looting and Arson is what the Left does when they are upset. Conservatives just put their Heads down, Go back to work, and Keep on trying to change things for what they see is the better.
> 
> In General anyways, there are always exceptions
Click to expand...


----------



## Amazed

JakeStarkey said:


> Not so, kiddo, in the battle ground states the TPM is losing ground regularly, every week, every month.  The far righty extremists have to stop the shouting and name calling for a change, and work your asses off for MR the way your are told to work by his handlers.
> 
> 
> 
> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Romney has a chance in hell of winning the popular vote. He is difficult to like.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well opinions are like.....you know.
> 
> Obama has failed and America knows it....we're coming like we did in 2010...and like we did in Wisconsin....member those??????
> 
> We're not just coming for Obama...we're coming to take out progressivism for the cancer it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Sorry anybody to the right of Bammy is an extreme??

No thats a silly game lefty mongrels play.

The polls being cited are over sampled in one direction...so you boys and girls  keep goin...we're coming......again.


----------



## Lakhota

bripat9643 said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment went UP 8.3%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
Click to expand...


Whose fault is that?  To my knowledge, Republicans have refused to vote on any of Obama's jobs bills.


----------



## Steelplate

Lakhota said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment went UP 8.3%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whose fault is that?  To my knowledge, Republicans have refused to vote on any of Obama's jobs bills.
Click to expand...


well, you are right....but truthfully....it's going to depend on whether the general public can see that reality, or believe the spin. 

I certainly don't have a good enough bead on the sentiments of the country to make a determination. However, the biggest frame of reference I have is this message board. Somehow, I don't think this place is an accurate representation of the country.


----------



## The T

JakeStarkey said:


> We had some acting very stupidly, very loudly, very disruptive at town meetings in 2009 and 2010 in our region. Some quick arrests took care of that.
> 
> No, there will be no significant conservative "rioting" if Obama is re-elected.
> 
> No, there will be no significant liberal "rioting" if Romney is elected.
> 
> 
> 
> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When is the Last time you Saw a Group of Conservatives Rioting? Did they Riot when Obama one the First time? Did they Riot at tea Party Rallies?
> 
> No sorry Lawless rioting, Looting and Arson is what the Left does when they are upset. Conservatives just put their Heads down, Go back to work, and Keep on trying to change things for what they see is the better.
> 
> In General anyways, there are always exceptions
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
And YOUR REGION has to do with WHAt with the rest of the country?

That's right...ZERO.

Jake? You're a mistake.


----------



## Lakhota

Steelplate said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whose fault is that?  To my knowledge, Republicans have refused to vote on any of Obama's jobs bills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> well, you are right....but truthfully....it's going to depend on whether the general public can see that reality, or believe the spin.
> 
> I certainly don't have a good enough bead on the sentiments of the country to make a determination. However, the biggest frame of reference I have is this message board. Somehow, I don't think this place is an accurate representation of the country.
Click to expand...


Exactly!  The outcome will hinge on how accurately voters are informed - and what they believe.


----------



## Stephanie

Lakhota said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment went UP 8.3%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If unemployment stays above 8% by election time, or even until September, I don't see how Obama can win, and it doesn't look like unemployment is headed down anytime soon.  Obama is his own worst enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whose fault is that?  To my knowledge, Republicans have refused to vote on any of Obama's jobs bills.
Click to expand...


no, that is what thinkprogress and the Hufferpost TOLD YOU..he had his JOBS bill passed to the TUNE of 800billion dollars that didn't do a DAMN THING but rob us..but you and the steele go ahead a spew your DNC talking points, the MAJORITY of the people don't disapprove of Obama FOR NOTHING and they aren't as stupid as you two or Obama thinks they are..


----------



## Dick Tuck

Zxereus said:


> This is what happens when a country has reached the tipping point, of having so many people sucking on that big government nipple.
> Everyone knows that if you want to retain your government handouts, you really have a much better chance of retaining them by re-electing the Gimmecrat.



Like Bush financing a tax cut to the rich on debt?  That wasn't a handout?


----------



## Lakhota

The T said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> TPM Electoral College Scoreboard: Obama 310, Romney 206
> 
> TPM Electoral Scoreboard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Shitting BULL? I think your a fucking moron and a pedophile.
> 
> GET your 'Lawyer Friend' to take me to COURT...
> 
> IDIOT!
Click to expand...


Pedophile?  That's pretty cruel to say about someone you don't know, don't you think?


----------



## Dick Tuck

The T said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keep thinking that as Romey is already UP in polls for his trip abroad...and our allies appear to like him better than they EVER did your Messiah.
> 
> YOU are in for one rude awakening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's an even bigger laughing stock for his trip abroad. Tell me, is there anyone he didn't insult?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only to leftists like you as Romey took on issues Obama refuses to, and as Obama capitulates to our enemies and  invites known terrorists into the Whitehouse.
> 
> YOU are an idiot Sarah. Romney didn't go around the world and apologize for us like your messiah did in '09 to which we see the 'Arab Spring' and see Obama doubling down on what Carter did with Iran.
> 
> YOU need a history lesson badly.
Click to expand...


No,  Romney went around the world and told an occupied people that they're poor because their culture sucks.  He's quite the diplomat.


----------



## Peach

Look, 
a. He asked for a job in the midst of multiple disasters,
b. It has not improved appreciably,
c. No landslide, too close to call today.


----------



## Stephanie

Peach said:


> Look,
> a. He asked for a job in the midst of multiple disasters,
> b. It has not improved appreciably,
> c. No landslide, too close to call today.



I'll go with that...but I think he will lose..


----------



## Zoom

Lakhota said:


> The debates will seal Romney's fate!



As much as they screamed about the birth certificate, why no noise about Romney's tax returns?


----------



## Conservative

No sitting president since World War II has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.


----------



## Stephanie

Zoom said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> The debates will seal Romney's fate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as they screamed about the birth certificate, why no noise about Romney's tax returns?
Click to expand...


who's they? and as much as they screamed about how crazy and none of the peoples business about the birth certificate, why so much noise about someones tax returns


----------



## Lakhota

Conservative said:


> No sitting president since World War II has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.



Name one sitting president who ever had LESS help from the other party trying to improve the economy.


----------



## Stephanie

lakhota said:


> conservative said:
> 
> 
> 
> no sitting president since world war ii has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> name one sitting president who ever had less help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
Click to expand...


bush


----------



## Sarah G

Stephanie said:


> lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> conservative said:
> 
> 
> 
> no sitting president since world war ii has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> name one sitting president who ever had less help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> bush
Click to expand...


Yeah, congress just handed hundreds of billions for him to throw at that mess in the Middle East every month that's all.


----------



## Lakhota

Stephanie said:


> lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> conservative said:
> 
> 
> 
> no sitting president since world war ii has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> name one sitting president who ever had less help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> bush
Click to expand...


Seriously, are you really that misinformed?


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota said:


> Conservative said:
> 
> 
> 
> No sitting president since World War II has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Name one sitting president who ever had LESS help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
Click to expand...


You must be on welfare tonto.....it would explain the way you swallow for obama.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


Other prediction made by the left

Watch Reagan and the GOP get crushed in a midterm - Salon.com


----------



## Stephanie

Lakhota said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> name one sitting president who ever had less help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bush
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seriously, are you really that misinformed?
Click to expand...



did the Hufferpost tell you to ask that...


----------



## Stephanie

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other prediction made by the left
> 
> Watch Reagan and the GOP get crushed in a midterm - Salon.com
Click to expand...


----------



## Lakhota

Bush signs $700 billion TARP bailout...

The Raw Story | Paulson kneels before Pelosi, begs for bailout package

President Bush signs historic financial rescue plan into law - Oct. 3, 2008


----------



## Stephanie

Lakhota said:


> Bush signs $700 billion TARP bailout...
> 
> The Raw Story | Paulson kneels before Pelosi, begs for bailout package
> 
> President Bush signs historic financial rescue plan into law - Oct. 3, 2008



lol


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Stephanie said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other prediction made by the left
> 
> Watch Reagan and the GOP get crushed in a midterm - Salon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...



I say both party's are dead if they do not get rid of the Statist elite big government truds that control the government.


----------



## francoHFW

The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...


----------



## JakeStarkey

My region is going to return many, many electoral votes for Romney.  We can tolerate TP stupidity here without much damage, the dems just don't have the numbers.

But in FL, OH, PA, and other places, the president is pulling away slowly, and part of that, I think, is that the centrists who don't care for Obama are growing to despise the far right even more.

You guys need to rein your act in until after the election.

Frank, you are simply a lost little soul.




The T said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> We had some acting very stupidly, very loudly, very disruptive at town meetings in 2009 and 2010 in our region. Some quick arrests took care of that.
> 
> No, there will be no significant conservative "rioting" if Obama is re-elected.
> 
> No, there will be no significant liberal "rioting" if Romney is elected.
> 
> 
> 
> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is the Last time you Saw a Group of Conservatives Rioting? Did they Riot when Obama one the First time? Did they Riot at tea Party Rallies?
> 
> No sorry Lawless rioting, Looting and Arson is what the Left does when they are upset. Conservatives just put their Heads down, Go back to work, and Keep on trying to change things for what they see is the better.
> 
> In General anyways, there are always exceptions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And YOUR REGION has to do with WHAt with the rest of the country?
> 
> That's right...ZERO.
> 
> Jake? You're a mistake.
Click to expand...


----------



## Lakhota

I love the Tea Party...






Teabilly fucksticks is classic!


----------



## francoHFW

This congress has passed ONE SEVENTH  the number of laws Truman's do nothing one did- by far the record. "No compromise, un-American Tea Party GOP" (TIME).


----------



## Amazed

francoHFW said:


> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...



Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....


----------



## ConservaDerrps

The T said:


> EriktheRed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is if Obama even shows UP to any debates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, you really ARE a fuckin' delusional wingnut, aren't you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope. not at all. Obama is that arrogant. It's alright I understand your ignorance.
Click to expand...


Were you in a fucking alcoholic coma in '08, Grampy McShitshispants? Obama DESTROYED McCain in the debates. Absolutely annihilated him. Considering the Grand Old White Guy Party managed to run another boring, stiff white guy up there, look for more of the same.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Conservative said:


> No sitting president since World War II has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.



Why exclude Roosevelt, since the situation is similar in terms of digging our way out of a crappy economy that happened in the prior administration?  He won by over 24 points in '36, with an unemployment rate of 16.6%, and in '40, with 14.6% rate.  As for Reagan winning with a 7.2% rate, he won by over 18 point.  Would he have won by a smaller margin if the rate 1% higher?  Probably.  Then look at the incumbent party losses.  Gore lost with a 3.9% unemployment rate, Stevenson lost in '50 with a 2.8% rate, and Humphrey lost with a 3.4% rate.

Unemployment is certainly a factor, but it's not a predictor.  Romney's problem is that he's running on a platform that got us into this deep shit in the first place.  Americans may have short memories, but not that short.  Also, his 6% claim is what economists are predicting in any case by 2016, assuming no major disaster happens, so BFD.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Amazed said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
Click to expand...


Then he'd be doing what Bush and Reagan did in their recessions.






In fact, in all previous recessions, public-sector employment... on Twitpic


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Conservative said:


> No sitting president since World War II has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.



And no man has been elected in the modern age without releasing at least 10 years of tax returns.

See? It's fun to just toss out completely pointless facts that don't really mean shit but make you look smart to your friends who just don't want to tell you what a boring twat you are.


----------



## francoHFW

Amazed said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
Click to expand...


You're a gd brainwashed idiot. The Jobs Act Pubs have sat on since last August would add 2% to growth and cut 1% from UE, and is a typical PUB jobs bill- CAN'T HAVE THAT! No national sacrifice is too great to smear Obama. Pub dupe fools.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Stephanie said:


> Zoom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> The debates will seal Romney's fate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as they screamed about the birth certificate, why no noise about Romney's tax returns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> who's they? and as much as they screamed about how crazy and none of the peoples business about the birth certificate, why so much noise about someones tax returns
Click to expand...


Here's the thing.  Obama released his official birth certificate, as well as two contemporaneous birth announcements from Hawaii newspapers.  And the birth nuts still screamed.  Obama also released his tax returns going back to 2000.  Why won't Mitt?  More embarrassments like his horse LP tax sham?


----------



## Dick Tuck

Stephanie said:


> lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> conservative said:
> 
> 
> 
> no sitting president since world war ii has been re-elected with the unemployment rate above 7.2 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> name one sitting president who ever had less help from the other party trying to improve the economy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> bush
Click to expand...


Bullshit.  TARP wasn't blocked.


----------



## Zander

I love the over-confidence.  A few more Polls with +19% democrats oversampled (like the recent Pew poll)  will help to keep Dem voters home. Yep, Obama's a lock!!! He can't lose!! Stay home, it's a done deal!


----------



## Peach

Reagan extended the recession, then spent us into the 21st century, grinning like an idiot all the while, to bump us close to a recovery. Obama has not had the same luck, though Obama walked into the nadir of America's economy, and foreign affairs, not seen since the 1930s. The two wars, overseas tax cut giveaways, and Bush bumbling has the US low, and there is no proof the situation is getting much better.

No grade Z movie figure to cheer us into acceptance this time.


----------



## Amazed

francoHFW said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a gd brainwashed idiot. The Jobs Act Pubs have sat on since last August would add 2% to growth and cut 1% from UE, and is a typical PUB jobs bill- CAN'T HAVE THAT! No national sacrifice is too great to smear Obama. Pub dupe fools.
Click to expand...


Poor sissy boy....Gov jobs aren't jobs at all....they produce nothing....smoke and mirrors and Obammy cum.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

lakhota said:


> i love the tea party...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teabilly fucksticks is classic!



idiot anyone can go own a discussion board and claim to be anything just to make what they say they are look stupid.
Take jake starkey he claims to be a republican but most republicans doubt he is.


----------



## Amazed

Peach said:


> Reagan extended the recession, then spent us into the 21st century, grinning like an idiot all the while, to bump us close to a recovery. Obama has not had the same luck, though Obama walked into the nadir of America's economy, and foreign affairs, not seen since the 1930s. The two wars, overseas tax cut giveaways, and Bush bumbling has the US low, and there is no proof the situation is getting much better.
> 
> No grade Z movie figure to cheer us into acceptance this time.



(smile) Are you 12 trichomosis girl?

Reagan already had it turned around at just over 2 years.....say peach...you from WV?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Peach said:


> Reagan extended the recession, then spent us into the 21st century, grinning like an idiot all the while, to bump us close to a recovery. Obama has not had the same luck, though Obama walked into the nadir of America's economy, and foreign affairs, not seen since the 1930s. The two wars, overseas tax cut giveaways, and Bush bumbling has the US low, and there is no proof the situation is getting much better.
> 
> No grade Z movie figure to cheer us into acceptance this time.



Damn it's amazing how clueless you really are when it comes to what actually happened while Reagan was president, wished you could have been there like I was.
Truly an amazing president turned carters failure around.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Amazed said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
Click to expand...


What a lie.  If Obama created government jobs at the rate that Bush did, unemployment would be down substantially.


----------



## freedombecki

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

Well, Jimmy Carter's second term "landslide" didn't go so well. He gave away Panama Canal, which stirred people up. Obama tried to give away oil-rich waters to Russia the US purchased that are Alaskan Sovereign waters, but he didn't get backing, however, his mandate to nix US drillers in the Gulf Coast region gave drilling incentives to 3 communist countries--China, Cuba, and Russia.

I'm gonna say, there's going to be a major backlash against these Democrat freebies to the Communists in waters that just 4 years ago were fully American areas.

Collateral damage of Obama's unilateral injunction against American Oil companies was a hike in gas prices that precluded Americans from going to our own National Parks, and visitation is way low there, plus the Tourist Industry has lost half its workforce because Americans are worried about their new heinous costs of living, disguised by clever packaging, but there in full force behind the facade.


----------



## Liability

Zander said:


> I love the over-confidence.  A few more Polls with +19% democrats oversampled (like the recent Pew poll)  will help to keep Dem voters home. Yep, Obama's a lock!!! He can't lose!! Stay home, it's a done deal!



I like your photo.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




If (God forbid) the incumbent wins 4 more years, it's gonna be 4 long hard years of the Obama Administration saying, "Blame Obama!"


Oh bullshit.  It will _*still*_ be "It was Boooooosh's Fault!"


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> We had some acting very stupidly, very loudly, very disruptive at town meetings in 2009 and 2010 in our region.  Some quick arrests took care of that.
> 
> No, there will be no significant conservative "rioting" if Obama is re-elected.
> 
> No, there will be no significant liberal "rioting" if Romney is elected.
> 
> 
> 
> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives don't riot. Or so we've been told.
> 
> Will this be the case if Obama wins?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When is the Last time you Saw a Group of Conservatives Rioting? Did they Riot when Obama one the First time? Did they Riot at tea Party Rallies?
> 
> No sorry Lawless rioting, Looting and Arson is what the Left does when they are upset. Conservatives just put their Heads down, Go back to work, and Keep on trying to change things for what they see is the better.
> 
> In General anyways, there are always exceptions
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Loud Protesting that led to a few Arrest is not even Close to Rioting.

Agreed on the other 2 Points.


----------



## Full-Auto

Dick Tuck said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pubs have blocked every jobs bill and stimulus since early 2009- So what Obama policies are they complaining about? This their Pub obstruction economy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a lie.  If Obama created government jobs at the rate that Bush did, unemployment would be down substantially.
Click to expand...


Instead he gave away billion to cronies.


Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............


----------



## ConservaDerrps

freedombecki said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, Jimmy Carter's second term "landslide" didn't go so well. He gave away Panama Canal, which stirred people up. Obama tried to give away oil-rich waters to Russia the US purchased that are Alaskan Sovereign waters, but he didn't get backing, however, his mandate to nix US drillers in the Gulf Coast region gave drilling incentives to 3 communist countries--China, Cuba, and Russia.
> 
> I'm gonna say, there's going to be a major backlash against these Democrat freebies to the Communists in waters that just 4 years ago were fully American areas.
> 
> Collateral damage of Obama's unilateral injunction against American Oil companies was a hike in gas prices that precluded Americans from going to our own National Parks, and visitation is way low there, plus the Tourist Industry has lost half its workforce because Americans are worried about their new heinous costs of living, disguised by clever packaging, but there in full force behind the facade.
Click to expand...


Oh fuck. You're one of those idiots that got riled up about the Panama fucking Canal? 

That explains EVERYTHING.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Full-Auto said:


> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny...you kids swallow everything hr feeds you....the ONLY jobs he wants to "create" are Gov jobs....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a lie.  If Obama created government jobs at the rate that Bush did, unemployment would be down substantially.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
Click to expand...


Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?

Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.

You're transparent, motherfucker.


----------



## Full-Auto

ConservaDerrps said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a lie.  If Obama created government jobs at the rate that Bush did, unemployment would be down substantially.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
Click to expand...

So instead OPbama gave away billions in those contracts to his friends. I know I was slated to go until Obama took office.

You are not very smart using the lowest of standards.,


----------



## Charles_Main

ConservaDerrps said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a lie.  If Obama created government jobs at the rate that Bush did, unemployment would be down substantially.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
Click to expand...


I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.

P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.

Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Charles_Main said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
Click to expand...


Then we agree to disagree.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Charles_Main said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
Click to expand...


Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Full-Auto said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Instead he gave away billion to cronies.
> 
> 
> Have you been an outright pussy long?  Did it hapopen when you became a democrat or have you been a puss your entire life?  Just curious..............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So instead OPbama gave away billions in those contracts to his friends. I know I was slated to go until Obama took office.
> 
> You are not very smart using the lowest of standards.,
Click to expand...


You have some links to these "billions" he's giving away to "his friends"?


----------



## Full-Auto

ConservaDerrps said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
Click to expand...


We can start with 16 green energy companies to date.....Odd how many of them were campaign contributors.


----------



## Charles_Main

ConservaDerrps said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
Click to expand...


HOLY CHRIST are you for real.

Take a look where the Stimulus Money went. Don't play Dumb man.

The Single Largest Spending Bill Ever passed and a Huge Portion of the Money was handed out on a who helped me get elected the most Basis. Rewarding Unions, and Obama Donors over everyone else. Wake up.

Yes Bush was a scum bag, But so is Obama.


----------



## buckeye45_73

ConservaDerrps said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
Click to expand...

 
GE (paid no taxes and not a peep from the left....uh)
Solyndra (Green jobs boondogle)


----------



## Conservative

ConservaDerrps said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> 
> 
> So instead OPbama gave away billions in those contracts to his friends. I know I was slated to go until Obama took office.
> 
> You are not very smart using the lowest of standards.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have some links to these "billions" he's giving away to "his friends"?
Click to expand...


I invoke the Axelrod Principle... Prove Obama ISN'T giving away billions in contracts to his friends.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

buckeye45_73 said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> I might agree with your Assessment of Halliburton and Cheney, but then you go and Dismiss the Idea that Obama is engaging in Rampant Crony Capitalism as well, and lose all Credibility with me.
> 
> P.S. That 17 Billion number is Bogus, long ago there was a thread on it, and it turned out people were counting the Total Profit Halliburton made World Wide during the War, and crediting it all to Profits from the War Alone.
> 
> Sorry but I drive By A Halliburton Location all the Time right by me. They do business and make money all over the place, You can't count it all and say it was Profit from a War.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> GE (paid no taxes and not a peep from the left....uh)
> Solyndra (Green jobs boondogle)
Click to expand...


Solyndra? Pfffffffffffffft. You mean that shit that Bush started with his friends and then Obama renewed? 

What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra | Research | Media Matters for America

I know, Gramps. "Media Matters? LOLBERAL! LIBTARD!! KENYA!"

zzzzzzzzzzzzz.


----------



## Full-Auto

ConservaDerrps said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GE (paid no taxes and not a peep from the left....uh)
> Solyndra (Green jobs boondogle)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Solyndra? Pfffffffffffffft. You mean that shit that Bush started with his friends and then Obama renewed?
> 
> What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra | Research | Media Matters for America
> 
> I know, Gramps. "Media Matters? LOLBERAL! LIBTARD!! KENYA!"
> 
> zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Click to expand...


The process they rejected, that Obama revived?


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Full-Auto said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> GE (paid no taxes and not a peep from the left....uh)
> Solyndra (Green jobs boondogle)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Solyndra? Pfffffffffffffft. You mean that shit that Bush started with his friends and then Obama renewed?
> 
> What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra | Research | Media Matters for America
> 
> I know, Gramps. "Media Matters? LOLBERAL! LIBTARD!! KENYA!"
> 
> zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The process they rejected, that Obama revived?
Click to expand...




> CLAIM: Email Saying Deal Was "NOT Ready For Prime Time" Was Warning About Financial Risk
> 
> ABC reported that internal emails "show the Obama administration was keenly monitoring the progress of the loan, even as analysts were voicing serious concerns about the risk involved. 'This deal is NOT ready for prime time,' one White House budget analyst wrote in a March 10, 2009 email, nine days before the administration formally announced the loan." [ABC News, 9/13/11]
> CNN claimed "prime time" email showed "some White House budget analysts questioned early on how financially sound Solyndra was." [CNN, CNN Newsroom, 9/15/11, via Nexis]
> Fox's Neil Cavuto: "Prime time" email was warning that "the loan could be very risky for taxpayers." [Fox News, Your World with Neil Cavuto, 9/14/11, via Nexis]
> Wash. Examiner: "Prime time" email showed "some officials in the Obama Administration thought the loan was a lousy idea." [Washington Examiner, 9/14/11]
> FACT: The Email Did Not Voice Any Concerns About Risk Of Loan
> 
> Email Concerned Timing Of Announcement, Not The Merit Of The Loan Guarantee. Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee released some of the context around this email, which was written by an analyst with the Office of Management and Budget, according to House Republicans. In response to an email about a potential announcement of the Solyndra loan during the President's visit to California on March 19, 2009, the analyst argued that the presidential announcement should not be made before the loan deal was completed. The email argued that "This deal is NOT ready for prime time" because there were more steps to be completed before the loan guarantee could be finalized -- namely, OMB had to review the credit rating and Solyndra needed to raise an additional $200 million in private capital. [House Energy and Commerce Republicans, 9/14/11]
> 
> Obama Did Not Announce A Deal During His March California Trip. On March 19, 2009, Obama visited California and held a town hall meeting in Los Angeles. He did not announce the Solyndra deal. The conditional commitment to Solyndra was issued on March 20 and announced by Energy Secretary Steven Chu in a press release. [Department of Energy, 3/20/09]
> 
> VP Announcement Came After Loan Guarantee Was Finalized In September. The Solyndra loan guarantee was formally issued by DOE on September 3, 2009. On September 4, Vice President Joe Biden announced the deal via satellite at the groundbreaking of the plant along with DOE's Chu and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was the Governor of California at the time. [Department of Energy, 9/4/09; Contra Costa Times, 9/5/09]
> 
> OMB Reviews Credit Subsidy Cost; It Does Not Select Loan Guarantee Recipients. From the Congressional testimony of Jeffrey Zients of the Office of Management and Budget:



Psst. It's from the link.


----------



## Full-Auto

ConservaDerrps said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solyndra? Pfffffffffffffft. You mean that shit that Bush started with his friends and then Obama renewed?
> 
> What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra | Research | Media Matters for America
> 
> I know, Gramps. "Media Matters? LOLBERAL! LIBTARD!! KENYA!"
> 
> zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The process they rejected, that Obama revived?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CLAIM: Email Saying Deal Was "NOT Ready For Prime Time" Was Warning About Financial Risk
> 
> ABC reported that internal emails "show the Obama administration was keenly monitoring the progress of the loan, even as analysts were voicing serious concerns about the risk involved. 'This deal is NOT ready for prime time,' one White House budget analyst wrote in a March 10, 2009 email, nine days before the administration formally announced the loan." [ABC News, 9/13/11]
> CNN claimed "prime time" email showed "some White House budget analysts questioned early on how financially sound Solyndra was." [CNN, CNN Newsroom, 9/15/11, via Nexis]
> Fox's Neil Cavuto: "Prime time" email was warning that "the loan could be very risky for taxpayers." [Fox News, Your World with Neil Cavuto, 9/14/11, via Nexis]
> Wash. Examiner: "Prime time" email showed "some officials in the Obama Administration thought the loan was a lousy idea." [Washington Examiner, 9/14/11]
> FACT: The Email Did Not Voice Any Concerns About Risk Of Loan
> 
> Email Concerned Timing Of Announcement, Not The Merit Of The Loan Guarantee. Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee released some of the context around this email, which was written by an analyst with the Office of Management and Budget, according to House Republicans. In response to an email about a potential announcement of the Solyndra loan during the President's visit to California on March 19, 2009, the analyst argued that the presidential announcement should not be made before the loan deal was completed. The email argued that "This deal is NOT ready for prime time" because there were more steps to be completed before the loan guarantee could be finalized -- namely, OMB had to review the credit rating and Solyndra needed to raise an additional $200 million in private capital. [House Energy and Commerce Republicans, 9/14/11]
> 
> Obama Did Not Announce A Deal During His March California Trip. On March 19, 2009, Obama visited California and held a town hall meeting in Los Angeles. He did not announce the Solyndra deal. The conditional commitment to Solyndra was issued on March 20 and announced by Energy Secretary Steven Chu in a press release. [Department of Energy, 3/20/09]
> 
> VP Announcement Came After Loan Guarantee Was Finalized In September. The Solyndra loan guarantee was formally issued by DOE on September 3, 2009. On September 4, Vice President Joe Biden announced the deal via satellite at the groundbreaking of the plant along with DOE's Chu and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was the Governor of California at the time. [Department of Energy, 9/4/09; Contra Costa Times, 9/5/09]
> 
> OMB Reviews Credit Subsidy Cost; It Does Not Select Loan Guarantee Recipients. From the Congressional testimony of Jeffrey Zients of the Office of Management and Budget:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Psst. It's from the link.
Click to expand...


Psst  I dont know anything about an email sent.

I do know the loan was revived. That the owners not losing any personal money was a political favor, that was not started by GWs admin........ 

Add the last count 15 others and a pattern forms.

Remain blind at your own peril.


----------



## buckeye45_73

ConservaDerrps said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, what examples do you have of this "rampant Crony Capitalism"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GE (paid no taxes and not a peep from the left....uh)
> Solyndra (Green jobs boondogle)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Solyndra? Pfffffffffffffft. You mean that shit that Bush started with his friends and then Obama renewed?
> 
> What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra | Research | Media Matters for America
> 
> I know, Gramps. "Media Matters? LOLBERAL! LIBTARD!! KENYA!"
> 
> zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Click to expand...

 
Dude stop posting Media matters, get a real source...or I'm going to start posting Glen Beck...you're such a sheep.......baaaaah media matters baaaaah george soros baaaaah 


Seven things you should know about Solyndra - Jun. 6, 2012

*It was started by Bush:* The DOE loan program that funded Solyndra was actually started by President Bush in 2005. It was intended to provide government support for "innovative technologies." 
*But the Bush administration never approved Solyndra's loan, saying the **application** needed more work.*


In other words Bush (you know the guy you call dumb) figured out it sucked, while the great scholar Obama (still no academic record...we really dont know yet) fell for the boondogle......and I'm sure media matters pointed out that nuance?


----------



## Lakhota

That Media Matters link is awesome!  It has all the facts and supporting proof.


----------



## buckeye45_73

Lakhota said:


> That Media Matters link is awesome! It has all the facts and supporting proof.


 


OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool


----------



## Lakhota

buckeye45_73 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome! It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool
Click to expand...


Big talk.  Disprove their facts and sources!


----------



## syrenn

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome! It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Big talk.  Disprove their facts and sources!
Click to expand...


----------



## buckeye45_73

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome! It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Big talk. Disprove their facts and sources!
Click to expand...

 

OMG the fact you just posted that, makes me think you are Dolly, the cloned sheep.....you really think Media Matters is a objective source? Oh that's right you use, Media Matters, Daily KOS and Huff Po........who are objective.....WOW.....so you think Harry Reid is a right wing republican, dont ya?


----------



## buckeye45_73

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome! It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Big talk. Disprove their facts and sources!
Click to expand...

 

Seriously though, how old are you, just hit me with a decade, I'm in my 30s, and you?


----------



## Lakhota

I'm 65.


----------



## Full-Auto

ConservaDerrps said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, do you happen to know how much money Haliburton made in the Iraq war?
> 
> Over 17 billion dollars. So you want to bitch about Obama's "Crony" capitalism? (which is total bullshit) Gee...who's got a big-ass chunk of Haliburton's stake, again? Oh yeah. Dick Cheney.
> 
> You're transparent, motherfucker.
> 
> 
> 
> So instead OPbama gave away billions in those contracts to his friends. I know I was slated to go until Obama took office.
> 
> You are not very smart using the lowest of standards.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have some links to these "billions" he's giving away to "his friends"?
Click to expand...


I think you can handle the search......  Green energy bankruptcies to start.


When you get through the last one, 16 I believe is the count we can then discuss it.


----------



## buckeye45_73

Lakhota said:


> I'm 65.


 

Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm


----------



## Lakhota

buckeye45_73 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 65.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm
Click to expand...


Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.

BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".

Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Wow, what a wishful thinking article.

Go to 270towin.com as it currently stands and light up Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa and Wisconsin (all very winnable states) and Romney hits 270. So he can win w/o even getting Ohio and Pennsylvania.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 65.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.
> 
> BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".
> 
> Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Dedicated to manipulating and distorting and non-liberal sanctioned news. It's quite hacky; it's perfect for you.


----------



## Charles_Main

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.
> 
> BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".
> 
> Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


If they wanted any Credibility at all they would be Dedicated to Correcting all Misinformation. The Fact they willfully admit they go only After what they Deem Conservative misinformation tells you all you need to know about them. They are a Hyper Partisan Propaganda machine. 

But feel free to keep drinking their Punch and Believing Obama is going to win in a Landslide if you want.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

buckeye45_73 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OMG you are such a leftwing piece of shit.....media matters is gayer than aids.....and it figures you would take them seriously......wow....you probably have never watched a second of Fox or listened to and talk radio other than Air AMerica....wow....you are a complete brainwashed fool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big talk. Disprove their facts and sources!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> OMG the fact you just posted that, makes me think you are Dolly, the cloned sheep.....you really think Media Matters is a objective source? Oh that's right you use, Media Matters, Daily KOS and Huff Po........who are objective.....WOW.....so you think Harry Reid is a right wing republican, dont ya?
Click to expand...


Know what I noticed? You didn't actually disprove their facts or sources. Though you sure did use a lot of words to make your massive turd of a fucking post.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



According to the house majority leader of the PA legislature, their voter suppression tactics should have the state locked up for Romney



> Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.



Turzai: Voter ID Law Means Romney Can Win in PA | PoliticsPA


----------



## bigrebnc1775

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to the house majority leader of the PA legislature, their voter suppression tactics should have the state locked up for Romney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Turzai: Voter ID Law Means Romney Can Win in PA | PoliticsPA
Click to expand...


One more time Requiring someone to show an ID before voting is not voter suppression. Why do I have to show an ID before I buy a gun? No where in the second Amendment does it say I must show an ID to have a gun.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Lakhota said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 65.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.
> 
> BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".
> 
> Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


A 65 year old is not going to use the word awesome when describing something good to them.



Lakhota said:


> That Media Matters link is awesome!  It has all the facts and supporting proof.


----------



## Charles_Main

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you're 65? and you think media matters is a real source of news? Something doesnt seem right here...hmmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.
> 
> BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".
> 
> Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A 65 year old is not going to use the word awesome when describing something good to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome!  It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Punk ass Liberal 20's Somethings are always running around lying about how old they are, How much they make, where they went to school, on Message Boards like this.

I am sure the Right does it as well, but I think because more Young People are Very Liberal, and Also Less mature, They tend to do it more.

This is not the First time I have seen I have personally thought Lakhota does not talk at all like an Older Person. sounds more like a cocky, Arrogant Collage age kid who thinks he knows it all.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to the house majority leader of the PA legislature, their voter suppression tactics should have the state locked up for Romney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Turzai: Voter ID Law Means Romney Can Win in PA | PoliticsPA
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One more time Requiring someone to show an ID before voting is not voter suppression.
Click to expand...

_*It is when the entire reason you decide to require it is because you know your political opponents are less likely to have one.
*_



> Why do I have to show an ID before I buy a gun? No where in the second Amendment does it say I must show an ID to have a gun.



So what?


----------



## auditor0007

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


If it's a close election, then Obama has a big advantage.  This is Obama's to lose.  If something drastic changes between now and election day, then Romney will win all those close states and he will pretty much win the way GW did.  Everyone knows he needs a near clean sweep of the swing states to pull it off.  In order to do that he needs to makes something happen that affects a lot of votes in all those swing states.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Wow, what a wishful thinking article.

Go to 270towin.com as it currently stands and light up Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa and Wisconsin (all very winnable states) and Romney hits 270. So he can win w/o even getting Ohio and Pennsylvania.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

OohPooPahDoo said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to the house majority leader of the PA legislature, their voter suppression tactics should have the state locked up for Romney
> 
> 
> 
> Turzai: Voter ID Law Means Romney Can Win in PA | PoliticsPA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more time Requiring someone to show an ID before voting is not voter suppression.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _*It is when the entire reason you decide to require it is because you know your political opponents are less likely to have one.
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do I have to show an ID before I buy a gun? No where in the second Amendment does it say I must show an ID to have a gun.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?
Click to expand...


What makes you think that you can read someones mind? Do you have evidence that agree's with your opinion? You got to show an ID to get and cash those government checks,


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Charles_Main said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, prove their facts and sources wrong and maybe I'll agree with you.
> 
> BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".
> 
> Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 65 year old is not going to use the word awesome when describing something good to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Media Matters link is awesome!  It has all the facts and supporting proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Punk ass Liberal 20's Somethings are always running around lying about how old they are, How much they make, where they went to school, on Message Boards like this.
> 
> I am sure the Right does it as well, but I think because more Young People are Very Liberal, and Also Less mature, They tend to do it more.
> 
> This is not the First time I have seen I have personally thought Lakhota does not talk at all like an Older Person. sounds more like a cocky, Arrogant Collage age kid who thinks he knows it all.
Click to expand...


True true and true.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

One more thing Lakota The Gerontologist is not your friend when you claim to be an age and use certain words that does not fit your age group.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> One more time Requiring someone to show an ID before voting is not voter suppression.
> 
> 
> 
> _*It is when the entire reason you decide to require it is because you know your political opponents are less likely to have one.
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do I have to show an ID before I buy a gun? No where in the second Amendment does it say I must show an ID to have a gun.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What makes you think that you can read someones mind? Do you have evidence that agree's with your opinion?
Click to expand...

This



> "Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done." - PA House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny)





> You got to show an ID to get and cash those government checks,



So what?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

OohPooPahDoo said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*It is when the entire reason you decide to require it is because you know your political opponents are less likely to have one.
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> So what?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think that you can read someones mind? Do you have evidence that agree's with your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done." - PA House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You got to show an ID to get and cash those government checks,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?
Click to expand...




> Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania done." - PA House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny)


So what it's an opinion  of what someone said  which means nothing like the below will mean nothing to you also.


> Turzai spokesman Stephen Miskin said voter fraud is a real problem.


----------



## buckeye45_73

BTW, Media Matters is not a "news" organization - it's a media watchdog group "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and *correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media*".

DEAD giveaway......ding ding ding.....they dont even hide it....like CBS or NBC.....Sorry but the sources you use are highly ideological and partisan....that's why I dont post Rush Limbuagh, Glen Beck, Red State and Media Research Center......they may very well be true, but it's not serious...


----------



## Interpol

Somebody said earlier that this is Obama's election to lose. 

I beg to differ. It's Mitt Romney's election to lose. 

8.3% unemployment, an ever-growing unpopular war in Afghanistan, a $15 trillion dollar debt headed for $16, a double-dip recession in Europe and a slowdown in China that have helped to cause our recovery to be a fragile one, uncertainty about the direction of our country. 

An independent vote of about 6 to 8% that is up in the air and hasn't come down on one side of the fence yet. 

On top of that, Romney has more money in his war chest than Obama. 

And he's the business guy who should be scoring huge points with a narrative that says he will do with America what he's done with his portfolio, which is fill it with wealth and prosperity. 

Sorry, but if you can't win with all that at your back, than there's something wrong with ya. 

This is Romney's to lose. All the conditions are ripe to make Obama a one-termer. 

The first order of business you have to show to people when it comes to making them think about you as a possible Commander-In-Chief is how you conduct the business of running for President, which includes your effectiveness at communicating a narrative that sticks with the average person, in controlling that narrative and framing the national debate, at picking the right VP choice to compliment the ticket, rallying the troops at the convention, and then, your debate performances. 

So far, Mitt Romney is doing surprisingly awful at the business of running for President since he has been the presumptive nominee the past 3 months. He doesn't appear to have any kind of narrative. From one event to the other, he says what specific crowds want to hear, often changing his positions. 

And every other day it seems like he says something uninformed or confused and then has to come back out several times to explain and re-explain, ad nauseum. 

There is a business aspect to all this that he understood quite well when he totally demolished his Republican competitors earlier this year, but since he's entered the big dance, it actually seems like he doesn't like being in the spotlight. 

When he gets asked common sense questions that are challenging, he gives the impression that he either doesn't want to be there or that he feels entitled and shouldn't have to answer the questions. 

That's troublesome to me. I don't care what party you represent. When you run for something, it needs to show that you want it bad. You really have to have the fire for it. 

He's not like that. He just seems to think he's entitled to it and shouldn't have to go through the tedious process of being grilled about stuff like his own personal taxes, which is so routinely taken care of by all presidential candidates since time immemorial since they reveal years of them. 

It's bad business when you can't get your message out because you're constantly having to defend stuff that should have been taken care of long ago. 

It's bad business when you start getting into a 3 or a 4 day feud with the Senate Majority Leader. Harry Reid isn't Romney's opponent. The President is. 

It's also bad business with people like moderate women I know who really can relate to the latest Obama ads criticizing Romney for wanting to take us back to the 1950's when he picks a fight with them about Planned Parenthood. 

I know people who use PP who've never had abortions and Romney's comments are disturbing. It's bad business for him that he seems unaware of the fact that 10 million more women will be voting in this election than men, and they make up the bulk of that 6-8% of undecideds. 

The polls in OH, FL, CO, VA lean Obama to this point, but not by much. They should be places where Mitt is scoring points right now, but he's not. He needs to flip three of those just to make this an electoral college race, or forget about it.


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Liability, the skewing toward Democrats in polling has definitively been defeated elsewhere above.
> 
> Either the TPM gets squarely behind Romney on the issues the way he wants, or the TPM may well cost him the votes in the swing states.
> 
> What do you want: Romney victory or TPM ideological purity?  You can't have both.



Isn't it kind of incumbant on Romney to lead the Tea Party, not necessarily for the TEA Party to follow?  

Ultimately, he's the one who has to set the agenda, not the other way around. 

WMR: "OOOOOOHhhhhh, Please, guys you're making me look bad".

TPM "Ummm, no, Guy, you are doing that all by yourself."


----------



## JakeStarkey

Believe me, JoeB, no one thinks it is incumbent to do anything but laugh at your advice for the GOP.


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Believe me, JoeB, no one thinks it is incumbent to do anything but laugh at your advice for the GOP.



The RCP Average has him running three points behind Obama.   He'd lose the electoral college 332-206 and Intrade has him below 40 again.  

Now, I know that when he loses, you are going to blame the TEA Party for his loss.  And although I have as much love for the TPM as you do, I'm at least honest enough to admit Romney's biggest problem right now is Romney.  

People just don't like or trust him, and the only thing that animates his campaign at all is a bad economy and racism.  

If Obama had Bill Clinton's economy and skin tone, this would be a blow-out.


----------



## JakeStarkey

JoeB, we all know that you hate Mormonism because you are ex-Mormon.  Just let it go.


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> JoeB, we all know that you hate Mormonism because you are ex-Mormon.  Just let it go.



Duly noted you couldn't asnwer the point... 

I told you a year ago he was a bad pick.  

You refused to listen.  Now he's trailing badly, and the media hasn't even gotten started on him yet.  

When Romney loses in November, will you finally admit he was a bad pick, or will you just blame the Tea Party?  I'm guessing the latter.


----------



## copsnrobbers

I think this is our election to win.. Just get out and vote.

Kick those bastard Dems the hell out.


----------



## Warrior102

Obama in a landslide?

Where?

Sudan? 

France?


----------



## Mr. Shaman

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!*and still be reelected.*​
Click to expand...









[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcqDBT37SQ]World Reacts to Obama Victory - YouTube[/ame]

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxDgRr_Ynvc&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLA11972639E54C010]Right America Feeling Wronged pt1 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## EriktheRed

Interpol said:


> Somebody said earlier that this is Obama's election to lose.
> 
> I beg to differ. It's Mitt Romney's election to lose.
> 
> 8.3% unemployment, an ever-growing unpopular war in Afghanistan, a $15 trillion dollar debt headed for $16, a double-dip recession in Europe and a slowdown in China that have helped to cause our recovery to be a fragile one, uncertainty about the direction of our country.
> 
> An independent vote of about 6 to 8% that is up in the air and hasn't come down on one side of the fence yet.
> 
> On top of that, Romney has more money in his war chest than Obama.
> 
> And he's the business guy who should be scoring huge points with a narrative that says he will do with America what he's done with his portfolio, which is fill it with wealth and prosperity.
> 
> Sorry, but if you can't win with all that at your back, than there's something wrong with ya.
> 
> This is Romney's to lose. All the conditions are ripe to make Obama a one-termer.
> 
> The first order of business you have to show to people when it comes to making them think about you as a possible Commander-In-Chief is how you conduct the business of running for President, which includes your effectiveness at communicating a narrative that sticks with the average person, in controlling that narrative and framing the national debate, at picking the right VP choice to compliment the ticket, rallying the troops at the convention, and then, your debate performances.
> 
> So far, Mitt Romney is doing surprisingly awful at the business of running for President since he has been the presumptive nominee the past 3 months. He doesn't appear to have any kind of narrative. From one event to the other, he says what specific crowds want to hear, often changing his positions.
> 
> And every other day it seems like he says something uninformed or confused and then has to come back out several times to explain and re-explain, ad nauseum.
> 
> There is a business aspect to all this that he understood quite well when he totally demolished his Republican competitors earlier this year, but since he's entered the big dance, it actually seems like he doesn't like being in the spotlight.
> 
> When he gets asked common sense questions that are challenging, he gives the impression that he either doesn't want to be there or that he feels entitled and shouldn't have to answer the questions.
> 
> That's troublesome to me. I don't care what party you represent. When you run for something, it needs to show that you want it bad. You really have to have the fire for it.
> 
> He's not like that. He just seems to think he's entitled to it and shouldn't have to go through the tedious process of being grilled about stuff like his own personal taxes, which is so routinely taken care of by all presidential candidates since time immemorial since they reveal years of them.
> 
> It's bad business when you can't get your message out because you're constantly having to defend stuff that should have been taken care of long ago.
> 
> It's bad business when you start getting into a 3 or a 4 day feud with the Senate Majority Leader. Harry Reid isn't Romney's opponent. The President is.
> 
> It's also bad business with people like moderate women I know who really can relate to the latest Obama ads criticizing Romney for wanting to take us back to the 1950's when he picks a fight with them about Planned Parenthood.
> 
> I know people who use PP who've never had abortions and Romney's comments are disturbing. It's bad business for him that he seems unaware of the fact that 10 million more women will be voting in this election than men, and they make up the bulk of that 6-8% of undecideds.
> 
> The polls in OH, FL, CO, VA lean Obama to this point, but not by much. They should be places where Mitt is scoring points right now, but he's not. He needs to flip three of those just to make this an electoral college race, or forget about it.


----------



## OODA_Loop

JakeStarkey said:


> JoeB, we all know that you hate Mormonism because you are ex-Mormon.  Just let it go.


[/QUOTE]

Joe is anything he needs to be at the moment.

His life is nothing but direct examples of every talking point or to counter talking points.


----------



## Nova78

*4 more years of Obama and you will be begging for Romeny........*


----------



## Nova78

*Expect to see Obama to fall apart in any debate , no TelePrompter's allowed...*


----------



## WillowTree

The dumb ass media should pick on Romney hard. Real hard. and it will cost obummer the election Romney will be "chick fil A" king. 




keep acting like assholes, the whole nation is fed up with it. Eat more chikken.


----------



## JoeB131

Nova78 said:


> *Expect to see Obama to fall apart in any debate , no TelePrompter's allowed...*View attachment 20344
> 
> []



Funny, I seem to remember Obama doing very well in debates against Hillary Clinton and John McCain, both very skilled debators.  

Romney struggled against Newt and Rick Santorum.


----------



## JoeB131

OODA_Loop said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB, we all know that you hate Mormonism because you are ex-Mormon.  Just let it go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe is anything he needs to be at the moment.
> 
> His life is nothing but direct examples of every talking point or to counter talking points.
Click to expand...


Well, yeah, it's called life experience.  I'd suggest moving out of your parent's basement and getting some.


----------



## there4eyeM

"Romney struggled against Newt and Rick Santorum."

!

But then, what happened to Gore against 'W'? How could anyone lose to that - what would you call him? Nincompoop?

One would not need to be a hardened word warrior to triumph over an illiterate.


----------



## WillowTree

There's a "Romney In A Landslide" down in "General Discussions" 







why the disparity?


----------



## JoeB131

there4eyeM said:


> "Romney struggled against Newt and Rick Santorum."
> 
> !



Since you are relatively new here, what is your problem with this statement?  

Newt won an upset in South Carolina.  Rick Santorum won an upset in Iowa, then went on to win upsets all across the country.  And if his daughter hadn't gotten sick, he might have fought Romney the whole way.  

Keep in mind, I was specifically talking about the Debates, where Rick and Newt were pleasing the crowd, while there was always a feeling that Romney was faking it.  

Now Romney prevailed, mostly because he outspent those guys by a 10-1 margin and they really weren't great shakes to start with. So Republicans took the Dole/McCain approach of nominating Romney because he was "electable"...  not because they were enthusiastic about him.  

case in point. I live in Dupage County, IL. Pretty much the strongest GOP stronghold in a blue state.  During the IL Primary, I didn't see one Romney sign.  (Which is a disappointment, I was looking forward to vandalizing them) Lots of Santorum signs.


----------



## Greenbeard

bripat9643 said:


> Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.



Here's the problem. Obama and the Democrats have been outspent on advertising by Romney and the Republicans all month.



> *Team Romney&#8217;s big ad-spending advantage:* While it&#8217;s technically correct that the Obama campaign is outspending the Romney campaign in TV advertising in the battleground states, you can&#8217;t say the same thing when adding all the outside groups. Right now, Team Romney -- the campaign, the RNC, and all the GOP-leaning outside groups -- is outspending Team Obama (campaign, DNC, outside groups) this week by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, $25 million to $14 million. That $25 million, in fact, is more than we&#8217;ve seen from one side during any other week this cycle. Here&#8217;s the full breakdown on this week&#8217;s ad spending (from July 30 to Aug. 5), according to data from SMG Delta: Obama $12.8 million, Crossroads GPS $9.7 million, Romney $8.1 million, Restore Our Future $3.8 million, RNC $2.5 million, Priorities USA $1 million, American Crossroads $940,000. Note that Crossroads GPS is outspending the Romney camp right now, and the Koch Brothers&#8217; Americans for Prosperity has booked a multimillion buy slated to begin next week.
> 
> *And it&#8217;s been that way for the past month:* What&#8217;s more, Team Romney has enjoyed this ad-spending edge for much of the past month. Last week (starting July 23), for example, it was Team Romney&#8217;s $22 million vs. Team Obama&#8217;s nearly $15 million; the week before that (July 16), it was Team Romney&#8217;s $19 million vs. Team Obama&#8217;s $10 million; and the week before that (July 9), it was Team Romney&#8217;s $13 million vs. Team Obama&#8217;s $9 million. You have to go back to July 2 to see when there was true parity between the two advertising forces. So while some -- like Karl Rove in today&#8217;s Wall Street Journal -- might observe that the Obama campaign&#8217;s ad spending hasn&#8217;t really moved the needle, you could also make another argument. For the past month, Team Romney has enjoyed a sizable ad-spending advantage, and that hasn&#8217;t moved the needle, either. (And considering what&#8217;s popping inside some of the polls, you can make an argument that Team Obama appears to be, for now, getting more bang for its buck.)



The difference, as we found out earlier last month, is that Obama's ads are much, much more effective than those of Romney and the Super PACs:



> At this point, Obama is the clear winner in the ad wars. Among swing-state voters who say the ads have changed their minds about a candidate, rather than just confirmed what they already thought, 76% now support the president, vs. 16% favoring Romney.



This appears to be manifesting itself in the swing state polls, where Obama now has the lead in virtually every one (except North Carolina).

If you're waiting for anti-Obama groups and the Romney campaign to unload on Obama and if you're waiting for anti-Obama ads to outnumber anti-Romney ads in key states, you can stop waiting. That's been happening all along.


----------



## there4eyeM

JoeB131 said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Romney struggled against Newt and Rick Santorum."
> 
> !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are relatively new here, what is your problem with this statement?
> 
> Newt won an upset in South Carolina.  Rick Santorum won an upset in Iowa, then went on to win upsets all across the country.  And if his daughter hadn't gotten sick, he might have fought Romney the whole way.
> 
> Keep in mind, I was specifically talking about the Debates, where Rick and Newt were pleasing the crowd, while there was always a feeling that Romney was faking it.
> 
> Now Romney prevailed, mostly because he outspent those guys by a 10-1 margin and they really weren't great shakes to start with. So Republicans took the Dole/McCain approach of nominating Romney because he was "electable"...  not because they were enthusiastic about him.
> 
> case in point. I live in Dupage County, IL. Pretty much the strongest GOP stronghold in a blue state.  During the IL Primary, I didn't see one Romney sign.  (Which is a disappointment, I was looking forward to vandalizing them) Lots of Santorum signs.
Click to expand...


Mighty touchy! Guess it is because of such vociferous opposition.

The '!' was meant as affirmation, as in 'even with those inepts'. I agree.

Obama is probably a better debater than they and most likely better than Romney.


----------



## Misty

Don't buy into the propaganda that Obama will win in a landslide. They use this same line every year to discourage republicans from voting


----------



## EriktheRed

Greenbeard said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama spent $137 million on negative advertising last month.  That's all that shows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the problem. Obama and the Democrats have been outspent on advertising by Romney and the Republicans all month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Team Romneys big ad-spending advantage:* While its technically correct that the Obama campaign is outspending the Romney campaign in TV advertising in the battleground states, you cant say the same thing when adding all the outside groups. Right now, Team Romney -- the campaign, the RNC, and all the GOP-leaning outside groups -- is outspending Team Obama (campaign, DNC, outside groups) this week by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, $25 million to $14 million. That $25 million, in fact, is more than weve seen from one side during any other week this cycle. Heres the full breakdown on this weeks ad spending (from July 30 to Aug. 5), according to data from SMG Delta: Obama $12.8 million, Crossroads GPS $9.7 million, Romney $8.1 million, Restore Our Future $3.8 million, RNC $2.5 million, Priorities USA $1 million, American Crossroads $940,000. Note that Crossroads GPS is outspending the Romney camp right now, and the Koch Brothers Americans for Prosperity has booked a multimillion buy slated to begin next week.
> 
> *And its been that way for the past month:* Whats more, Team Romney has enjoyed this ad-spending edge for much of the past month. Last week (starting July 23), for example, it was Team Romneys $22 million vs. Team Obamas nearly $15 million; the week before that (July 16), it was Team Romneys $19 million vs. Team Obamas $10 million; and the week before that (July 9), it was Team Romneys $13 million vs. Team Obamas $9 million. You have to go back to July 2 to see when there was true parity between the two advertising forces. So while some -- like Karl Rove in todays Wall Street Journal -- might observe that the Obama campaigns ad spending hasnt really moved the needle, you could also make another argument. For the past month, Team Romney has enjoyed a sizable ad-spending advantage, and that hasnt moved the needle, either. (And considering whats popping inside some of the polls, you can make an argument that Team Obama appears to be, for now, getting more bang for its buck.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The difference, as we found out earlier last month, is that Obama's ads are much, much more effective than those of Romney and the Super PACs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point, Obama is the clear winner in the ad wars. Among swing-state voters who say the ads have changed their minds about a candidate, rather than just confirmed what they already thought, 76% now support the president, vs. 16% favoring Romney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This appears to be manifesting itself in the swing state polls, where Obama now has the lead in virtually every one (except North Carolina).
> 
> If you're waiting for anti-Obama groups and the Romney campaign to unload on Obama and if you're waiting for anti-Obama ads to outnumber anti-Romney ads in key states, you can stop waiting. That's been happening all along.
Click to expand...


Another thing to consider is that it ain't all about ads...




> Since the beginning of last year, Mr. Obama and the Democrats have burned through millions of dollars to find and register voters. They have spent almost $50 million subsidizing Democratic state parties to hire workers, pay for cellphones and update voter lists. They have spent tens of millions of dollars on polling, online advertising and software development to turn Mr. Obamas fallow volunteers corps into a grass-roots army.



http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/u...g-by-obamas-camp-shrinks-coffers.html?_r=2&hp


----------



## Katzndogz

Food and gas prices are on the rise.  Unemployment is on the rise.   Production is at a crawl.  

Yeah obama in a landslide.

He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.


----------



## Greenbeard

Katzndogz said:


> He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.



You're missing the point of the OP. The article is focusing on the fact that "horse race" coverage often focuses on the latest national polling numbers, where Obama has a slim lead. However, presidents are elected via the Electoral College, which today means we essentially aggregate state-level popular votes.

And Obama is outperforming his national numbers in key swing states. So "he's below 50%, this could slip either way!" coverage and reactions ignore the fact that, for now at least, Obama is dominating the Electoral College.

Certainly that could change and folks can debate how likely that is to change. But the fact remains that Romney supporters _do_ have to hope that something changes because if  things continue as they have then Obama will win. And he'll win convincingly in the Electoral College, even if the popular vote numbers make it look a little closer.


----------



## ConservaDerrps

Katzndogz said:


> Food and gas prices are on the rise.  Unemployment is on the rise.   Production is at a crawl.
> 
> Yeah obama in a landslide.
> 
> He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.



Gas prices are way down. 

You have ODS big time.

Stop posting about it.

You're looking stupid.

And I have to type one sentence at a time.

Because you're so slow.


----------



## Liability

ConservaDerrps said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Food and gas prices are on the rise.  Unemployment is on the rise.   Production is at a crawl.
> 
> Yeah obama in a landslide.
> 
> He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices are way down.
> 
> You have ODS big time.
> 
> Stop posting about it.
> 
> You're looking stupid.
> 
> And I have to type one sentence at a time.
> 
> Because you're so slow.
Click to expand...



Gas prices in the NYC metro area are close to 4 fucking dollars a fucking gallon.

WTF do you pretend to "mean" when you claim gas prices are "down?"

You idiot.

Gas prices are only "down" in some recent weeks *from the fucking HIGH they reached under the Obama Administration.* http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_NUS_DPG&f=W

You Obamaphiles just can't suck his dick enough, regardless of how much you have to spin.    That's a polite way of calling you on your outright lie, you fuckwit.


----------



## JakeStarkey

We spent $3.09 a gallon yesterday in Utah, where the average price is $3.29.  It is $3.45 in Houston, $3.27 in New Orleans, $3.33 in Pensacola, and $3.24 in Mobile.  That is where we normally buy gas.


----------



## Liability

JakeStarkey said:


> We spent $3.09 a gallon yesterday in Utah, where the average price is $3.29.  It is $3.45 in Houston, $3.27 in New Orleans, $3.33 in Pensacola, and $3.24 in Mobile.  That is where we normally buy gas.



And?


----------



## Katzndogz

Liability said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Food and gas prices are on the rise.  Unemployment is on the rise.   Production is at a crawl.
> 
> Yeah obama in a landslide.
> 
> He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices are way down.
> 
> You have ODS big time.
> 
> Stop posting about it.
> 
> You're looking stupid.
> 
> And I have to type one sentence at a time.
> 
> Because you're so slow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices in the NYC metro area are close to 4 fucking dollars a fucking gallon.
> 
> WTF do you pretend to "mean" when you claim gas prices are "down?"
> 
> You idiot.
> 
> Gas prices are only "down" in some recent weeks *from the fucking HIGH they reached under the Obama Administration.* Weekly U.S. Regular All Formulations Retail Gasoline Prices (Dollars per Gallon)
> 
> You Obamaphiles just can't suck his dick enough, regardless of how much you have to spin.    That's a polite way of calling you on your outright lie, you fuckwit.
Click to expand...


Gas prices are down from what they were, but rising quickly.  The trend is back up.  If you notice a 5 cent per gallon reduction is dramatic, but a 23 cent increase is minor.  The gas prices never got close to what they were, even what they were before the recent spike.


----------



## Full-Auto

Katzndogz said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices are way down.
> 
> You have ODS big time.
> 
> Stop posting about it.
> 
> You're looking stupid.
> 
> And I have to type one sentence at a time.
> 
> Because you're so slow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices in the NYC metro area are close to 4 fucking dollars a fucking gallon.
> 
> WTF do you pretend to "mean" when you claim gas prices are "down?"
> 
> You idiot.
> 
> Gas prices are only "down" in some recent weeks *from the fucking HIGH they reached under the Obama Administration.* Weekly U.S. Regular All Formulations Retail Gasoline Prices (Dollars per Gallon)
> 
> You Obamaphiles just can't suck his dick enough, regardless of how much you have to spin.    That's a polite way of calling you on your outright lie, you fuckwit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Gas prices are down from what they were, but rising quickly.  The trend is back up.  If you notice a 5 cent per gallon reduction is dramatic, but a 23 cent increase is minor.  The gas prices never got close to what they were, even what they were before the recent spike.
Click to expand...


I would personally like to thank democrats for paying 47 cents more per gallon then anywhere else in the states.  The concern about raising the gas tax on the poor was overwhelming...as you raised it......


----------



## Rinata

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



A landslide would be nice, but I think you're right. I think he will win and it will be a decent victory.


----------



## Full-Auto

Rinata said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it won&#8217;t be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A landslide would be nice, but I think you're right. I think he will win and it will be a decent victory.
Click to expand...


Amazing the number of people supporting the murder of a border agent isnt it?


----------



## Rinata

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


What a good article!!! I don't think there will be a landslide for the prez, but I like hearing this.


----------



## candycorn

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!


----------



## Full-Auto

candycorn said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
Click to expand...


Maybe you guys could slip in some more funding for fast and furious.......

Yes just great.....Following the party line. 



Determined to double our debt again in 4 more. Damn it I deserve free health care. I deserve you paying more to lower my costs.


Yes wonderful....................


----------



## Clementine

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is almost better in a lot of ways.
Click to expand...


Usually, that would be a good thing, but Obama has been pushing things through without congress.   I think he knows that he may end up with more Republicans, which is probably why he has been practicing doing things on his own or through his czars and other appointees.   He will do anything to carry on with his radical agenda and neither voters or congress will get in his way.


----------



## candycorn

Full-Auto said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe you guys could slip in some more funding for fast and furious.......
> Yes just great.....Following the party line.
> Determined to double our debt again in 4 more. Damn it I deserve free health care. I deserve you paying more to lower my costs.
> Yes wonderful....................
Click to expand...


You sound like a defeated man; reality setting in already in early August.

Yes wonderful...................


----------



## Inthemiddle

Obama is going to seal the deal with a surprise announcement next week, with Joe Biden being replaced as the VP nominee for Condoleeza Rice.


----------



## Zander

candycorn said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
Click to expand...


Snowe in Mass?


----------



## Amazed

Zander said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Snowe in Mass?
Click to expand...


I saw it too...this is a gal that thinks Stalin is a rightie..waddaya expect?


----------



## Zander

Amazed said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Snowe in Mass?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I saw it too...this is a gal that thinks Stalin is a rightie..waddaya expect?
Click to expand...


She's a know-it-all that knows very little. Next she'll want to make a bet.......


----------



## JoeB131

candycorn said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, *Snowe* is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
Click to expand...


Slight correction, I think you mean Warren has a chance to upset Brown.  

RCP has 47 sure seats for the Dems, 45 for the GOP with  6 Dem seats and 3 Rep seats in the toss up column.  So the GOP SHOULD have taken the senate that year, but they seem intent on blowing that one, too. 

One of the REp seats that is up is Indiana, a sure thing until the Teabaggers drove out Dick Lugar for not being crazy enough.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Liability said:


> ConservaDerrps said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Food and gas prices are on the rise.  Unemployment is on the rise.   Production is at a crawl.
> 
> Yeah obama in a landslide.
> 
> He's slipping already.  He's below 50% and that doesn't spell landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices are way down.
> 
> You have ODS big time.
> 
> Stop posting about it.
> 
> You're looking stupid.
> 
> And I have to type one sentence at a time.
> 
> Because you're so slow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Gas prices in the NYC metro area are close to 4 fucking dollars a fucking gallon.
> 
> WTF do you pretend to "mean" when you claim gas prices are "down?"
> 
> You idiot.
> 
> Gas prices are only "down" in some recent weeks *from the fucking HIGH they reached under the Obama Administration.* Weekly U.S. Regular All Formulations Retail Gasoline Prices (Dollars per Gallon)
> 
> You Obamaphiles just can't suck his dick enough, regardless of how much you have to spin.    That's a polite way of calling you on your outright lie, you fuckwit.
Click to expand...


Gas prices are now about $3.50, a far cry from the $4.11 record high under Bush.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

I love that libs here are trying to sell us on the GOP taking the Senate. Nobody really knows. But they want people to think well if the GOP has the Senate then it'd be a good balance for Obama to have the WH. No__ Obama's a fuck-up no matter what.


----------



## Amazed

Zander said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zander said:
> 
> 
> 
> Snowe in Mass?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I saw it too...this is a gal that thinks Stalin is a rightie..waddaya expect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She's a know-it-all that knows very little. Next she'll want to make a bet.......
Click to expand...


Well she has already done that


----------



## JoeB131

TheGreatGatsby said:


> I love that libs here are trying to sell us on the GOP taking the Senate. Nobody really knows. But they want people to think well if the GOP has the Senate then it'd be a good balance for Obama to have the WH. No__ Obama's a fuck-up no matter what.



Actually, by all rights, the GOP should take the Senate.  All the seats they won in 2006 are now up.  

But they aren't.  They may well lose three seats- Nevada, Indiana and Massachusetts.  the lost Maine, which should have been an easy retain for them. 

They had a chance in Michigan, until the Teabagger candidate decided to run an offensive racist commercial. 

My predictions.

Obama wins re-election, with every state he won in 2008 except NC and IN. 

Dems retain the Senate.  

Dems take back 10 seats in the House, minimum.


----------



## candycorn

Zander said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Snowe is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Snowe in Mass?
Click to expand...


My bad; Warren.


----------



## candycorn

Amazed said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Senate is starting to tighten up actually.  Snowe leaving has allowed the governor of Maine to get the seat; he'll caucus with the Democrats.  In Mass, Warren is likely to upset Brown.  Amazingly (with a ton of undecideds), John Kyl's seat may become a blue seat.  That would be great!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Snowe in Mass?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I saw it too...this is a gal that thinks Stalin is a rightie..waddaya expect?
Click to expand...


I don't think I ever said that; just that Stalin and the right wing love brinksmanship (to put it kindly) over negotiation.  I showed examples and you of course had nothing to say.


----------



## Lakhota

Yep, Paul Ryan will assure Obama another FOUR YEARS in the White House.  Thanks, Mitt.


----------



## Chris

Lakhota said:


> Yep, Paul Ryan will assure Obama another FOUR YEARS in the White House.  Thanks, Mitt.



True.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Chris said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, Paul Ryan will assure Obama another FOUR YEARS in the White House.  Thanks, Mitt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True.
Click to expand...


One more of you nutters and you'll have an official circle jerk.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

JoeB131 said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love that libs here are trying to sell us on the GOP taking the Senate. Nobody really knows. But they want people to think well if the GOP has the Senate then it'd be a good balance for Obama to have the WH. No__ Obama's a fuck-up no matter what.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, by all rights, the GOP should take the Senate.  All the seats they won in 2006 are now up.
> 
> But they aren't.  They may well lose three seats- Nevada, Indiana and Massachusetts.  the lost Maine, which should have been an easy retain for them.
> 
> They had a chance in Michigan, until the Teabagger candidate decided to run an offensive racist commercial.
> 
> My predictions.
> 
> Obama wins re-election, with every state he won in 2008 except NC and IN.
> 
> Dems retain the Senate.
> 
> Dems take back 10 seats in the House, minimum.
Click to expand...


You're that sure that Obama will take Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico and New Hampshire?

I think you're the teabagger. Cos you're all over Obama's nuts with that prediction.


----------



## Chris

I was really worried Romney would pick Portman.

That was his only real chance.

Now he is toast.


----------



## courseofhistory

Now that Ryan seems to be Romney's pick, Obama will win a landslide!  This sr. citizen won't be voting for Romney for certain!


----------



## Lakhota

> Over the next three months, expect to hear a lot of variations on this analysis, from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:
> 
> Chairman Ryans sweeping budget plan has been labeled courageous, but its a cowardly budget in a crucial respect. It proposes a dramatic reverse-Robin-Hood approach that gets the lions share of its budget cuts from programs for low-income Americans  the politically and economically weakest group in America and the politically safest group for Ryan to target even as it bestows extremely large tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans. Taken together, its proposals would produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history, while increasing poverty and inequality more than any measure in recent times and possibly in the nations history.​



More: Paul Ryan to Be Romney's Running Mate | Mother Jones


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

TheGreatGatsby said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love that libs here are trying to sell us on the GOP taking the Senate. Nobody really knows. But they want people to think well if the GOP has the Senate then it'd be a good balance for Obama to have the WH. No__ Obama's a fuck-up no matter what.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, by all rights, the GOP should take the Senate.  All the seats they won in 2006 are now up.
> 
> But they aren't.  They may well lose three seats- Nevada, Indiana and Massachusetts.  the lost Maine, which should have been an easy retain for them.
> 
> They had a chance in Michigan, until the Teabagger candidate decided to run an offensive racist commercial.
> 
> My predictions.
> 
> Obama wins re-election, with every state he won in 2008 except NC and IN.
> 
> Dems retain the Senate.
> 
> Dems take back 10 seats in the House, minimum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're that sure that Obama will take Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico and New Hampshire?
> 
> I think you're the teabagger. Cos you're all over Obama's nuts with that prediction.
Click to expand...


Perhaps you can create for us, using an EC map and current state by state polling data, a scenario resulting in a Romney win.   

But republicans will win the Senate, by about 4 seats; of course the GOP has no interest in running Congress, and will be of little consolation.


----------



## Lakhota

Obama will remain in the White House!


----------



## zonly1

more doodad pro and goodwill hunting campaign contributions from overseas.


----------



## zonly1

Lakhota said:


> Obama will remain in the White House!



and this country will be more in debt with less liberties from the keysian transplant.

start with 1st amendment and 2nd amendment with eliminating president to two terms to push for inifinite time in office.


----------



## Lakhota

Obama didn't create this mess.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## California Girl

Lakhota said:


> Obama didn't create this mess.



No, he didn't. But he was so busy with his fucking healthcare debacle that he sure as fuck hasn't helped. What started this was the scrapping of Glass-Steagal. And that was Clinton. Just sayin'. Of course, being a rational being, I know that it took a bipartisan clusterfuck to lead us here... and it will take a bipartisan approach to fix it... but Obama's idea of bipartisanship is 'I won'. One of the many reasons that I'll be voting for Romney.

Oh, and... for the record... cartoons are not 'political discussion'. You make yourself look stupid, no one needs to assist you. Fool.


----------



## JoeB131

TheGreatGatsby said:


> You're that sure that Obama will take Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico and New Hampshire?
> 
> I think you're the teabagger. Cos you're all over Obama's nuts with that prediction.



He'd win all of them today... 

And Romney seems to be folding like a cheap suit right now. Picking Ryan?  That's kind of sad and pathetic.  If you are still trying to placate your base with a Veep Pick at this point, you are struggling.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

California Girl said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, he didn't. But he was so busy with his fucking healthcare debacle that he sure as fuck hasn't helped. What started this was the scrapping of Glass-Steagal. And that was Clinton. Just sayin'. Of course, being a rational being, I know that it took a bipartisan clusterfuck to lead us here... and it will take a bipartisan approach to fix it... but Obama's idea of bipartisanship is 'I won'. One of the many reasons that I'll be voting for Romney.
> 
> Oh, and... for the record... cartoons are not 'political discussion'. You make yourself look stupid, no one needs to assist you. Fool.
Click to expand...


Obama didn't create this mess? I beg to differ. He had some help though; Wilson, FDR, Johnson, Clinton. And I'm sure there's plenty of Republicrats to blame as well. Anyways, Obama not creating this mess is not a reason to vote for him. If he can't fix the problem then there's no use for him.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Chris said:


> I was really worried Romney would pick Portman.
> 
> That was his only real chance.
> 
> Now he is toast.



Yea, a low profile Congressman from Ohio was gonna do it.  Ryan is hardcore. Deal with it.


----------



## Katzndogz

No matter who was picked, democrats would say it was a terrible choice and it's obama in a landslide.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Katzndogz said:


> No matter who was picked, democrats would say it was a terrible choice and it's obama in a landslide.



Yup. Libtards and hardcore Dem Socialists are nothing but spinsters.


----------



## HUGGY

*Obama in a Landslide? 
*

As of last night.

There is no reasonable doubt.

The conz won't even be able to steal this election.  

Grand parents would be out in the streets rioting.

RobMeHood is toast.


----------



## Katzndogz

No doubt about it, obama has the whore vote and the senile vote locked up.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

HUGGY said:


> *Obama in a Landslide?
> *
> 
> As of last night.
> 
> There is no reasonable doubt.
> 
> The conz won't even be able to steal this election.
> 
> Grand parents would be out in the streets rioting.
> 
> RobMeHood is toast.



Given how many trillions, Obama has stolen from the American people; I think we know who RobMeHood is. Nice try though. I have to laugh now that election time is here, Obama is spouting about balancing the budget. Yea, you won't hear that in the next four years again if he's re-elected.


----------



## IGetItAlready

Start saving up old shit you no longer want now liberals. 
That way you'll have some stuff you can burn in the streets on November 7th without losing anything you'll wish you had not burned on the 8th.


----------



## Katzndogz

An indication of how the white house feels is that the statement they released regarding Ryan's choice started with "Bush".


----------



## IGetItAlready

Katzndogz said:


> An indication of how the white house feels is that the statement they released regarding Ryan's choice started with "Bush".



It's a habit...


----------



## rightwinger

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



No landlord but Obama takes 325 EC votes

The Senate will be the real nail biter going 50-50 with Biden the deciding vote


----------



## rightwinger

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



No landslide but Obama takes 325 EC votes

The Senate will be the real nail biter going 50-50 with Biden the deciding vote


----------



## HUGGY

Katzndogz said:


> No doubt about it, obama has the whore vote and the senile vote locked up.



You are an idiot.  43% of the population households are over 50.  Mittens has now alienated the elderly.  Very few are senile.  RobMeHood will discover that in November.

Whites constitute around 70% of the population..  half are women.  Mittens has now alienated women.  A very small sub minority are actually prostitutes.  

Non whites are almost 30% of the population.  Mittens has already alienated most non white citizens.

What Mittens has done is maginalize the 1%ers and the teababbling wingnuts.  AKA those fundamentalist fuckwits  America loves to hate.

Did I mention that you are an idiot?


----------



## Lakhota

Paul "Ayn Rand" Ryan will serve a very useful purpose - to remind voters of the GOP WAR on the following:

Poor

Middle Class

Women

Obama​


----------



## California Girl

TheGreatGatsby said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, he didn't. But he was so busy with his fucking healthcare debacle that he sure as fuck hasn't helped. What started this was the scrapping of Glass-Steagal. And that was Clinton. Just sayin'. Of course, being a rational being, I know that it took a bipartisan clusterfuck to lead us here... and it will take a bipartisan approach to fix it... but Obama's idea of bipartisanship is 'I won'. One of the many reasons that I'll be voting for Romney.
> 
> Oh, and... for the record... cartoons are not 'political discussion'. You make yourself look stupid, no one needs to assist you. Fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess? I beg to differ. He had some help though; Wilson, FDR, Johnson, Clinton. And I'm sure there's plenty of Republicrats to blame as well. Anyways, Obama not creating this mess is not a reason to vote for him. If he can't fix the problem then there's no use for him.
Click to expand...


You can beg to differ all you want... the fact remains... he did not create this... but that does not excuse his inaction when he took office. We cannot afford another 4 years of that level of incompetence.


----------



## mudwhistle

I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining. 

Right now it's almost even.


----------



## mudwhistle

Lakhota said:


> Paul "Ayn Rand" Ryan will serve a very useful purpose - to remind voters of the GOP WAR on the following:
> 
> Poor
> 
> Middle Class
> 
> Women
> 
> Obama​



You forgot puppies.


----------



## candycorn

rightwinger said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No landlord but Obama takes 325 EC votes
> 
> The Senate will be the real nail biter going 50-50 with Biden the deciding vote
Click to expand...


325 EV's (55 more than needed) is pretty much a landslide. 

Agreed; the only thing Romney can hope to do is keep Obama from reaching the 353 he reached when he beat McCain.


----------



## rightwinger

candycorn said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No landlord but Obama takes 325 EC votes
> 
> The Senate will be the real nail biter going 50-50 with Biden the deciding vote
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 325 EV's (55 more than needed) is pretty much a landslide.
> 
> Agreed; the only thing Romney can hope to do is keep Obama from reaching the 353 he reached when he beat McCain.
Click to expand...


I can't see him matching 2008 numbers but if Romney doesnt get some buzz it will hurt in the House and Senate

With the selection of Ryan the discussion will go back to where it belongs....What republican leadership will mean to our future


----------



## rightwinger

mudwhistle said:


> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.



Post one


----------



## HUGGY

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post one
Click to expand...


He's talking about a dream he had.  It wasn't real.  A Fascist Fundamentalist guy can dream can't he?


----------



## skookerasbil

A non-k00k left perspective...................


Smart Democrats Should Be Worried - By John Fund - The Corner - National Review Online


----------



## skookerasbil

Here's all I know...............


The k00ks on here who fall all over themselves every day to throw up new threads about the imminent Obama victory are also the board members who are home shitting their shorts the most in the hour or two they are actually NOT in the internet!! We know the members well..............no need to specifically point out the 15 or so real mental cases on here!! Suffice to say, many of them have about 4 billion posts to their name.............clearly signifying a quiet confidence in their ideology!!!


----------



## candycorn

skookerasbil said:


> Here's all I know...............
> The k00ks on here who fall all over themselves every day to throw up new threads about the imminent Obama victory are also the board members who are home shitting their shorts the most in the hour or two they are actually NOT in the internet!! We know the members well..............no need to specifically point out the 15 or so real mental cases on here!!



All data points to Obama winning easily.  There is nothing k00kie about it.  Sorry.


----------



## Lakhota

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post one
Click to expand...


Yeah, I'd love to see one of those "almost even" EC maps...


----------



## regent

All I saw, was that the nation was close to going into another Great Depression and the Republicans had no desire or ability to stop it. The usual Republican scare tactics don't scare me anymore, nor do their promises of a conservative utopia grab me. We may not be back to normal and may never be, but we aren't in that pre-Great Depession era, that usually comes with a Republican administration. We even have a chance to be like other civilized nations and have a health plan for all our citizens.


----------



## Greenbeard

candycorn said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's all I know...............
> The k00ks on here who fall all over themselves every day to throw up new threads about the imminent Obama victory are also the board members who are home shitting their shorts the most in the hour or two they are actually NOT in the internet!! We know the members well..............no need to specifically point out the 15 or so real mental cases on here!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All data points to Obama winning easily.  There is nothing k00kie about it.  Sorry.
Click to expand...


Apparently those kooks have infiltrated the Romney campaign strategy team. Because if we've learned one thing in the last 24 hours, it's that they're a bit spooked.


----------



## JoeB131

TheGreatGatsby said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, he didn't. But he was so busy with his fucking healthcare debacle that he sure as fuck hasn't helped. What started this was the scrapping of Glass-Steagal. And that was Clinton. Just sayin'. Of course, being a rational being, I know that it took a bipartisan clusterfuck to lead us here... and it will take a bipartisan approach to fix it... but Obama's idea of bipartisanship is 'I won'. One of the many reasons that I'll be voting for Romney.
> 
> Oh, and... for the record... cartoons are not 'political discussion'. You make yourself look stupid, no one needs to assist you. Fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess? I beg to differ. He had some help though; Wilson, FDR, Johnson, Clinton. And I'm sure there's plenty of Republicrats to blame as well. Anyways, Obama not creating this mess is not a reason to vote for him. If he can't fix the problem then there's no use for him.
Click to expand...


Wilson?  

The sad thing is, you probably really believe that shit.


----------



## skookerasbil

candycorn said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's all I know...............
> The k00ks on here who fall all over themselves every day to throw up new threads about the imminent Obama victory are also the board members who are home shitting their shorts the most in the hour or two they are actually NOT in the internet!! We know the members well..............no need to specifically point out the 15 or so real mental cases on here!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All data points to Obama winning easily.  There is nothing k00kie about it.  Sorry.
Click to expand...




Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports



yuk...........yuk............+ gas prices continuing to soar and economic numbers continuing to fall further into the shitter.


----------



## skookerasbil

and more k00k losing........................


39% Have Favorable Opinion of Paul Ryan, 25% Unfavorable - Rasmussen Reports&#8482;


----------



## JakeStarkey

Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.



mudwhistle said:


> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.
Click to expand...


Oh, there's Jake... 

Hey, Jake, I was wondering about your take on the Ryan pick and how Romney was going to finally put the teabaggers in their place. 

WHich is apparently on the ticket.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Hi, Joe.  You missed the obvious.  By picking Ryan, the chief cheerleader has to cheer for Romney and can't cheer for tea.  Once elected, the chief tea sits presiding over the senate, which means absolutely nothing.

The tea will vote heavily for Romney, then Mitt being my boy, will simply ignore them for three and a half years.

I love it!  Use, abuse, then throw em away.


----------



## Old Rocks

There are now two really threatoning issues for the GOP. One is Romney's tax returns. The other the exposure of Ryan's infatuation with the philosphies of Ayn Rand.

Demoncrats should keep hammering on both.


----------



## Old Rocks

JakeStarkey said:


> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.
Click to expand...


President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map

The President leads in all but one of the tossup states


----------



## Amazed

It's quite early yet


----------



## Stephanie

Old Rocks said:


> There are now two really threatoning issues for the GOP. One is Romney's tax returns. The other the exposure of Ryan's infatuation with the philosphies of Ayn Rand.
> 
> Demoncrats should keep hammering on both.



why should that be?
 you all weren't concerned with Obama's infatuation with radical Marxist while he protested against his country..Or his associations with a domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. Republicans need to now bring this all out and HAMMER it home


----------



## candycorn

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


Shaping up that way.


----------



## rightwinger

Stephanie said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are now two really threatoning issues for the GOP. One is Romney's tax returns. The other the exposure of Ryan's infatuation with the philosphies of Ayn Rand.
> 
> Demoncrats should keep hammering on both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why should that be?
> you all weren't concerned with Obama's infatuation with radical Marxist while he protested against his country..Or his associations with a domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. Republicans need to now bring this all out and HAMMER it home
Click to expand...


Republicans tried this rhetoric in 2008 and lost by a two to one margin. 

Glad to see that some keep pushing a failed political tactic


----------



## Stephanie

rightwinger said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are now two really threatoning issues for the GOP. One is Romney's tax returns. The other the exposure of Ryan's infatuation with the philosphies of Ayn Rand.
> 
> Demoncrats should keep hammering on both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why should that be?
> you all weren't concerned with Obama's infatuation with radical Marxist while he protested against his country..Or his associations with a domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. Republicans need to now bring this all out and HAMMER it home
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Republicans tried this rhetoric in 2008 and lost by a two to one margin.
> 
> Glad to see that some keep pushing a failed political tactic
Click to expand...


oh well, maybe it's time to REALLY hammer it home..People have now had experince with Obama and all his RADICAL "visions" them.


----------



## Amazed

Stephanie said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> why should that be?
> you all weren't concerned with Obama's infatuation with radical Marxist while he protested against his country..Or his associations with a domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. Republicans need to now bring this all out and HAMMER it home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Republicans tried this rhetoric in 2008 and lost by a two to one margin.
> 
> Glad to see that some keep pushing a failed political tactic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh well, maybe it's time to REALLY hammer it home..People have now had experince with Obama and all his RADICAL "visions" them.
Click to expand...


Never mind that there is ZERO non partisan data to support these kids and their fantasy....but they LOVE that Qunnipiac/NYT/CBS poll....


----------



## Nova78

*Obama in a Landslide? *

* 4 more years of Obama ,and the only thing that will be in a landslide will be your paycheck..*


----------



## candycorn

Amazed said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Republicans tried this rhetoric in 2008 and lost by a two to one margin.
> 
> Glad to see that some keep pushing a failed political tactic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh well, maybe it's time to REALLY hammer it home..People have now had experince with Obama and all his RADICAL "visions" them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never mind that there is ZERO non partisan data to support these kids and their fantasy....but they LOVE that Qunnipiac/NYT/CBS poll....
Click to expand...


Rasmussen Reports:
Obama: 247 - Romney: 206 - Toss-up: 85​
Love that poll too.


----------



## Amazed

candycorn said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh well, maybe it's time to REALLY hammer it home..People have now had experince with Obama and all his RADICAL "visions" them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never mind that there is ZERO non partisan data to support these kids and their fantasy....but they LOVE that Qunnipiac/NYT/CBS poll....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rasmussen Reports:
> Obama: 247 - Romney: 206 - Toss-up: 85​
> Love that poll too.
Click to expand...


Rassy and Gallup have Romney up in the National....RCP averge has Bammy up 4.6, I am very comfy where we are.


----------



## theHawk

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


With 100 million people on welfare it wouldn't surprise me if he is elected again.

People never want to give up their free handouts, even if it will bankrupt the country.


----------



## Stephanie

theHawk said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With 100 million people on welfare it wouldn't surprise me if he is elected again.
> 
> People never want to give up their free handouts, even if it will bankrupt the country.
Click to expand...


that's why this administration set out to make it easier to add more to the rolls..
Obama is a student of cloward-piven..we could be already to late


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Hi, Joe.  You missed the obvious.  By picking Ryan, the chief cheerleader has to cheer for Romney and can't cheer for tea.  Once elected, the chief tea sits presiding over the senate, which means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The tea will vote heavily for Romney, then Mitt being my boy, will simply ignore them for three and a half years.
> 
> I love it!  Use, abuse, then throw em away.



Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.   

If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"  

The Teabaggers will feel betrayed. 

The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.  

And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.  

And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.


----------



## JoeB131

Old Rocks said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know......every time I see the electoral map Obama is losing his lead and Romney keeps gaining.
> 
> Right now it's almost even.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> The President leads in all but one of the tossup states
Click to expand...


They put Wisconsin back into tossup not because the polls have changed, but because Ryan's on the ticket now. 

Get real.  Wisconsin hasn't gone for the GOP in a national presidential race since 1984.  

More to the point, Ryan's "Push Granny from the Train" budget pretty much kills Romney in Florida and Iowa.


----------



## Amazed

Stephanie said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With 100 million people on welfare it wouldn't surprise me if he is elected again.
> 
> People never want to give up their free handouts, even if it will bankrupt the country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's why this administration set out to make it easier to add more to the rolls..
> Obama is a student of cloward-piven..we could be already to late
Click to expand...


Bammy taught them how to cheat at Acorn


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

JoeB131 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> The President leads in all but one of the tossup states
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They put Wisconsin back into tossup not because the polls have changed, but because Ryan's on the ticket now.
> 
> Get real.  Wisconsin hasn't gone for the GOP in a national presidential race since 1984.
> 
> More to the point, Ryan's "Push Granny from the Train" budget pretty much kills Romney in Florida and Iowa.
Click to expand...


True. And even if you give Wisconsin to Romney, along with Colorado, Iowa, and Florida, assuming Obama takes Virginia (where he currently leads), Obama still wins 278 to 260. 

Its all about EC math, and even when you configure a pessimistic scenario for Obama, the president wins re-election.


----------



## Amazed

JoeB131 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> The President leads in all but one of the tossup states
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They put Wisconsin back into tossup not because the polls have changed, but because Ryan's on the ticket now.
> 
> Get real.  Wisconsin hasn't gone for the GOP in a national presidential race since 1984.
> 
> More to the point, Ryan's "Push Granny from the Train" budget pretty much kills Romney in Florida and Iowa.
Click to expand...


You poor kid...Bammy only leads by just over 1 point in both states...what a hack you are.


----------



## Stephanie

JoeB131 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, Joe.  You missed the obvious.  By picking Ryan, the chief cheerleader has to cheer for Romney and can't cheer for tea.  Once elected, the chief tea sits presiding over the senate, which means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The tea will vote heavily for Romney, then Mitt being my boy, will simply ignore them for three and a half years.
> 
> I love it!  Use, abuse, then throw em away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
Click to expand...


And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
you get more hysterical each passing day


----------



## JoeB131

Amazed said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> The President leads in all but one of the tossup states
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They put Wisconsin back into tossup not because the polls have changed, but because Ryan's on the ticket now.
> 
> Get real.  Wisconsin hasn't gone for the GOP in a national presidential race since 1984.
> 
> More to the point, Ryan's "Push Granny from the Train" budget pretty much kills Romney in Florida and Iowa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You poor kid...Bammy only leads by just over 1 point in both states...what a hack you are.
Click to expand...


again, that was before you push granny from the train. 

And winning by 1 point in florida is usually enough. Mind you, it's Florida, where you can win and still lose...  but 1 point is probably enough...


----------



## Nova78

*I will laugh my ass off when all you Obama ball licker's lose your homes ,jobs, freedom,guns ,freedom of speech, its going to get really juicy when it comes time to pay the piper, better brush up on your Spanish while your at it.......*



[/ATTACH]


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

If we give Wisconsin to Obama, which is very likely given the current polling and history, and Florida, Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado to Romney, the president wins re-election 275 to 263. 

Landslide for Obama? Likely not. But hell still be president come 2013.


----------



## JoeB131

Stephanie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, Joe.  You missed the obvious.  By picking Ryan, the chief cheerleader has to cheer for Romney and can't cheer for tea.  Once elected, the chief tea sits presiding over the senate, which means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The tea will vote heavily for Romney, then Mitt being my boy, will simply ignore them for three and a half years.
> 
> I love it!  Use, abuse, then throw em away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
> you get more hysterical each passing day
Click to expand...


If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.  

You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.  





*"I pity the fool!" *


----------



## JakeStarkey

Romney is laughing his head off at the Nova78s', going to take their vote, then kick them in their combined ass, after he wins office.

I love voting for Romney.  I put down the far left and kick the far right in the face.  Great!


----------



## Full-Auto

JoeB131 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, Joe.  You missed the obvious.  By picking Ryan, the chief cheerleader has to cheer for Romney and can't cheer for tea.  Once elected, the chief tea sits presiding over the senate, which means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The tea will vote heavily for Romney, then Mitt being my boy, will simply ignore them for three and a half years.
> 
> I love it!  Use, abuse, then throw em away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
Click to expand...


Full of shit as always.


----------



## JoeB131

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> If we give Wisconsin to Obama, which is very likely given the current polling and history, and Florida, Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado to Romney, the president wins re-election 275 to 263.
> 
> Landslide for Obama? Likely not. But hell still be president come 2013.



I don't see him taking Iowa or Florida iwth their 15% retiree populations.  

Iowa, particularly, he's never done well in. The evangelicals already don't trust him on the Mormon thing.


----------



## Katzndogz

JoeB131 said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
> you get more hysterical each passing day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"I pity the fool!" *
Click to expand...


The conversation would be the same, it would just be about the other person.  That's the beauty of democrat arguments, all they do is change the name and can use the same argument every time.


----------



## Stephanie

JoeB131 said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
> you get more hysterical each passing day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"I pity the fool!" *
Click to expand...


no one is making you do shit, just like no one is asking for all your insane opinions..but you give them anyway


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Romney is laughing his head off at the Nova78s', going to take their vote, then kick them in their combined ass, after he wins office.
> 
> I love voting for Romney.  I put down the far left and kick the far right in the face.  Great!



Romney just got rolled by Faux News and _the Weekly Standard_.  

A couple of weeks of exposing the draconian budget this guy has drawn up and Romney now OWNS... it'll be their worst advocacy since the Iraq War.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Romney will take Florida and Iowa.  Joe's analysis why not is weak on that.  Virginia may be very problematic for Romney, but i am hoping.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bucs90 has been heavily conservative from the beginning, so whining from katz and steph is just that, whining.  I hope bucs90 reconsiders.



Katzndogz said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
> you get more hysterical each passing day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"I pity the fool!" *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The conversation would be the same, it would just be about the other person.  That's the beauty of democrat arguments, all they do is change the name and can use the same argument every time.
Click to expand...


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Romney will take Florida and Iowa.  Joe's analysis why not is weak on that.  Virginia may be very problematic for Romney, but i am hoping.



I don't see how he takes either.  

Romney's campaign is starting to collapse in on itself.  He sounded positively whiny yesterday about the Soptic ad.  

Did he forget the truckloads of shit he dumped on Newt and the Ricks?  Because I'm sure they haven't and they are laughing their asses off right now.


----------



## Amazed

You guys were giddy with Kerry....I'm jus sayin...I remember watching Morris telling the world it was over because of the exit polls 

You boys and girls go ahead and relax.


----------



## JoeB131

Katzndogz said:


> The conversation would be the same, it would just be about the other person.  That's the beauty of democrat arguments, all they do is change the name and can use the same argument every time.



I had nice things to say about Newt and Rick Santorum, and would have supported either if they were the nominee.  


Rick Perry was a profound disappointment, but I still think he's an okay guy.  

In fact, you would be very hard pressed to find a lot of Republicans I've ripped into OTHER than Mitt Romney.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Your hatred of Mormonism simply blocks your thinking.

Your analysis is off, and you don't see it, you are right.



JoeB131 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romney will take Florida and Iowa.  Joe's analysis why not is weak on that.  Virginia may be very problematic for Romney, but i am hoping.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how he takes either.
> 
> Romney's campaign is starting to collapse in on itself.  He sounded positively whiny yesterday about the Soptic ad.
> 
> Did he forget the truckloads of shit he dumped on Newt and the Ricks?  Because I'm sure they haven't and they are laughing their asses off right now.
Click to expand...


----------



## Stephanie

JakeStarkey said:


> bucs90 has been heavily conservative from the beginning, so whining from katz and steph is just that, whining.  I hope bucs90 reconsiders.
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"I pity the fool!" *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The conversation would be the same, it would just be about the other person.  That's the beauty of democrat arguments, all they do is change the name and can use the same argument every time.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


lol, we have to figure out which Jake is here today? there are so many of you
this is the one who likes to post on top of people


----------



## JoeB131

Amazed said:


> You guys were giddy with Kerry....I'm jus sayin...I remember watching Morris telling the world it was over because of the exit polls
> 
> You boys and girls go ahead and relax.



I don't remember anyone being giddy about Kerry.  

Kerry's selection was kind of in the same boat as Romney's...  He was just the lesser evil.  

Much like Romney seemed too look better compared to Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann...

Kerry looked good against Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean.


----------



## Full-Auto

JoeB131 said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, Romney is now owned by the Teabaggers.
> 
> If you think he's going to get up on Innaguration day and say, "Screw you, Teabaggers who are even a larger slice of Congress than you were before, I'm really a moderate and I'm cutting deals with the Democrats!"
> 
> The Teabaggers will feel betrayed.
> 
> The moderate Republicans won't work with him because they are all afraid of a teabagger challenging them in their primaries.
> 
> And the Democrats will be looking for any chance to screw him.
> 
> And this is the beauty of the Teabag movement.  They don't even have to win over their own party.  There are only about 87 of them in Congress now.  All they have to do is threaten to pick up their ball and go home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Obama has been solely owned by the Commies...but that won't stop you all from voting for them..
> you get more hysterical each passing day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you didn't nominate Romney, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> You guys are making me vote for this fool.  Because you ran a bigger fool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"I pity the fool!" *
Click to expand...


We understand you dont have a moral compass and would prefer to support the most corrupt admin In US History.

You must be very proud the government has run up 16 trillion in debt with your favorite programs.

You were always a low life democrat.  You have never fooled us...........


----------



## JoeB131

Democrats have taken Iowa four of the last five elections.  

They've taken Florida three of the last four elections, depending how you count 2000.  

And again, Ryan puts both states out of play.  Simply put, he's doing handstands on the third rail...  which would be bad enough, but on top of that, he wants to push old people off the cliff to give rich people tax cuts... 




JakeStarkey said:


> Your hatred of Mormonism simply blocks your thinking.
> 
> Your analysis is off, and you don't see it, you are right.
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romney will take Florida and Iowa.  Joe's analysis why not is weak on that.  Virginia may be very problematic for Romney, but i am hoping.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how he takes either.
> 
> Romney's campaign is starting to collapse in on itself.  He sounded positively whiny yesterday about the Soptic ad.
> 
> Did he forget the truckloads of shit he dumped on Newt and the Ricks?  Because I'm sure they haven't and they are laughing their asses off right now.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Mac1958

.

The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.

I don't think they can do it.

.


----------



## Stephanie

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.
> 
> I don't think they can do it.
> 
> .



time will tell if the people are so shallow and can be fooled again


----------



## Greenbeard

Stephanie said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.
> 
> I don't think they can do it.
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time will tell if the people are so shallow and can be fooled again
Click to expand...


No need to fool anyone, simply pointing out what RomneyRyan is advocating should do the trick. It ain't pretty.


----------



## Full-Auto

Greenbeard said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.
> 
> I don't think they can do it.
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time will tell if the people are so shallow and can be fooled again
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No need to fool anyone, simply pointing out what RomneyRyan is advocating should do the trick. It ain't pretty.
Click to expand...


Vs your plan of complete economic collapse.


PATHETIC................


----------



## Amazed

Full-Auto said:


> Greenbeard said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> time will tell if the people are so shallow and can be fooled again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need to fool anyone, simply pointing out what RomneyRyan is advocating should do the trick. It ain't pretty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Vs your plan of complete economic collapse.
> 
> 
> PATHETIC................
Click to expand...


Too funny, these folks just want to cancel the election....


----------



## Full-Auto

Amazed said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greenbeard said:
> 
> 
> 
> No need to fool anyone, simply pointing out what RomneyRyan is advocating should do the trick. It ain't pretty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vs your plan of complete economic collapse.
> 
> 
> PATHETIC................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Too funny, these folks just want to cancel the election....
Click to expand...


Many idiots right here in this forum are willing to sell their soul and their families futures for a government check. Democrats must believe killing Americans for political gain is a OK, giving billions away to campaign supporters under the guise of green energy should be brought to every county.

You will not find a more fucked up individual then a democrat of any persuasion.


----------



## JoeB131

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.
> 
> I don't think they can do it.
> 
> .



NOr do I. 

Unfortunately, this is one of those conversations that should be had in quiet rooms, not on a campaign trail, to paraphrase Mr. Romney.  

I think that the fact that he wants to cut medicare and taxes for the wealthy is very bad form. 

A sensible comprimise is "We are going to raise taxes and cut spending... the conversation should be on how much of each."


----------



## rightwinger

Full-Auto said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Vs your plan of complete economic collapse.
> 
> 
> PATHETIC................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny, these folks just want to cancel the election....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Many idiots right here in this forum are willing to sell their soul and their families futures for a government check. Democrats must believe killing Americans for political gain is a OK, giving billions away to campaign supporters under the guise of green energy should be brought to every county.
> 
> You will not find a more fucked up individual then a democrat of any persuasion.
Click to expand...


If republicans want to run on a platform that anyone who does not support their policies is looking for a government handout......I encourage them to do so


----------



## Dick Tuck

JoeB131 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give us a link.  I would like to see that map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> President Obama    237       Governor Romney    191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> The President leads in all but one of the tossup states
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They put Wisconsin back into tossup not because the polls have changed, but because Ryan's on the ticket now.
> 
> Get real.  Wisconsin hasn't gone for the GOP in a national presidential race since 1984.
> 
> More to the point, *Ryan's "Push Granny from the Train" budget pretty much kills Romney in Florida and Iowa.*
Click to expand...


It might even put Arizona in play.


----------



## Dick Tuck

rightwinger said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny, these folks just want to cancel the election....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many idiots right here in this forum are willing to sell their soul and their families futures for a government check. Democrats must believe killing Americans for political gain is a OK, giving billions away to campaign supporters under the guise of green energy should be brought to every county.
> 
> You will not find a more fucked up individual then a democrat of any persuasion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If republicans want to run on a platform that anyone who does not support their policies is looking for a government handout......I encourage them to do so
Click to expand...


----------



## Full-Auto

JoeB131 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The Dems will be piling on the emotional pitch from here on out, "we'll save Medicare and poor people from those mean Republicans".  I think the only way Romney wins now is if he and Ryan can put a softer, gentler face on Ryan's budget.  It's all about perception, baby.
> 
> I don't think they can do it.
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOr do I.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is one of those conversations that should be had in quiet rooms, not on a campaign trail, to paraphrase Mr. Romney.
> 
> I think that the fact that he wants to cut medicare and taxes for the wealthy is very bad form.
> 
> A sensible comprimise is "We are going to raise taxes and cut spending... the conversation should be on how much of each."
Click to expand...


But you are voting for the side where any cut is extreme.,

Thats on tape shit head..........


----------



## Amazed

Dick Tuck said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Many idiots right here in this forum are willing to sell their soul and their families futures for a government check. Democrats must believe killing Americans for political gain is a OK, giving billions away to campaign supporters under the guise of green energy should be brought to every county.
> 
> You will not find a more fucked up individual then a democrat of any persuasion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If republicans want to run on a platform that anyone who does not support their policies is looking for a government handout......I encourage them to do so
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


The mindset of the Left, ignorance...

Ummmmm, the Gov IS Medicade.


----------



## rightwinger

Amazed said:


> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> If republicans want to run on a platform that anyone who does not support their policies is looking for a government handout......I encourage them to do so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The mindset of the Left, ignorance...
> 
> Ummmmm, the Gov IS Medicade.
Click to expand...


Irony is lost on this one


----------



## zonly1

Lakhota said:


> Obama didn't create this mess.



he said he was going to cut the deficit in half only to lie and add  50 %, 6trillion in 3.5 yrs/1st term.


----------



## Nole

At some point each and every American will have to at least once, think about Bush II and his disaster of a run. His 8 years really put us on the wrong side of the tracks. Obama has done little more than stop the bleeding. Hes got to do more, everyone knows this to be true. But I would put good money that a healthy % of these so called Independent voters will think of the last time the GOP was in power. That particular memory is not a good one.


----------



## francoHFW

I know, let's cut taxes on the bloated rich, destroy Medicare and health reform, raise taxes and fees on the nonrich, let corporate cheats run wild, cut aid to states and localities, raise military spending to more than the rest of the world combined, and worry about the debt in 2035. Absolute idiocy, dupes.


----------



## Nole

To go from Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney to this debt Hawk crazy town behavior is really comedy in motion. I have to think anyone with half a right mind will remember the last time the GOP was in Office. We went into head over heels DEBT!


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Nole said:


> At some point each and every American will have to at least once, think about Bush II and his disaster of a run. His 8 years really put us on the wrong side of the tracks. Obama has done little more than stop the bleeding. Hes got to do more, everyone knows this to be true. But I would put good money that a healthy % of these so called Independent voters will think of the last time the GOP was in power. That particular memory is not a good one.



Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency. He has robbed from medicare to pay for his government intrusions. He hasn't created a job. Look__ you could be a hundred percent correct on Bush for all I care, but that's done and he is not the reason for Obama's failures.


----------



## LoneLaugher

That really sounds horrible! Trillion dollar deficits every year! Oh my! And not a single job created! Just awful! Robbed from Medicare? My hot buttons have finally been pushed!

Please.....whatever you do.......don't stop repeating these things here and as you go about your daily routine. These things need repeating!


----------



## bitterlyclingin

Somebody gets it! "Spotted along I-35"

Reaganite Republican: Spotted Along I-35


----------



## Nole

there is no fucks sake about it. People will certainly not forget the legend that was Bush II. He was a Republican President for 8 long years, no reason why his polices cant be fodder for politicians. Since Romney and Paul are peddling similar polices, I personally think Bush's record is relevant. 

you know that many Americans will weight all of they above come November.

Just like Obama care will be on the tip of every GOP rep for the next decade.


----------



## Dick Tuck

zonly1 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama didn't create this mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he said he was going to cut the deficit in half only to lie and add  50 %, 6trillion in 3.5 yrs/1st term.
Click to expand...


And Mitt claims he's cut taxes for the rich, raise defense spending, and balance the budget.  Considering the fucked upness of the economy was the result of Mitt's plan, who should you believe?


----------



## Dick Tuck

TheGreatGatsby said:


> Nole said:
> 
> 
> 
> At some point each and every American will have to at least once, think about Bush II and his disaster of a run. His 8 years really put us on the wrong side of the tracks. Obama has done little more than stop the bleeding. Hes got to do more, everyone knows this to be true. But I would put good money that a healthy % of these so called Independent voters will think of the last time the GOP was in power. That particular memory is not a good one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency. He has robbed from medicare to pay for his government intrusions. He hasn't created a job. Look__ you could be a hundred percent correct on Bush for all I care, but that's done and he is not the reason for Obama's failures.
Click to expand...


Oh for fuck's sake.  Bush dried up the revenue stream.  There's two sides to the balance sheet, moron.


----------



## mudwhistle

Dick Tuck said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nole said:
> 
> 
> 
> At some point each and every American will have to at least once, think about Bush II and his disaster of a run. His 8 years really put us on the wrong side of the tracks. Obama has done little more than stop the bleeding. Hes got to do more, everyone knows this to be true. But I would put good money that a healthy % of these so called Independent voters will think of the last time the GOP was in power. That particular memory is not a good one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency. He has robbed from medicare to pay for his government intrusions. He hasn't created a job. Look__ you could be a hundred percent correct on Bush for all I care, but that's done and he is not the reason for Obama's failures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake.  Bush dried up the revenue stream.  There's two sides to the balance sheet, moron.
Click to expand...


Bush hasn't been president for over 3 and a half years. Obama policies had more to do with it than Bush. 

It's a waste of time talking facts with a twit like you.


----------



## HomeInspect

With half the country with thier hand out, waiting for government to take care of them, it's a wonder Republicans win any seats in any form of government.


----------



## mudwhistle

HomeInspect said:


> With half the country with thier hand out, waiting for government to take care of them, it's a wonder Republicans win any seats in any form of government.



The debt is the wildcard. Obama refuses to deal with it. 

He changed spending-cuts to austerity so he could camouflage the problem. Then he tried to turn everyone against the word. 

We'll see if it worked.


----------



## LoneLaugher

HomeInspect said:


> With half the country with thier hand out, waiting for government to take care of them, it's a wonder Republicans win any seats in any form of government.



Half the country? Is that the number? Half of all able bodied adult Americans refuse to work in favor of living off of government handouts? Is that it?

Thank you......thank you......thank you. I have been asking people here for that number since I arrived. 

That"s a lot of people! And they ALL vote for Democrats? 

Shit. This election is in the bag for Obama. Talk about a winning campaign strategy.


----------



## Inthemiddle

TheGreatGatsby said:


> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency.





SniperFire said:


> In America, our Congress controls spending.



.


----------



## HomeInspect

LoneLaugher said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> With half the country with thier hand out, waiting for government to take care of them, it's a wonder Republicans win any seats in any form of government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Half the country? Is that the number? Half of all able bodied adult Americans refuse to work in favor of living off of government handouts? Is that it?
> 
> Thank you......thank you......thank you. I have been asking people here for that number since I arrived.
> 
> That"s a lot of people! And they ALL vote for Democrats?
> 
> Shit. This election is in the bag for Obama. Talk about a winning campaign strategy.
Click to expand...


Well according to CNN it's 1 in 3. But with that margin in the tank for the party of government dependency, it's still a wonder a Repub has a chance. Fortunately, many of them don't vote.  I know ACORN tried to change that  .. LOL  A hard working tax payer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Frank Perdue
Government assistance expands - Feb. 7, 2012


----------



## Luddly Neddite

TheGreatGatsby said:


> Nole said:
> 
> 
> 
> At some point each and every American will have to at least once, think about Bush II and his disaster of a run. His 8 years really put us on the wrong side of the tracks. Obama has done little more than stop the bleeding. Hes got to do more, everyone knows this to be true. But I would put good money that a healthy % of these so called Independent voters will think of the last time the GOP was in power. That particular memory is not a good one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency. He has robbed from medicare to pay for his government intrusions. He hasn't created a job. Look__ you could be a hundred percent correct on Bush for all I care, but that's done and he is not the reason for Obama's failures.
Click to expand...


Hey, you know what?

If you keep repeating these lies long enough, often enough, loud enough, there are actually brainless rw nutjobs who will believe it. 

Really.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Inthemiddle said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SniperFire said:
> 
> 
> 
> In America, our Congress controls spending.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


Now CUT THAT OUT!

You know how rw's hate FACTS. 

Like this, for example -



> The Current ReaganBush Debt is:
> $14,986,403,819,477.70
> which means that in a total of 20 years,
> these three presidents have led to the creation of
> 94.13%
> of the entire national debt
> in only 8.4746% of the 236 years of the existence of the United States of America.



ReaganBushDebt.org


----------



## SuMar

Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.


----------



## beretta304

I hope he does get caught in a landslide.


----------



## rightwinger

SuMar said:


> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.



Obama 325 electoral votes.

Landslide, butt whipp'n.......whatever you want to call it


----------



## SuMar

rightwinger said:


> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama 325 electoral votes.
> 
> Landslide, butt whipp'n.......whatever you want to call it
Click to expand...



Are you Ms. Cleo now? Results before the election? Don't tell me you put all your eggs in a basket when it comes to polls?


----------



## Zander

Obamessiah!!! He can't lose!!!


----------



## LoneLaugher

HomeInspect said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> With half the country with thier hand out, waiting for government to take care of them, it's a wonder Republicans win any seats in any form of government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Half the country? Is that the number? Half of all able bodied adult Americans refuse to work in favor of living off of government handouts? Is that it?
> 
> Thank you......thank you......thank you. I have been asking people here for that number since I arrived.
> 
> That"s a lot of people! And they ALL vote for Democrats?
> 
> Shit. This election is in the bag for Obama. Talk about a winning campaign strategy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well according to CNN it's 1 in 3. But with that margin in the tank for the party of government dependency, it's still a wonder a Repub has a chance. Fortunately, many of them don't vote.  I know ACORN tried to change that  .. LOL  A hard working tax payer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Frank Perdue
> Government assistance expands - Feb. 7, 2012
Click to expand...


Oh! It is not half? MOTHERFUCKER! I thought I had finally gotten an answer. If I didn't know better, I would think you are talking out of your ass.

Now it is 33-1/3% of able-bodied American adults who refuse to work in favor of living off of federal tax dollars. That is STILL a lot of people.

But............now you say that many of them do not vote?  How strange given the premise of your original comments? You are now saying that Obama won in 2008 with votes from people who are NOT sitting on heir ass awaiting handouts.  Something is out of whack. Is it you or me?

Hmmmmmmm. Yep. It's you. 

Fucking dummy.


----------



## rightwinger

SuMar said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama 325 electoral votes.
> 
> Landslide, butt whipp'n.......whatever you want to call it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you Ms. Cleo now? Results before the election? Don't tell me you put all your eggs in a basket when it comes to polls?
Click to expand...


I call em like I see em

Romney is hurt'n in the Electoral College


----------



## Amazed

Actually you call'em how you want to see'em , the wannabe bot king has lost a point in the polls snice yesterday


----------



## LoneLaugher

Amazed said:


> Actually you call'em how you want to see'em , the wannabe bot king has lost a point in the polls snice yesterday



Nutter-like cheap shot warning:

Heh.....heh....heh.....heh.....He said "bot" king. Kewl name for Romney.


----------



## squeeze berry

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



Obama may win the precincts in Philly, but not necessarily in the rest of the state that clings to guns and religion


----------



## mudwhistle

luddly.neddite said:


> Inthemiddle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh for fuck's sake. Obama has ran trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now CUT THAT OUT!
> 
> You know how rw's hate FACTS.
> 
> Like this, for example -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Current ReaganBush Debt is:
> $14,986,403,819,477.70
> which means that in a total of 20 years,
> these three presidents have led to the creation of
> 94.13%
> of the entire national debt
> in only 8.4746% of the 236 years of the existence of the United States of America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ReaganBushDebt.org
Click to expand...


Two presidents spent almost $15 trillion you say???

Obama spent $6 trillion in the first 4 years and is on course to spend us to a $25 trillion dollar debt by the end of his second term.

Wow........he works almost twice as fast as two presidents. 

Another historical first for Obama.


----------



## Mac1958

.


----------



## Mac1958

SuMar said:


> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.




Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.

They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.

.


----------



## rightwinger

Mac1958 said:


> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
Click to expand...


My money is on the toilet


----------



## mudwhistle

rightwinger said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My money is on the toilet
Click to expand...


I always knew you were full of shit.


(sorry, couldn't help the set-up)


----------



## LoneLaugher

Mac1958 said:


> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
Click to expand...


Are they equally culpable? Or, has one party demonstrated a greater willingness to work together than the other?


----------



## Mac1958

LoneLaugher said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are they equally culpable? Or, has one party demonstrated a greater willingness to work together than the other?
Click to expand...



My estimation is that there are definitely more absolutists in the GOP right now.  Between Obama's victory in 2008 and the Tea Party's gains in 2010, however, the Dems were the absolutists, essentially saying "we won, you lost, too bad."  That's when Obama said the Republicans "can't do much talkin'".

Right now?  Definitely the Tea Party-driven GOP.

.


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,

1. I guess even the libnuts gotta dream!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## JoeB131

Mac1958 said:


> SuMar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever wins the election, it won't be by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
Click to expand...


I could see the presidential race be very once sided and then the people hedged their bets by voting for the oppossition in Congress.   

This is what happened in 1984, when Reagan won 49 states, but the GOP only gained 16 seats in the house after they had lost 27 the last cycle. 

Or I could see a scenario where people are so panicked by the notion of Ryan-Romney that they swamp congress as well.


----------



## mudwhistle

Mac1958 said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  And even more importantly, neither party is going to have total control.
> 
> They either choose to grow the fuck up and work together or it's into the toilet we go.
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are they equally culpable? Or, has one party demonstrated a greater willingness to work together than the other?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My estimation is that there are definitely more absolutists in the GOP right now.  Between Obama's victory in 2008 and the Tea Party's gains in 2010, however, the Dems were the absolutists, essentially saying "we won, you lost, too bad."  That's when Obama said the Republicans "can't do much talkin'".
> 
> Right now?  Definitely the Tea Party-driven GOP.
> 
> .
Click to expand...


My information says that Democrats only call it bi-partisanship when the GOP gives in.

The Dems decided about 20 years ago that cooperation was not even a consideration. 

The GOP keeps extending their hand and the Dems slap it. 

Then they lie about the GOP claiming THEY'RE the major roadblock in Washington.


In the words of Obama talking to his spiritial leader Reverand Jerimiah Wright "You have to be honest!!!"

Apparently to the left *honesty* is a *liability*.


----------



## LoneLaugher

This is a reasonable take on hat period......IMO

Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans | Cynthia Tucker


----------



## Mac1958

mudwhistle said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are they equally culpable? Or, has one party demonstrated a greater willingness to work together than the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My estimation is that there are definitely more absolutists in the GOP right now.  Between Obama's victory in 2008 and the Tea Party's gains in 2010, however, the Dems were the absolutists, essentially saying "we won, you lost, too bad."  That's when Obama said the Republicans "can't do much talkin'".
> 
> Right now?  Definitely the Tea Party-driven GOP.
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My information says that Democrats only call it bi-partisanship when the GOP gives in.
> 
> The Dems decided about 20 years ago that cooperation was not even a consideration.
> 
> The GOP keeps extending their hand and the Dems slap it.
> 
> Then they lie about the GOP claiming THEY'RE the major roadblock in Washington.
> 
> 
> In the words of Obama talking to his spiritial leader Reverand Jerimiah Wright "You have to be honest!!!"
> 
> Apparently to the left *honesty* is a *liability*.
Click to expand...



Seems to me that pretty much anyone on either side who extends a hand across the aisle is immediately a pariah.  While that may be great for those on the far ends of the spectrum, our government is paralyzed and the ship is sinking.  I sincerely don't understand how someone can be for that.

I'll let the partisans point the finger at the other guy.  If we don't get enough consensus to unclog the drain pretty goddamn soon, it will be too late.

.


----------



## LoneLaugher

I would love to be informed about an occasion when the GOP genuinely extended a hand of cooperation to President Obama......and he refused it. 

That is said often. Can it be substantiated?


----------



## mudwhistle

LoneLaugher said:


> This is a reasonable take on hat period......IMO
> 
> Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans | Cynthia Tucker










Obama had no intention of working with them. 

Harry Reid holds up every bill in the Senate and Obama goes around the country claiming the GOP won't work with him. 

The Speaker of the House said Obama was like nailing down Jello. 

Every time they had a deal before lunch they'd come back and everything he agreed to was forgotten and they'd have to scratch everything.


----------



## LoneLaugher

Mud.......you seem to believe what you are writing. I will be kinder to you moving forward.

BTW....the author of that piece cites examples. Did you read it?


----------



## Amazed

LoneLaugher said:


> Mud.......you seem to believe what you are writing. I will be kinder to you moving forward.
> 
> BTW....the author of that piece cites examples. Did you read it?



LOL....as if anyone cares about you being kind, what an idiot.


----------



## LoneLaugher

Amazed said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mud.......you seem to believe what you are writing. I will be kinder to you moving forward.
> 
> BTW....the author of that piece cites examples. Did you read it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL....as if anyone cares about you being kind, what an idiot.
Click to expand...


Oh! A love tap! How's about a reach-around?


----------



## Amazed

LoneLaugher said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mud.......you seem to believe what you are writing. I will be kinder to you moving forward.
> 
> BTW....the author of that piece cites examples. Did you read it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL....as if anyone cares about you being kind, what an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh! A love tap! How's about a reach-around?
Click to expand...


You ain't up for it kid.


----------



## LoneLaugher

Oh? Try me.


----------



## Amazed

(smile) Give er go spanky 

All you'll end up doing is whining and talking bad about my mother.


----------



## LoneLaugher

What?

Wanna say that in a language that we both understand?


----------



## candycorn

LoneLaugher said:


> I would love to be informed about an occasion when the GOP genuinely extended a hand of cooperation to President Obama......and he refused it.
> 
> That is said often. Can it be substantiated?



The Senate passed a bill on tax cuts.  The President supports it.  Sent it to the House. There it sits.


----------



## oreo

Lakhota said:


> Liberals don&#8217;t want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romney&#8217;s path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> There&#8217;s a secret lurking behind everything you&#8217;re reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders know&#8212;or should&#8212;but few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like you&#8217;ve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isn&#8217;t really up for grabs. Romney&#8217;s paths to 270 are few.
> 
> It&#8217;s beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern four&#8212;Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of &#8217;em!&#8212;and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...



DREAM ON--Obama is losing the YOUTH vote-
New York Times: Obama Losing the Youth Vote to Mitt Romney | Growing Up in a Recession | TheBlaze.com

Obama had a 56% DISAPPROVAL rating with small business owners--PRIOR to his comment--"If you own a business--you didn't build it--someone else made it happen."
God only knows what small business owners think of him now.

We are at 8.3% stated unemployment with real unemployment standing at 11% if you count those that have run out of unemployment benefits but still haven't found a job.

Black pastors are furious over his endorsement of Gay Marriage and are very vocal about it.  Black adults are suffering from a 16% unemployment rate.

We have Fast n Furious the delivery of semi-auto weapons to Mexican drug cartels  that have killed thousands in Mexico--so I don't see Latino's in this country fainting over Obama. To add within this group it is 11% stated unemployment.

There are 46 million Americans that today are receiving food stamps--"I am certain they're real happy about that"--LOL.
SNAP/Food Stamp Participation « Food Research & Action Center

So if you add up these groups--we can see that Obama/Romney election is going to look very similar to one in the past.  1980 between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan--which ended up like this--and you can color *ALL SWING STATES Red at this time.* 





1980 Carter v Reagan

"Sweet Dreams--liberals"--LOL

*"If you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama*


----------



## JoeB131

oreo said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> DREAM ON--Obama is losing the YOUTH vote-
> New York Times: Obama Losing the Youth Vote to Mitt Romney | Growing Up in a Recession | TheBlaze.com
> 
> Obama had a 56% DISAPPROVAL rating with small business owners--PRIOR to his comment--"If you own a business--you didn't build it--someone else made it happen."
> God only knows what small business owners think of him now.
> 
> We are at 8.3% stated unemployment with real unemployment standing at 11% if you count those that have run out of unemployment benefits but still haven't found a job.
> 
> Black pastors are furious over his endorsement of Gay Marriage and are very vocal about it.  Black adults are suffering from a 16% unemployment rate.
> 
> We have Fast n Furious the delivery of semi-auto weapons to Mexican drug cartels  that have killed thousands in Mexico--so I don't see Latino's in this country fainting over Obama. To add within this group it is 11% stated unemployment.
> 
> There are 46 million Americans that today are receiving food stamps--"I am certain they're real happy about that"--LOL.
> SNAP/Food Stamp Participation « Food Research & Action Center
> 
> So if you add up these groups--we can see that Obama/Romney election is going to look very similar to one in the past.  1980 between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan--which ended up like this--and you can color *ALL SWING STATES Red at this time.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1980 Carter v Reagan
> 
> "Sweet Dreams--liberals"--LOL
> 
> *"If you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama*
Click to expand...


That's not even an accurate map... Carter carried Georgia. 

Also, I hate to keep bringing this up, but the entire 1980 race was skewed by the fact that John Anderson sapped liberal votes away from Carter he would have otherwise gotten.


----------



## OODA_Loop

JoeB131 said:


> Also, I hate to keep bringing this up, but the entire 1980 race was skewed by the fact that John Anderson sapped liberal votes away from Carter he would have otherwise gotten.



Yes not Carter's fault at all.


----------



## JoeB131

OODA_Loop said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I hate to keep bringing this up, but the entire 1980 race was skewed by the fact that John Anderson sapped liberal votes away from Carter he would have otherwise gotten.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes not Carter's fault at all.
Click to expand...


Carter was exactly what we wanted in 1976.  

As Tip O'Neill said about him "He came to washington an outsider, he was an outsider when he was here, and he left an outsider." 

But that's what we wanted then.  We were angry at Washington, where a president got caught red handed, resigned, and got a pardon from the guy who replaced him. 

He probably would have won, had he secured the release of the hostages.  Anderson was killing him.  Economic situation sucked worse than it does now.  

But ultimately, Reagan was what Romney isn't. Someone people liked.


----------



## OODA_Loop

JoeB131 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I hate to keep bringing this up, but the entire 1980 race was skewed by the fact that John Anderson sapped liberal votes away from Carter he would have otherwise gotten.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes not Carter's fault at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Carter was exactly what we wanted in 1976.
Click to expand...


Obama was exactly what we wanted in 2008.

History.  How does it repeat itself ?


----------



## JoeB131

OODA_Loop said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes not Carter's fault at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carter was exactly what we wanted in 1976.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama was exactly what we wanted in 2008.
> 
> History.  How does it repeat itself ?
Click to expand...


By actually having the same things happening again... 

The following things happened in 1980 that are not happening this time. 

1) There is no big foreign crisis making the president look impotent. Carter had a couple. 
2) No double digit inflation.
3) No internal party challenge
4) No third party challenge
5) No gas lines. 

But the most important thing was the candidate.  Ronald Reagan was an exceptional figure. So much so that everyone tries to remold him to validate themselves today.  

No one will do that with Romney.  He only got the nomination because the other guys were toads and his runningmate elicits more excitement than he does.  

No one ever talked about Pappy Bush being a "game-changer" in 1980.


----------



## Lakhota

> Obama in a Landslide?



After watching the Democratic Convention, I'm thinking it could happen.


----------



## bripat9643

JoeB131 said:


> oreo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DREAM ON--Obama is losing the YOUTH vote-
> New York Times: Obama Losing the Youth Vote to Mitt Romney | Growing Up in a Recession | TheBlaze.com
> 
> Obama had a 56% DISAPPROVAL rating with small business owners--PRIOR to his comment--"If you own a business--you didn't build it--someone else made it happen."
> God only knows what small business owners think of him now.
> 
> We are at 8.3% stated unemployment with real unemployment standing at 11% if you count those that have run out of unemployment benefits but still haven't found a job.
> 
> Black pastors are furious over his endorsement of Gay Marriage and are very vocal about it.  Black adults are suffering from a 16% unemployment rate.
> 
> We have Fast n Furious the delivery of semi-auto weapons to Mexican drug cartels  that have killed thousands in Mexico--so I don't see Latino's in this country fainting over Obama. To add within this group it is 11% stated unemployment.
> 
> There are 46 million Americans that today are receiving food stamps--"I am certain they're real happy about that"--LOL.
> SNAP/Food Stamp Participation « Food Research & Action Center
> 
> So if you add up these groups--we can see that Obama/Romney election is going to look very similar to one in the past.  1980 between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan--which ended up like this--and you can color *ALL SWING STATES Red at this time.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1980 Carter v Reagan
> 
> "Sweet Dreams--liberals"--LOL
> 
> *"If you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not even an accurate map... Carter carried Georgia.
> 
> Also, I hate to keep bringing this up, but the entire 1980 race was skewed by the fact that John Anderson sapped liberal votes away from Carter he would have otherwise gotten.
Click to expand...



Here's an accurate map:


----------



## miami_thomas

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


Most polls have been over sampling the Democrats based on previous elections. The truth is that the Democrat party has been shrinking over the past 4 years and that has not been even considered in these polls. That and the polls are also not taken into account voter enthusiasm. This is going to be a landslide alright just not in the way that you think.


----------



## JoeB131

miami_thomas said:


> Most polls have been over sampling the Democrats based on previous elections. The truth is that the Democrat party has been shrinking over the past 4 years and that has not been even considered in these polls. That and the polls are also not taken into account voter enthusiasm. This is going to be a landslide alright just not in the way that you think.



Not really. If anything, the recent polls have been undercounting minorities.  Their samples are about 78% White, when in fact the electorate in 2008 was only 74% white and it's likely to be closer to 72% this time, given demographic trends.  

You guys make waaaay to much over the 2010 elections, where Democrats had won seats in Republican districts and Republicans merely took them back.


----------



## miami_thomas

JoeB131 said:


> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most polls have been over sampling the Democrats based on previous elections. The truth is that the Democrat party has been shrinking over the past 4 years and that has not been even considered in these polls. That and the polls are also not taken into account voter enthusiasm. This is going to be a landslide alright just not in the way that you think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. If anything, the recent polls have been undercounting minorities.  Their samples are about 78% White, when in fact the electorate in 2008 was only 74% white and it's likely to be closer to 72% this time, given demographic trends.
> 
> You guys make waaaay to much over the 2010 elections, where Democrats had won seats in Republican districts and Republicans merely took them back.
Click to expand...


You pay too much attention to race. Talk about racists huh. Look I laid out the facts. Every single poll has been oversampling Democrats and they even admit it. The facts are that the number of Democrats has decreased and the enthusiasm gap between Democrats and Republicans is huge. You can deny all you want but facts are facts.


----------



## JoeB131

miami_thomas said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most polls have been over sampling the Democrats based on previous elections. The truth is that the Democrat party has been shrinking over the past 4 years and that has not been even considered in these polls. That and the polls are also not taken into account voter enthusiasm. This is going to be a landslide alright just not in the way that you think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. If anything, the recent polls have been undercounting minorities.  Their samples are about 78% White, when in fact the electorate in 2008 was only 74% white and it's likely to be closer to 72% this time, given demographic trends.
> 
> You guys make waaaay to much over the 2010 elections, where Democrats had won seats in Republican districts and Republicans merely took them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You pay too much attention to race. Talk about racists huh. Look I laid out the facts. Every single poll has been oversampling Democrats and they even admit it. The facts are that the number of Democrats has decreased and the enthusiasm gap between Democrats and Republicans is huge. You can deny all you want but facts are facts.
Click to expand...


I'm just pointing out that if the electorate is made up of a certain breakdown, and the polls say something else, the polls are probably wrong. 

I've seen nothing to indicate the number of Democrats have "decreased".  Quite the contrary, I think the Tea Party has really damaged the GOP Brand.  

Here's a case in point.  in the Republican Primaries in 2008, a total of 21 million people voted for one of the six major candidates.  This was in a contest that was essenatially over by Super Tuesday.   

In 2012, a total of 19 million voters voted in Republican Primaries.  Romney's final vote total was less than McCain's.   

This was in a contest that lasted far long AND where there was no Democratic contest so people could change registrations if they wanted to.  But there were LESS people voting in Republican primaries, not more.  

Now if you reasoning were correct, that people are truly fed up with Obama, there should have been MILLIONS of people changing their registration and having a say in the GOP process.  But the only new enthusiasm on the GOP side was for Ron Paul, and a lot of his folks will stay home or vote for Johnson.


----------



## miami_thomas

JoeB131 said:


> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. If anything, the recent polls have been undercounting minorities.  Their samples are about 78% White, when in fact the electorate in 2008 was only 74% white and it's likely to be closer to 72% this time, given demographic trends.
> 
> You guys make waaaay to much over the 2010 elections, where Democrats had won seats in Republican districts and Republicans merely took them back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You pay too much attention to race. Talk about racists huh. Look I laid out the facts. Every single poll has been oversampling Democrats and they even admit it. The facts are that the number of Democrats has decreased and the enthusiasm gap between Democrats and Republicans is huge. You can deny all you want but facts are facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm just pointing out that if the electorate is made up of a certain breakdown, and the polls say something else, the polls are probably wrong.
> 
> I've seen nothing to indicate the number of Democrats have "decreased".  Quite the contrary, I think the Tea Party has really damaged the GOP Brand.
> 
> Here's a case in point.  in the Republican Primaries in 2008, a total of 21 million people voted for one of the six major candidates.  This was in a contest that was essenatially over by Super Tuesday.
> 
> In 2012, a total of 19 million voters voted in Republican Primaries.  Romney's final vote total was less than McCain's.
> 
> This was in a contest that lasted far long AND where there was no Democratic contest so people could change registrations if they wanted to.  But there were LESS people voting in Republican primaries, not more.
> 
> Now if you reasoning were correct, that people are truly fed up with Obama, there should have been MILLIONS of people changing their registration and having a say in the GOP process.  But the only new enthusiasm on the GOP side was for Ron Paul, and a lot of his folks will stay home or vote for Johnson.
Click to expand...


Here are the stories about Democrats leaving the party. Now you provide the stories about the GOP leaving. I put some articles bellow to help you out. You are welcome to search for even more.

Enthusiasm

Democratic Enthusiasm Remains Flat | Elections

Daily Kos: The Reports of the Death of Democrats' Enthusiasm Are Greatly Exaggerated

Talk about both low Enthusiasm and party shrinkage

Enthusiasm factor is big as Democrats convene starting Tuesday | Gainesville.com


Party shrinkage
The Incredible Shrinking Democratic Party

Number of registered voters decreased

Number of registered voters decreased

Battleground-State Voters Leaving the Democratic Party - 2012 Decoded
Democrats leave party over marriage, religious freedom concerns :: Catholic News Agency (CNA)

African American Democrat Leaving Party To Register As Republican - The Ulsterman Report

Democratic Party Leaves Its Supporters | Lubbock Online | Lubbock Avalanche-Journal


----------



## JoeB131

Guy, i'm not even bothering with those links because I'm sure most of them lead to Right Wing sites.... 

If people were hot for Romney, more people would have voted in the GOP Primary, not less.


----------



## miami_thomas

JoeB131 said:


> Guy, i'm not even bothering with those links because I'm sure most of them lead to Right Wing sites....
> 
> If people were hot for Romney, more people would have voted in the GOP Primary, not less.



Nope most are actually not. In fact some are even left wing.


----------



## JoeB131

miami_thomas said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, i'm not even bothering with those links because I'm sure most of them lead to Right Wing sites....
> 
> If people were hot for Romney, more people would have voted in the GOP Primary, not less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope most are actually not. In fact some are even left wing.
Click to expand...


Right, everything to you guys is left wing... 

Yawn... bored.  moving on to posts by people who can process facts and not repeat talking points.


----------



## miami_thomas

JoeB131 said:


> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guy, i'm not even bothering with those links because I'm sure most of them lead to Right Wing sites....
> 
> If people were hot for Romney, more people would have voted in the GOP Primary, not less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope most are actually not. In fact some are even left wing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right, everything to you guys is left wing...
> 
> Yawn... bored.  moving on to posts by people who can process facts and not repeat talking points.
Click to expand...


Funny I give facts and you claim talking points when 90% of what Democrats claim to be facts when in fact are talking points. Then when people produce the facts you go try to sell you crap elsewhere. No problem I would expect no less from a liberal.


----------



## AVG-JOE

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



I'd like to think that up to election day, we're ALL up for grabs.

I know *I* watched both sales pitches, and I've marked my calendar for the debates.


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,


1. Take off the rose colored glasses.
2. Obama will have the seat of his pants kicked with a landside victory for Romney/Ryan.
3. To compare these two groups of men you have on the right hand, two well respected men, and on the other left hand, a failed socialist leader with a gaff a minute side kick.
4. I for one want America to survive, and keep being the light to lighten the world, not just a second rate third world country, for which Obama is steering America.
5. If you think alls well in America your drinking the Obama Cool-Aid, get off of it.
6. America is heading into the ditch, and its a ditch that will cause great harm to everything we know and expect as Americans, we *MUST* change horses this November, or not we find ourselves ruined as a Nation for the next 35 years at least.
7. And if America fails which it will under Obama, the whole world will fail, I mean they will pretty much *Die Off*, when and if we go into the ditch.
8. Here is a prediction, if Obama does win, or steals this election,  I predict it will be the kick off of the *END TIMES*, for well over one quarter of the earths population will have to *DIE*.
9. Yes billions of people will die, I for one don't want that!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## JoeB131

miami_thomas said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope most are actually not. In fact some are even left wing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, everything to you guys is left wing...
> 
> Yawn... bored.  moving on to posts by people who can process facts and not repeat talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny I give facts and you claim talking points when 90% of what Democrats claim to be facts when in fact are talking points. Then when people produce the facts you go try to sell you crap elsewhere. No problem I would expect no less from a liberal.
Click to expand...


Facts are- less people voted Republican in 2012 than in 2008.   

Only fact that is relevent.  The rest is, "Hey, I have a poll that says Democrats aren't enthused... really. I need to believe that."  

Obama will beat Romney easily...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JoeB131 said:


> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right, everything to you guys is left wing...
> 
> Yawn... bored.  moving on to posts by people who can process facts and not repeat talking points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny I give facts and you claim talking points when 90% of what Democrats claim to be facts when in fact are talking points. Then when people produce the facts you go try to sell you crap elsewhere. No problem I would expect no less from a liberal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Facts are- less people voted Republican in 2012 than in 2008.
> 
> Only fact that is relevent.  The rest is, "Hey, I have a poll that says Democrats aren't enthused... really. I need to believe that."
> 
> Obama will beat Romney easily...
Click to expand...

No one has voted yet.


----------



## miami_thomas

JoeB131 said:


> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right, everything to you guys is left wing...
> 
> Yawn... bored.  moving on to posts by people who can process facts and not repeat talking points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny I give facts and you claim talking points when 90% of what Democrats claim to be facts when in fact are talking points. Then when people produce the facts you go try to sell you crap elsewhere. No problem I would expect no less from a liberal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Facts are- less people voted Republican in 2012 than in 2008.
> 
> Only fact that is relevent.  The rest is, "Hey, I have a poll that says Democrats aren't enthused... really. I need to believe that."
> 
> Obama will beat Romney easily...
Click to expand...


That is not a fact go read the article I posted from the Gainesville times. It states more republicans voted in the primaries. Oh wait or are we talking Demfacts?


----------



## copsnrobbers

*Liberal Mudslide!*







*Republican Mudslide!*


----------



## rightwinger

Obama will win 53% of the popular vote and approximately 325 Electoral votes

Is that a landslide?  Not really
But he will win by a comfortable margin

The key will be in the Senate where it will probably go 50-50


----------



## Katzndogz

obama will win in a landslide.

Where's the obama convention bounce?   Has he pulled away from Romney?


----------



## rightwinger

Katzndogz said:


> obama will win in a landslide.
> 
> Where's the obama convention bounce?   Has he pulled away from Romney?



We will see next week when the polls come in


----------



## Katzndogz

After the Republican convention we saw the bounce the very next day.  

You are right in that we will have to wait for new polls to see where the parties stand.  Right now, everyone is quoting very old polls to justify obama's support.


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,





rightwinger said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> obama will win in a landslide.
> 
> Where's the obama convention bounce?   Has he pulled away from Romney?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We will see next week when the polls come in
Click to expand...




1. I see you have a *Eastwoodie* for that empty chair Obama! 
2. We gonna sarw it off come election day,....


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## candycorn

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



303 will be a 10%+ victory.  What % would be necessary to qualify for "landslide"?


----------



## rightwinger

candycorn said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 303 will be a 10%+ victory.  What % would be necessary to qualify for "landslide"?
Click to expand...


Obama got twice as many votes as McCain...thats a good start

Obama is looking to pull 300-325 this election. An easy victory but not necessarily a landslide


----------



## candycorn

rightwinger said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 303 will be a 10%+ victory.  What % would be necessary to qualify for "landslide"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama got twice as many votes as McCain...thats a good start
> 
> Obama is looking to pull 300-325 this election. An easy victory but not necessarily a landslide
Click to expand...


Interesting...to me 325 sounds like a pretty mosterous victory; you got 55 more electoral votes than your opponent did.


----------



## Dreadnaught1968

If Romney wins, the meltdowns on this board are going to be EPIC!

Should be fun to watch.


----------



## grunt11b

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


----------



## grunt11b

Report: Axelrod Sought to Intimidate Gallup When Findings Favored Romney

 Do a web search, this isn't the only site that has this. You keep believing the hype, the rest of us will live here in reality. Obama is in trouble, and that is a fact.


----------



## rightwinger

Dreadnaught1968 said:


> If Romney wins, the meltdowns on this board are going to be EPIC!
> 
> Should be fun to watch.



And when he loses, he will be quickly thrown under the bus

Just like McCain


----------



## miami_thomas

Dreadnaught1968 said:


> If Romney wins, the meltdowns on this board are going to be EPIC!
> 
> Should be fun to watch.



you mean when Romney wins.


----------



## miami_thomas

rightwinger said:


> Dreadnaught1968 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Romney wins, the meltdowns on this board are going to be EPIC!
> 
> Should be fun to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when he loses, he will be quickly thrown under the bus
> 
> Just like McCain
Click to expand...


If he were to lose, we may as well start deciding which sector you need to work in so you can provide for the elites in Government needs.


----------



## JakeStarkey

If Obama wins, the far right will get out the guns and be stupid until some are planted six-feet down.

Let's elect Romney to avoid that.


----------



## Amazed

JakeStarkey said:


> If Obama wins, the far right will get out the guns and be stupid until some are planted six-feet down.
> 
> Let's elect Romney to avoid that.



Too funny, it will be a ball to watch you people melt down in November.
Candycorn likes to post a wishful EC map...but the real one paints a far different picture.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The election will be very close, Romney will win, and the Dems in the Senate will gear up to make Mitch McConnel look like an ass for two years.

There will be no riots.


----------



## Lakhota

General Election: Obama 52%, Romney 48%.


----------



## JakeStarkey

If that is so, Lakhota, because it will be the sweeping of the political cartoons that show (instead of Clint and empty chair) an angry Obama at a podium talking to a chair with an empty suit labeled Obama.

That is what I am afraid voters will remember.


----------



## JoeB131

miami_thomas said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miami_thomas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny I give facts and you claim talking points when 90% of what Democrats claim to be facts when in fact are talking points. Then when people produce the facts you go try to sell you crap elsewhere. No problem I would expect no less from a liberal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Facts are- less people voted Republican in 2012 than in 2008.
> 
> Only fact that is relevent.  The rest is, "Hey, I have a poll that says Democrats aren't enthused... really. I need to believe that."
> 
> Obama will beat Romney easily...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not a fact go read the article I posted from the Gainesville times. It states more republicans voted in the primaries. Oh wait or are we talking Demfacts?
Click to expand...


No, I'm going by the vote totals for primaries posted in Real Clear Politics.  

More people participated in the 2008 primaries than 2012.


----------



## JoeB131

rightwinger said:


> Dreadnaught1968 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Romney wins, the meltdowns on this board are going to be EPIC!
> 
> Should be fun to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when he loses, he will be quickly thrown under the bus
> 
> Just like McCain
Click to expand...


But it will be more fun to watch them do it.


----------



## Lakhota

Larry Flynt could help make this an easy election for Obama.  Go Larry!!!!!


----------



## ScienceRocks

Lakhota said:


> Larry Flynt could help make this an easy election for Obama.  Go Larry!!!!!



I wish Obama would just hand it off to Biden after the election. Even Obama must understand that someone with a little more experience needs to take over. 

Obama was begging on that stage. He knew he fucked up.


----------



## Listening

candycorn said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 303 will be a 10%+ victory.  What % would be necessary to qualify for "landslide"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama got twice as many votes as McCain...thats a good start
> 
> Obama is looking to pull 300-325 this election. An easy victory but not necessarily a landslide
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting...to me 325 sounds like a pretty mosterous victory; you got 55 more electoral votes than your opponent did.
Click to expand...


So take the bet, asswipe.

Loser exits the board.  That has some teeth in it.


----------



## copsnrobbers

Matthew said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Larry Flynt could help make this an easy election for Obama.  Go Larry!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Obama would just hand it off to Biden after the election. Even Obama must understand that someone with a little more experience needs to take over.
> 
> Obama was begging on that stage. He knew he fucked up.
Click to expand...


He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
Fuck her and the rest of them.


----------



## Dick Tuck

copsnrobbers said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Larry Flynt could help make this an easy election for Obama.  Go Larry!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Obama would just hand it off to Biden after the election. Even Obama must understand that someone with a little more experience needs to take over.
> 
> Obama was begging on that stage. He knew he fucked up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
> Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
> Fuck her and the rest of them.
Click to expand...


Is Mittens better off than he was 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.


----------



## Listening

Dick Tuck said:


> copsnrobbers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Obama would just hand it off to Biden after the election. Even Obama must understand that someone with a little more experience needs to take over.
> 
> Obama was begging on that stage. He knew he fucked up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
> Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
> Fuck her and the rest of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than we were 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
Click to expand...


If it were any bit at all your business, he'd release them.  But until you post yours on this forum with your name on them, STFU.


----------



## Amazed

Dick Tuck said:


> copsnrobbers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Obama would just hand it off to Biden after the election. Even Obama must understand that someone with a little more experience needs to take over.
> 
> Obama was begging on that stage. He knew he fucked up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
> Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
> Fuck her and the rest of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than he was 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
Click to expand...


Poor Dickless.....stuck on stupid.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Listening said:


> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> copsnrobbers said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
> Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
> Fuck her and the rest of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than we were 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If it were any bit at all your business, he'd release them.  But until you post yours on this forum with your name on them, STFU.
Click to expand...


The douchebag asked the question.  Not me.  I know I'm better off.  Don't tell me to STFU, you're not my bitch.


----------



## Dick Tuck

Amazed said:


> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> copsnrobbers said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's a liar.. His agenda is clear. What he's done has been deliberate. He gets re elected and we'll all pay the price economically and socially. Only a fool doesn't see thru this man.
> Michelle is worse them him. She's as dangerous as Hillary and Bill. America's mother?
> Fuck her and the rest of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than he was 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Poor Dickless.....stuck on stupid.
Click to expand...


I'm much better off than I was 4 years ago.  Are you?  Most Americans are better off.  So why does that pussified Romney ask the question.  The punk won't even show why he's better off or worse off.

Nope dude, you're worse than stuck on stupid.  You're in R...I know that D moves me forward.


----------



## Listening

Dick Tuck said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than we were 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it were any bit at all your business, he'd release them.  But until you post yours on this forum with your name on them, STFU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The douchebag asked the question.  Not me.  I know I'm better off.  Don't tell me to STFU, you're not my bitch.
Click to expand...


Then post your returns or STFU.


----------



## Listening

Dick Tuck said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dick Tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is Mittens better off than he was 4 years ago?  Tell him to release his tax returns so we all know the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor Dickless.....stuck on stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm much better off than I was 4 years ago.  Are you?  Most Americans are better off.  So why does that pussified Romney ask the question.  The punk won't even show why he's better off or worse off.
> 
> Nope dude, you're worse than stuck on stupid.  You're in R...I know that D moves me forward.
Click to expand...


If most were better off than they were four years ago, then Obama would have it in the bag.  

As it is, his speech was a (in the words of most commentators) an open admission that he really screwed up his first term.


----------



## Lakhota

Romney On Whether We're Better Off: 'Of Course It's Getting Better' | ThinkProgress


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> Romney On Whether We're Better Off: 'Of Course It's Getting Better' | ThinkProgress



That means nothing.

As pointed out before, the economy would have gotten better if Ozob the Clown (the current Bozo's brother) were in the Oval Office.  Economies do that...especially after a recession.

In fact, there is a good argument that it would have gotten much better on it's own.

Another example of the liars on the left trying to spin something up that does not exist.

You bet we are getting better...in spite of Oblather.


----------



## Lakhota

Bozo Bush nearly destroyed America!


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> Bozo Bush nearly destroyed America!



Yes, 4 years later....and you still have to point at Bush.

Because what Bush didn't destroy....Obama is.


----------



## copsnrobbers

Lakhota said:


> Bozo Bush nearly destroyed America!



Well, if nothing less Lakota you have kept this thread alive. You may be eating dog after the election though.


----------



## Lakhota

Romney campaign in deeeeeeeep trouble!


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota said:


> Romney campaign in deeeeeeeep trouble!



I just can't help thinking that you could have been lying there on the ground at wounded knee.....writhing and gasping for breath having just been cut from the womb.

Call it......early abortion.


----------



## Lakhota

Amazed said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romney campaign in deeeeeeeep trouble!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't help thinking that you could have been lying there on the ground at wounded knee.....writhing and gasping for breath having just been cut from the womb.
> 
> Call it......early abortion.
Click to expand...


Yeah, make it personal and racist - you asshole.


----------



## Warrior102

A landslide where?

At the Welfare Office?

Sure as hell isn't going to be with anyone of intelligence/the unemployed/our men and women serving.


----------



## Warrior102

Lakhota said:


> Romney campaign in deeeeeeeep trouble!



Election 2012: North Carolina President - Rasmussen Reports

Why's your "Rep" off, pussy?


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romney campaign in deeeeeeeep trouble!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't help thinking that you could have been lying there on the ground at wounded knee.....writhing and gasping for breath having just been cut from the womb.
> 
> Call it......early abortion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, make it personal and racist - you asshole.
Click to expand...


You are an idiot.....I have a very low idiot tolerance.....

You make the case for an extinction level event for your kind....jus sayin.


----------



## Lakhota

Amazed said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't help thinking that you could have been lying there on the ground at wounded knee.....writhing and gasping for breath having just been cut from the womb.
> 
> Call it......early abortion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, make it personal and racist - you asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are an idiot.....I have a very low idiot tolerance.....
> 
> You make the case for an extinction level event for your kind....jus sayin.
Click to expand...


Right-wing hatred, extremism and intolerance is very ugly.


----------



## Warrior102

Lakhota said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, make it personal and racist - you asshole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are an idiot.....I have a very low idiot tolerance.....
> 
> You make the case for an extinction level event for your kind....jus sayin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right-wing hatred, extremism and intolerance is very ugly.
Click to expand...


Why's your rep off, dick licker/slobberer?


----------



## Lakhota

Warrior102 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are an idiot.....I have a very low idiot tolerance.....
> 
> You make the case for an extinction level event for your kind....jus sayin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right-wing hatred, extremism and intolerance is very ugly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why's your rep off, dick licker/slobberer?
Click to expand...


Aw, does the little whiny baby want to neg me...?


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, make it personal and racist - you asshole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are an idiot.....I have a very low idiot tolerance.....
> 
> You make the case for an extinction level event for your kind....jus sayin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right-wing hatred, extremism and intolerance is very ugly.
Click to expand...


This from the girl who can't help but start some of the more prejudiced threads .


----------



## copsnrobbers

Lakhota said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right-wing hatred, extremism and intolerance is very ugly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why's your rep off, dick licker/slobberer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aw, does the little whiny baby want to neg me...?
Click to expand...


You're gay aren't cha. What fucking sissy.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I still don't think it is Obama in a landslide, but Romney came very close to tipping the woodpile onto himself this week. . . very close.


----------



## Lakhota

My General Election prediction:  Obama 52, Romney 48.


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota said:


> My General Election prediction:  Obama 52, Romney 48.



...and with your education we should all just bow.................


----------



## JakeStarkey

Amazingly Stupid is stalking, I see.


----------



## skookerasbil

Lakhota said:


> My General Election prediction:  Obama 52, Romney 48.





yuk........yuk..........

Election model with 100% success rate for past 30 years predicts Romney victory | The Raw Story



As James Carville once said.............


----------



## Lakhota

Ya got that right, Ricky...

Rick Santorum: 'Smart People' Will Never Be On Our Side (VIDEO)


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota.....we conqured you...aren't you happy with the money you get from the casinos?


----------



## Amazed

Who was it warned me someone would start with the stalking claims?????

I dunno.....but I smell fear.


----------



## Lakhota

Amazed said:


> Lakhota.....we conqured you...aren't you happy with the money you get from the casinos?



Obama should be paying you to campaign for him.  It's ignorant NaziCons like you that will help keep him in the White House for FOUR MORE YEARS.  Thank you!


----------



## Amazed

Lakhota said:


> Amazed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota.....we conqured you...aren't you happy with the money you get from the casinos?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama should be paying you to campaign for him.  It's ignorant NaziCons like you that will help keep him in the White House for FOUR MORE YEARS.  Thank you!
Click to expand...


Did you ask the Tribe for more money?


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> My General Election prediction:  Obama 52, Romney 48.



From what I recall, you were also predicting Scott Walker's demise.

How's he doing in his new job....wait...he still has his old one.

Keep up the good work.


----------



## Peach

The voter fraud decried by the extremist right is occurring, but it the DENIAL of the right that is the FRAUD upon the Constitution. To them, the Constitution really is just "pieces of paper".


----------



## Listening

Peach said:


> The voter fraud decried by the extremist right is occurring, but it the DENIAL of the right that is the FRAUD upon the Constitution. To them, the Constitution really is just "pieces of paper".



Is somebody else using your computer or are you on drugs ?

Would you like to elaborate on your little rant so we might better know what you are referencing ?


----------



## Lakhota

Virginia Ex-Congressman Could Cost Romney the Election - The Daily Beast


----------



## ScienceRocks

I'm going to start building my bunker and buying some can goods. Not looking good.


----------



## Listening

Matthew said:


> I'm going to start building my bunker and buying some can goods. Not looking good.



Why ?

We will keep the House and will likely win the senate.

Either way, Obama is a lame duck from day one.


----------



## Dissent

55% Obama
40% Romney
5% Johnson


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,


1. After this major  fuck up in Libya and Egypt, you dumb ass' still think your *boy* has a snow balls chance in hell?
2. Obama's minions knew what was about to take place, and they did *nothing*, didn't even make sure they had bullets for their guns.
3. *FAILURE IN THE FIRST DEGREE*
4. Betrayal of the Ambassador, he failed to protect him.
5. That should be enough right there on top of every other consistent failure he is.
6. Jimma Carter the original worst President was the last to lose an Ambassador.
7. That right there should tell you something......


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## copsnrobbers

Obama is going back to whats left of Acorn (nothing) and he's taking the rest of the party with him.
They need to be corralled, They're all seriously dangerous to America and Israel.

cops


----------



## HUGGY

*Obama in a Landslide? *

"A landslide election is an election in which one candidate wins by a substantial margin. The precise definition of a landslide election varies, with some people saying that the margin needs to consist of five points or more, setting a relatively low bar, while others say that the margin should be much higher, closer to 10 or 15 points. If a candidate achieves a landslide victory, it suggests a strong mandate from the people."

What is a Landslide Election?


----------



## HUGGY

Dissent said:


> 55% Obama
> 40% Romney
> 5% Johnson



That would be a landslide by anyone's definition.  I suspect the coat tails would be wide sweeping if those numbers happen.  The House could easily go dem with a bigger majority in the Senate.  

If that happens I guess we will REALLY find out what Obama wants to do with some political capital.


----------



## copsnrobbers

HUGGY said:


> Dissent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 55% Obama
> 40% Romney
> 5% Johnson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a landslide by anyone's definition.  I suspect the coat tails would be wide sweeping if those numbers happen.  The House could easily go dem with a bigger majority in the Senate.
> 
> If that happens I guess we will REALLY find out what Obama wants to do with some political capital.
Click to expand...


He won't help anyone. The end game is control Huggy. He's going to lose anyway.
We'll all be much better off for it. The first thing that comes to mind is Freedom and Opportunity. The threat he stands for will be dissolved for good in Nov. 
In the end you will be happy, we will all be happy and a whole lot safer.


----------



## bigrebnc1775




----------



## oreo

Lakhota said:


> Liberals don&#8217;t want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romney&#8217;s path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> There&#8217;s a secret lurking behind everything you&#8217;re reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders know&#8212;or should&#8212;but few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like you&#8217;ve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isn&#8217;t really up for grabs. Romney&#8217;s paths to 270 are few.
> 
> It&#8217;s beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern four&#8212;Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of &#8217;em!&#8212;and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...



  Yeah right:

*Here's how CNN manipulated their poll to show Obama leading Romney by 6 points.*



> CNN is grabbing political headlines tonight with the release of its latest poll. It shows Obama surging to a 6-point lead over Romney, 52-46, among likely. Before the start of the Democrat convention, the candidates had been tied in the poll. Since it purportedly confirms a narrative the media is trying to build, i.e. that Obama is starting to pull away with the race, it is getting wide coverage. However, there are a couple of strange things within the poll that cast doubt on its veracity. And, at least one concern warrants a response from CNN.
> 
> First, this being a media poll, it has an obvious skew towards Democrats. The partisan breakdown is *(D/R/I) 50/45/5.* It perhaps isn&#8217;t surprising that Obama is leading a D+5 poll by 6 points. Throughout the campaign season, Obama&#8217;s margin usually is very close to the partisan skew in the sample. It is surprising, though, that Independents make up only *5%* of the sample. Tellingly, Romney leads this group by 14 points.


CNN manipulated their polling | Education News

The national polls are doing the same thing they did during the Carter/Reagan race.  Manipulating the polls as they did in the above example--to keep Obama in this race--and they do it for a good reason.  *If the national polls showed Romney running away with this election--NO ONE would donate another dime to Obama's reelection campaign.*

So what you have to do is do what the campaigns do--pay attention to the "internal polling data" to get a clear view of what's going to happen in November.

Obama is losing the youth vote.
New York Times: Obama Losing the Youth Vote to Mitt Romney | Growing Up in a Recession | TheBlaze.com  In fact a recent poll in Colorado shows Romney leading the 18 to 34 year old age group by 1 point.  *This is devastating to Obama.*
http://www.denverpost.com/nationalp...post-presidential-poll-results-coming-at-noon
Women are moving to Romney.
Poll: Mitt Romney Making Headway With Women Voters - The Ballot 2012 (usnews.com)
Obama losing support with blacks--Hispanics who will not be voting for him like they did in 2008.
Obama losing support even among black and Hispanic voters, poll shows - NYPOST.com
Romney has 14 point lead with independents
Romney extends lead among Independents to 14 percent | RedState
White's will not support Obama like they did in 2008.
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports&#8482;
_The above are the ones that overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008--that won't be in 2012._

Plus Obama has this problem.
60% disapprove of the way Obama has handled the economy and deficit.
60% Disapprove of Obama's Handling of Economy: Gallup - CNBC
August 2012 jobs report--Horrible--employment in this country at a 30 year LOW.
August jobs report: hiring down, unemployment falls - Sep. 7, 2012

*All of the above internals show that Obama is going to get clobbered in November.  
*






*(This cartoon picture probably is fairly close to the support that Obama has lost since 2008)-*-

"If you don't have a record to run on, you need to paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama


----------



## Lakhota

The debates will finish Romney off.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Lakhota said:


> The debates will finish Romney off.



The economy tidal wave  has sunk the USS obama


----------



## Lakhota

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> The debates will finish Romney off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The economy tidal wave  has sunk the USS obama
Click to expand...


Only for the idiots.


----------



## oreo

Lakhota said:


> The debates will finish Romney off.



Obama will have to DEFEND his own record--*because he has a record now.*  And you can't defend real unemployment in this country standing around 12%--and 16 trillion in red ink.



> NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The labor market lost momentum last month as job growth fell to a disappointingly slow pace. The unemployment rate also fell, as more people stopped looking for jobs.
> 
> The economy added 96,000 jobs in August, down from 141,000 jobs in July, the Department of Labor said Friday.
> 
> Meanwhile, the unemployment rate fell to 8.1%, from 8.3% in July.
> Economists polled by CNNMoney were expecting 120,000 jobs to be added in the month, and the unemployment rate to remain unchanged.
> 
> The unemployment rate fell largely because *368,000 people stopped looking for work, many of them young people.* Just 63.5% of the working-age population was either employed or actively looking for work -- *a 30-year low.*


August jobs report: hiring down, unemployment falls - Sep. 7, 2012

Medium household incomes have dropped more than $4000.00 since Obama took office.
Household income is below recession levels, report says - The Washington Post

All the singing--and perfectly pronounced speech's are not going to save wonder boy from his own record.  Americans always vote their wallets.


----------



## oreo

Lakhota said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> The debates will finish Romney off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The economy tidal wave  has sunk the USS obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only for the idiots.
Click to expand...



Obama bought and paid for this economy with his shoving down our throats the 878 billion dollar economic stimulus bill that he PROMISED would create millions of jobs in this country.

Obama tried to revive this economy back to health through road and bridge work and green energy construction that was outsourced to China anyway.
Obama's Stimulus Money Spent Overseas, Jobs in China - ABC News



> Obama took a chapter out of FDR's book the 1930's at a time when we actually needed roads and bridges.  Today we have super highways that criss/cross this nation and if we needed a bridge we built it.  What permits were issued overnight in the 30's now takes years of engineering and design.  What took thousands of men with shovels in the 30's now can be done with a couple of heavy equipment operators--and what was a workforce of primarily men in the 1930's is now 1/2 women who don't do road and bridge work.



_Mitt Romney was right when he stated:_  Obama keeps running down to the corner pay-phone to plug quarters into it, believing the economy would recover--but forgot that we live in a smart phone century.

The one shovel ready project we had--*the Keystone pipeline* that would have put 10's of thousands of Americans to work the next day--Obama said NO to.

4 years later--August 2012--we have one of the WORST jobs report.  Employment in this country hits a 30 year LOW.
August jobs report: hiring down, unemployment falls - Sep. 7, 2012

This is Obama's record.  *It appears the only IDIOT is Barack Obama.*






"When you don't have a record to run on, you need to paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama


----------



## Chris

Bush's SEC let Wall Street run a derivatives Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

George W. Bush was the goose that flew into the engine.

Obama landed the plane in the Hudson.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chris said:


> Bush's SEC let Wall Street run a derivatives Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.
> 
> George W. Bush was the goose that flew into the engine.
> 
> Obama landed the plane in the Hudson.



Obama: Bailing Out the Banks "Was Necessary," but "I Hated It" - DailyFinance


----------



## JakeStarkey

Very good, bigrebnc.  I like it when you think not drink.

The key is to deny him OH and either NV or NH.



bigrebnc1775 said:


>


----------



## Pinocchio

liability said:


> obama could easily lose 50 of 57 states.



lol


----------



## eshrdlu

Wolfsister77 and Lakhota, spot on.  I agree.


----------



## OODA_Loop

Rock and roll / youth vote don't think so........







Bubba the Love Sponge® Show


----------



## Lakhota

Well, only 46 days to go and already NaziCons are coming unglued. I suspect sales of guns, Prozac and Xanex will skyrocket.


----------



## OODA_Loop

Ask over 1000 rock N roll, pro-pot, porn, shock jock, nationally syndicated crowd and:








Idiot Bubba is very pro-Obama.

Bubba the Love Sponge® Show


----------



## Lakhota

> Heading into the debates, an Obama victory on Election Day is looking likely. But what if he doesnt just win, but wins huge? Michael Tomasky on the consequences of a landslide.



The Blowout Scenario Following a Possible Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,

1. Like I keep telling you, Obama has zero chance.
2. No matter how the libnut media wants to paint the economy, the independents actually live in it, and know they have suffered massive in income loss since obama took office.
3. 85% of *ALL* Americans have slipped backwards in over all prosperity.
4. Thats a *FACT*!!!
5. The Independents will decide in all those close States, and they are smart enough people to *VOTE ROMNEY* for the money.
6. Switch the words around in Romney's name and you find *MONEY*!!! 
7. Romney can't lose this one folks, the Independents will get him in, no worries!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sir James, your facts are right, but your conclusion is contradicted overwhelmingly by the polling.

The point is this: Americans, unhappy as they may be with Obama, are terrified of a president dependent on the far right and libertarian wacko brigades.

In other words, America hates your type more than it dislikes Obama or likes Romney.

You are the cause for the coming defeat of Romney if he can't get you guys from hanging on to his feet.


----------



## Dr.House

0bama landslide...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Not a landslide for Obama.

Maybe a victory for Romney if he can do well Wednesday night and get back on track about the economy.


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,





JakeStarkey said:


> Sir James, your facts are right, but your conclusion is contradicted overwhelmingly by the polling.
> 
> The point is this: Americans, unhappy as they may be with Obama, are terrified of a president dependent on the far right and libertarian wacko brigades.
> 
> In other words, America hates your type more than it dislikes Obama or likes Romney.
> 
> You are the cause for the coming defeat of Romney if he can't get you guys from hanging on to his feet.





1. Jake, look,.......polling don't mean shit,......because those who are polling are controlling the results,.... everyone knows it,.....(ever watch the libnut media).....this election evolves around what the Independents do,......and feel,......towards obama,......and this economy,.......which has hit them *very hard*,........not unlike everyone else in it........
2. The far right whackjobs like me, as you put it, are not running for President, or have any actual pull with President Romney....... so you are so full of shit its coming out of your ears dude,......
3. Obama doesn't have a chance in hell,....he is done,....stick a fucking fork in this guy,...
4. There is a huge amount of libnuts who will absolutely *NOT* vote for him again, and will vote for Romney,..........
5. That alone will doom obama,.......the facts are on the table, obama is a socialists, commie bastard, and a good 85% of Americans don't want that, they are aware of history, communism doesn't work, because where communism is, freedom dies, and even most libnuts love their freedom more then they do being under a communistic government, where the government owns everything, and gives out goodies to the good dogs, while punishing the bad dogs, either way, communism makes its subjects dogs, and even libnuts don't want to be forced into some low life existence.
6. Jake, your a fucking idiot dude, do your self a favor, take a couple weeks off here, then never come back.
7. Fucking dumb ass!
8. Nothing personal,..lol!!!!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> Sir James, your facts are right, but your conclusion is contradicted overwhelmingly by the polling.
> 
> The point is this: Americans, unhappy as they may be with Obama, are terrified of a president dependent on the far right and libertarian wacko brigades.
> 
> In other words, America hates your type more than it dislikes Obama or likes Romney.
> 
> You are the cause for the coming defeat of Romney if he can't get you guys from hanging on to his feet.



Oh, Jakey, stop trying to blame "the far right" for Romney's problems. 

Romney has dug himself into this hole.  

A sincere conservative would be moping the floor with Obama right now.


----------



## JakeStarkey

You have nothing to worth to read about Romney.  We have all known that for months.


----------



## JoeB131

JakeStarkey said:


> You have nothing to worth to read about Romney.  We have all known that for months.



But yet, here you are, trying to blame the "far right" and the TEA movement for Romney's flailing around.   

Romney was a bad candidate.  I said that a year ago, but you all said he was "electable".  

Now he's trailing Obama by 4 points on average, going to lose all the states McCain lost, 

Own up and admit that you guys foisted a bad choice on the GOP.  Don't look for someone else to blame.


----------



## chesswarsnow

Sorry bout that,


1. Stop listening to the libnut media, they are the, *piss boy media* for all libnuts.
2. Thats why you won't hear about the politician fucking the young kid in the bathroom the other day.
3. Libnuts can do *no wrong* for the *libnutter media*.
4. These are the facts, and not meant as a personal attack on anyone.
5. So do no harm to yourselves.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## JakeStarkey

That was a Tea Party leader with the kid, Sir James.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Samson

Lakota should stick to predicting Wisconsin State recall elections......

...

or, maybe not.


----------



## Listening

How's  that landslide working out for you ?


----------



## Liability

Ohio: Obama 48%, Romney 47%
Florida: Romney 51%, Obama 47%
Virginia: Romney 49%, Obama 47%
Swing State Tracking: Romney 49%, Obama 47% -- Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports

And again, the polls are skewed IN FAVOR of the Democratic.

Imagine what's actually happening if the numbers were not getting "reported" in that skewed fashion.


----------



## candycorn

Obama's got it wrapped up!


----------



## Listening

candycorn said:


> Obama's got it wrapped up!


----------



## MeBelle

Mitt Romney leading in all 11 key swing states in QStarNews poll - Arlington Conservative | Examiner.com


----------



## decker

MeBelle60 said:


> Mitt Romney leading in all 11 key swing states in QStarNews poll - Arlington Conservative | Examiner.com


is that was case it be romney landslide. I doube he win all 11 but if he does it be massive win for him


----------



## decker

candycorn said:


> Obama's got it wrapped up!


nobody has it wapped up. its close race with romney having lead nationally


----------



## Meathead

The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.

Weird!


----------



## decker

Meathead said:


> The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.
> 
> Weird!


well he has to win at least five swing states obama to win. but romney does have the edge no doubt about it


----------



## candycorn

decker said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's got it wrapped up!
> 
> 
> 
> nobody has it wapped up. its close race with romney having lead nationally
Click to expand...


Leading what?  Elections are decided state-by-state sock boy.


----------



## JakeStarkey

If Romney is still at 231 to 191, Romney does not have the edge.  MR needs another big smack down to move in front in the swing states.



decker said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.
> 
> Weird!
> 
> 
> 
> well he has to win at least five swing states obama to win. but romney does have the edge no doubt about it
Click to expand...


----------



## Listening

Meathead said:


> The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.
> 
> Weird!



To be clear, I dug this up from a while ago....back when La-Sploda thought Obama would coast.  He and all the swaggering dorks on the left with the "Romney is toast" attitude.

One debate.....and guess what ?

It's been fun to watch.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Listening said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.
> 
> Weird!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be clear, I dug this up from a while ago....back when La-Sploda thought Obama would coast.  He and all the swaggering dorks on the left with the "Romney is toast" attitude.
> 
> One debate.....and guess what ?
> 
> It's been fun to watch.
Click to expand...



Fun, to be sure
the left and concern trolls are in total melt down
and total denial


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## syrenn

Lakhota said:


>




the braindead have arisen. Its been boring without your hack crap. Now all we need is liesmatters back


----------



## koshergrl

don't forget sky.


----------



## koshergrl

I just talked to my sis..she says my bro-in-law thinks the Margin of Corruption is too great for Romney to overcome. That's not good news. Unless her really does just landslide in...


----------



## syrenn

koshergrl said:


> don't forget sky.




i think sky is in perma vacation.....


----------



## mamooth

So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.

Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

mamooth said:


> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.



How many of this states are pro gun?
Colorado (9)
Florida (29)
Iowa (6)
Michigan (16)
Nevada (6)
New Hampshire (4)
North Carolina (15)
Ohio (18)
Pennsylvania (20)
Virginia (13)
Wisconsin (10)
How many of the voters from those states will over look obama assault weapons ban comment a short time ago?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> If Romney is still at 231 to 191, Romney does not have the edge.  MR needs another big smack down to move in front in the swing states.
> 
> 
> 
> decker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The OP's article's title is baffling. "Obama by a Landslide" discusses how he can still eek out a win even if he loses four big swing states.
> 
> Weird!
> 
> 
> 
> well he has to win at least five swing states obama to win. but romney does have the edge no doubt about it
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Who needs openly admitted liberals when you have starkey on your team


----------



## Luddly Neddite

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.



The real problem is the Rs will not suddenly become All Americans. They will continue to filibuster against jobs, against economic growth and against any and all recovery efforts. 

Hell, the damn Rs will keep voting against ObamaCare even though they know they can't repeal it and even though their anti-American shit costs the taxpayers MILLIONS. What do they care as long as they've got their tax payer funded health insurance.


----------



## Listening

luddly.neddite said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it wont be a landslide for Obama, but the president will realize a comfortable, uneventful victory with 303 EC votes.
> 
> However, republicans will win control of the Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The real problem is the Rs will not suddenly become All Americans. They will continue to filibuster against jobs, against economic growth and against any and all recovery efforts.
> 
> Hell, the damn Rs will keep voting against ObamaCare even though they know they can't repeal it and even though their anti-American shit costs the taxpayers MILLIONS. What do they care as long as they've got their tax payer funded health insurance.
Click to expand...


Ah yes...the sad truth comes to light.

We don't elect a king....as much as you bastards would like to think we do.

The house represents the interests of the individual districts.  And it appears a great many of those districts don't want Obamacare.

That is how you keep the 47% from grabbing the treasury.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

bigrebnc1775 said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of this states are pro gun?
> Colorado (9)
> Florida (29)
> Iowa (6)
> Michigan (16)
> Nevada (6)
> New Hampshire (4)
> North Carolina (15)
> Ohio (18)
> Pennsylvania (20)
> Virginia (13)
> Wisconsin (10)
> How many of the voters from those states will over look obama assault weapons ban comment a short time ago?
Click to expand...


Don't know but you can bert that all rw's will conveniently ignore that Mit voted for gun control while President Obama signed a law that loosened gun laws. 

rw's -- They will never vote in favor of their own interests. They're just dumb that way.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

luddly.neddite said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of this states are pro gun?
> Colorado (9)
> Florida (29)
> Iowa (6)
> Michigan (16)
> Nevada (6)
> New Hampshire (4)
> North Carolina (15)
> Ohio (18)
> Pennsylvania (20)
> Virginia (13)
> Wisconsin (10)
> How many of the voters from those states will over look obama assault weapons ban comment a short time ago?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't know but you can bert that all rw's will conveniently ignore that Mit voted for gun control while President Obama signed a law that loosened gun laws.
> 
> rw's -- They will never vote in favor of their own interests. They're just dumb that way.
Click to expand...


Romney said what was done in his state would not be workable in other states.
obama's gun grab thinks what works in his state is workable in all states.
Anything else?


----------



## The Rabbi

mamooth said:


> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.



It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.


----------



## skookerasbil

The Rabbi said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.
Click to expand...




Rabbi bro..........head over to DRUDGE this morning............Obama approval has dropped 7 points in 3 days on GALLUP.


yuk.......yuk............


----------



## skookerasbil




----------



## JakeStarkey

The facts remain these: we do not know who will be president at this but, but we are pretty sure that the House will stay Red and the Senate will be Blue.

This means that obamacare remains the law of the land.,


----------



## skookerasbil

JakeStarkey said:


> The facts remain these: we do not know who will be president at this but, but we are pretty sure that the House will stay Red and the Senate will be Blue.
> 
> This means that obamacare remains the law of the land.,





Analysis fAiL..........as usual. Typical lefty k00k does the talking points analysis for the gay, seeing a win as a mandate.


Fact is, if the Senate stays blue it does so by a hair and in districts where a Dem risks little by jumping ship.......and of course, we all know how popular Obamacare is Two or three Dems could easily flip given what the mood of the country will be with a new president who is going to facilitate bipartisanship. Reagan did the same thing in the early 80's and lots of Dems flipped on taxes.


----------



## JakeStarkey

You see simply what you want, freak boy, not what it is.

Harry Reed and the US Senate with 53 or 54 blue votes will make sure obamacare stays the law of the land.

What weird world you must inhabit if you truly believe all of what you write.



skookerasbil said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The facts remain these: we do not know who will be president at this but, but we are pretty sure that the House will stay Red and the Senate will be Blue.
> 
> This means that obamacare remains the law of the land.,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Analysis fAiL..........as usual. Typical lefty k00k does the talking points analysis for the gay, seeing a win as a mandate.
> 
> 
> Fact is, if the Senate stays blue it does so by a hair and in districts where a Dem risks little by jumping ship.......and of course, we all know how popular Obamacare is Two or three Dems could easily flip given what the mood of the country will be with a new president who is going to facilitate bipartisanship. Reagan did the same thing in the early 80's and lots of Dems flipped on taxes.
Click to expand...


----------



## Samson

skookerasbil said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rabbi bro..........head over to DRUDGE this morning............Obama approval has dropped 7 points in 3 days on GALLUP.
> 
> 
> yuk.......yuk............
Click to expand...




Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval

His approval rating at 46% is where it was a month ago.


----------



## JakeStarkey

RCP National Average 46.9 47.9 Romney +1.0 
Favorable Ratings +4.5 +6.5 Romney +2.0 
Intrade Odds 63.5 36.5 for Obama


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> RCP National Average 46.9 47.9 Romney +1.0
> Favorable Ratings +4.5 +6.5 Romney +2.0
> Intrade Odds 63.5 36.5 for Obama



intrade lol. Intrade is meaningless at this point. They simply assume all toss ups go to Obama.


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> You see simply what you want, freak boy, not what it is.
> 
> Harry Reed and the US Senate with 53 or 54 blue votes will make sure obamacare stays the law of the land.
> 
> What weird world you must inhabit if you truly believe all of what you write.
> 
> 
> 
> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The facts remain these: we do not know who will be president at this but, but we are pretty sure that the House will stay Red and the Senate will be Blue.
> 
> This means that obamacare remains the law of the land.,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Analysis fAiL..........as usual. Typical lefty k00k does the talking points analysis for the gay, seeing a win as a mandate.
> 
> 
> Fact is, if the Senate stays blue it does so by a hair and in districts where a Dem risks little by jumping ship.......and of course, we all know how popular Obamacare is Two or three Dems could easily flip given what the mood of the country will be with a new president who is going to facilitate bipartisanship. Reagan did the same thing in the early 80's and lots of Dems flipped on taxes.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...



The House of Reps ended the Way in Vietnam simply by not funding it. The same can be done to Obamacare.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Look at all the components to the program, and Romney, anyway, believes that the GOP must get off its ass and do something.  The free market system failed to bring a quality affordabile and accessible program to all Americans.  Tis what tis.


----------



## longknife

Well, you Looney Lefties are really gonna LOVE the following posts:


----------



## longknife

*Despite Evidence, Dems and MSM Hype Obama Early Vote, Ground Game*

This week, mainstream media and liberal outlets -- from the New York Times to Politico to the Huffington Post -- have tried to build up their last firewall for the Obama campaign. The media is hyping the Obama campaign's  indomitable ground game in swing states that will bank enough early votes for Obama to propel him to victory.

The GOP will love this story while Dems will say it's slanted @ Despite Evidence, Dems and MSM Hype Obama Early Vote, Ground Game

This early vote firewall is the last thing the mainstream media and the Obama campaign have to try to ensure their supporters are not demoralized by the bad polling numbers, but in many of the most important swing states -- like Colorado, Iowa, Virginia, Florida, and New Hampshire -- Republicans are over-performing compared to 2008 and Democrats are under performing.


----------



## longknife

*The National Agony May Be Over*

by Dad29 Dad29: The National Agony May Be Over 

Statistics are the most elegant forms of lies, yes.  But they're still interesting.

...In the current tracking poll, Gallup finds the ten-point advantage for Democrats has now turned into a one-point Republican advantage. The current party breakdown is now 35 percent Democrats, 36 percent Republicans, and 29 percent independents. And just in like 2008, that one-point advantage increases when independents are asked which party they typically lean to, with 49 percent identifying as Republicans and 46 percent Democrats. That number backs up the trends in other polling showing Romney leading among independents by large margins.

To get an idea of what this shift means, I plugged the Gallup 2008 and 2012 partisan numbers into the actual results from the 2008 election. Under Gallup&#8217;s breakdown, Obama would have won in 2008 by 9.8 points (he actually won by 7.2), and would eke out a victory against Romney in 2012 by eight tenths of a point.

But here&#8217;s why you can feel the panic emanating from Chicago: Romney is currently doing better with independents than Obama did in 2008. Obama won independents by eight, in 2008 while Romney is currently leading by 10.6 points on average. If the independent numbers are entered in to the 2008 results, Romney would have a victory of over four points. Even if Romney does not take any more crossover votes (Democrats who vote Republican and vice versa) than McCain got in 2008, he would still win by over four points on Election Day.

And Gallup is not alone.

...taking the Rasmussen partisan breakdown of 2008 and 2012 numbers and plugging them into the actual results gives Obama a seven-point win in 2008 and Romney a half-point victory in 2012. Taking the same scenario as Gallup and moving the independent results to match the current polling average changes Romney&#8217;s half-point victory into a 5.7-point victory. (As with Gallup, I&#8217;m assuming the Republican and Democrat voting margins stay the same as 2008.) If these polls are accurate and Romney captures a popular-vote win of four to six points, there is no chance he could lose the Electoral College...

None of that polling takes the Benghazi scandal into account. either.  It WILL get worse for SCOAMF


----------



## longknife

2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio

by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio

Romney Landslide. . .
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




*Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*


----------



## bigrebnc1775

longknife said:


> 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> Romney Landslide. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*



I don't see that happening but predicting is fun isn't it?


----------



## longknife

Well, I DO see it happening!!!

And Democrat lawyers all over the place suing to reverse the results!


----------



## The Rabbi

longknife said:


> 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> Romney Landslide. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*



I dont see PA or MI going for Romney.  But otherwise this is probably right.  Romney in a landslide.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

longknife said:


> Well, I DO see it happening!!!
> 
> And Democrat lawyers all over the place suing to reverse the results!



What I do find interesting is that many of the states that obama won big in back in 2008 are now toss up states.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map


----------



## bigrebnc1775

The Rabbi said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> Romney Landslide. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont see PA or MI going for Romney.  But otherwise this is probably right.  Romney in a landslide.
Click to expand...


I think the coal sates will go Romney


----------



## Cowman

longknife said:


> 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> Romney Landslide. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*



FUCKING LOL.

I'll bookmark this thread for you. God damn, this is going to be great!

Not even Nate Silver's numbers have such a ridiculous lead for Obama.

You're living in fucking fantasy land.


----------



## Rinata

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.

Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map

2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama


----------



## Rinata

Cowman said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> by Douglas V. Gibbs Political Pistachio: 2012 Election Map Prediction - Political Pistachio
> 
> Romney Landslide. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this too good to be true? Gibbs seems to make one heck of a case for this to be the case. Oh Lord above but I hope so.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FUCKING LOL.
> 
> I'll bookmark this thread for you. God damn, this is going to be great!
> 
> Not even Nate Silver's numbers have such a ridiculous lead for Obama.
> 
> You're living in fucking fantasy land.
Click to expand...


Why tell them?? They will be miserable enough after November 6th!!!


----------



## JakeStarkey

What is most amazing and amusing is that it is bigrebnc of all people who is being the voice of reason for the wacky extrem right.


----------



## LoneLaugher

And......he's supposedly educating an MIT grad? Life is either fucking inside-out or upside-down.


----------



## The Rabbi

If Romney takes WI and UT he can lose PA, OH, and IA and still win.

Too many ways for Romney to win here.


----------



## longknife

Rinata said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.
> 
> Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map
> 
> 2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?


----------



## Rozman

Republicans hold the House and win the Senate...

Works for me.
Would still like for Obama to be replaced...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Dem Senate and GOP House.

Romney hopefully as Pres.





Rozman said:


> Republicans hold the House and win the Senate...
> 
> Works for me.
> Would still like for Obama to be replaced...


----------



## AceRothstein

longknife said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.
> 
> Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map
> 
> 2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
Click to expand...


You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.
> 
> Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map
> 
> 2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
Click to expand...


That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama


----------



## candycorn

Trajan said:


> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?



It's not up for grabs for finishers either....


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Do take the time to explain it to bigrebnc.

He is a concrete learner, needs a lot of coaching, but when he gets something he does not forget.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Do take the time to explain it to bigrebnc.
> 
> He is a concrete learner, needs a lot of coaching, but when he gets something he does not forget.



Have you voted for obama yet?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Voted for Romney earlier in the week.  Hope you have voted early also.  With your lifestyle, I gather you are on a day by day basis.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
Click to expand...


Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
Did you or did you not say that?
I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Voted for Romney earlier in the week.  Hope you have voted early also.  With your lifestyle, I gather you are on a day by day basis.
> 
> Pay attention should AceRothstein takes hims time to teach you.  You, by the above comment, still don't understand.



You're a fucking liar.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Pay attention should AceRothstein takes his time to teach you.  You, by the above comment, still don't understand.





bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
Click to expand...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Pay attention should AceRothstein takes his time to teach you.  You, by the above comment, still don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


So your tellinfg an obama supporter that he needs to teach me a romney supporter?
How about this let me teach you how to read what he said.
Huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks yet Huffington post does not use Gallop but they use Rasmusse. Now go suck your liberals buddy asshole you're dismissed.


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
Click to expand...


Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.

2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


Stupid they used Rasmusse in the poll I post but not gallop isn't that making you a liar and them cherry picking?


----------



## JakeStarkey

His stubborness more than his stupidity is his major failing here, Ace.

Ask him about his great p'wn on the video that supposedly showed Hitler as a socialist (this after he had killed or jailed all the socialists).



AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to you. You are looking at the polls of Nevada and Gallup is a national poll. If you can find state polling from Gallup, I'm sure they'd be happy to add it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> His stubborness more than his stupidity is his major failing here, Ace.
> 
> Ask him about his great p'wn on the video that supposedly showed Hitler as a socialist (this after he had killed or jailed all the socialists).
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Your stupidity and lying far surpasses my stubbornness but I make it up with kicking you to the curb every time. That is what Romney will do to the left wing liberals like you who call themselves Republicans.


----------



## Charles_Main

AceRothstein said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.
> 
> Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map
> 
> 2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
Click to expand...


No you Jack ass RCP uses only more Current polls, they list them all but only use the most current in their Average. Huff Po is averaging polls into their total, that were taken as long ago as 4 weeks.


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ass hat you said huffington post uses all polls RCP cherry picks
> Did you or did you not say that?
> I am also seeing a Rasmusse poll in the huffington post poll isn't Rasmusse a national poll?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stupid they used Rasmusse in the poll I post but not gallop isn't that making you a liar and them cherry picking?
Click to expand...


Try to follow closely.

Ras was in your link because they poll both nationally and at the state level. You posted a list of polls for Nevada so the Ras state poll of Nevada was included. Gallup would not be included since they do a national tracker only. If you look at my link, national polls, you'll see both included.


----------



## AceRothstein

Charles_Main said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you Jack ass RCP uses only more Current polls, they list them all but only use the most current in their Average. Huff Po is averaging polls into their total, that were taken as long ago as 4 weeks.
Click to expand...


Wrong, dummy.  You'll find polls on both Huff and 538 that you won't see on RCP. YouGov and Grove come to mind.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stupid they used Rasmusse in the poll I post but not gallop isn't that making you a liar and them cherry picking?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Try to follow closely.
> 
> Ras was in your link because they poll both nationally and at the state level. You posted a list of polls for Nevada so the Ras state poll of Nevada was included. Gallup would not be included since they do a national tracker only. If you look at my link, national polls, you'll see both included.
Click to expand...

Try to fucking follow closely. You said Huffington post uses all polls yet they did not do that with Gallop but they did with Rasmusse
One other thing and pay very close attention because I will only teach you this once. that individual polls in the state are used to get the avg for their national poll for each state.
One more time cherry picking is cherry picking and when you lie don't get pissed when called. Class is over.


----------



## Neotrotsky

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> His stubborness more than his stupidity is his major failing here, Ace.
> 
> Ask him about his great p'wn on the video that supposedly showed Hitler as a socialist (this after he had killed or jailed all the socialists).
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have to do everything for you? Look at the national poll compilation for those, not the state polls. Your stupidity is amazing.
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your stupidity and lying far surpasses my stubbornness but I make it up with kicking you to the curb every time. That is what Romney will do to the left wing liberals like you who call themselves Republicans.
Click to expand...


Indeed

But the last thing 'concern trolls' care about is the 
truth or real debate

Besides this 'concern troll' has been caught before
in lies- see here- it is too funny 

As such, their word is no good or can not be trusted

Here boy


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stupid they used Rasmusse in the poll I post but not gallop isn't that making you a liar and them cherry picking?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try to follow closely.
> 
> Ras was in your link because they poll both nationally and at the state level. You posted a list of polls for Nevada so the Ras state poll of Nevada was included. Gallup would not be included since they do a national tracker only. If you look at my link, national polls, you'll see both included.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Try to fucking follow closely. You said Huffington post uses all polls yet they did not do that with Gallop but they did with Rasmusse
> One other thing and pay very close attention because I will only teach you this once. that individual polls in the state are used to get the avg for their national poll for each state.
> One more time cherry picking is cherry picking and when you lie don't get pissed when called. Class is over.
Click to expand...


Everything I posted is confirmed in both of our links. Thanks for confirming my belief that you are the dumbest bastard on this board.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try to follow closely.
> 
> Ras was in your link because they poll both nationally and at the state level. You posted a list of polls for Nevada so the Ras state poll of Nevada was included. Gallup would not be included since they do a national tracker only. If you look at my link, national polls, you'll see both included.
> 
> 
> 
> Try to fucking follow closely. You said Huffington post uses all polls yet they did not do that with Gallop but they did with Rasmusse
> One other thing and pay very close attention because I will only teach you this once. that individual polls in the state are used to get the avg for their national poll for each state.
> One more time cherry picking is cherry picking and when you lie don't get pissed when called. Class is over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything I posted is confirmed in both of our links. Thanks for confirming my belief that you are the dumbest bastard on this board.
Click to expand...


You're a fucking liar
Where is this poll in your huffingtonpost pol?
Associated Press/GfK

http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK Poll September 2012 Topline_1st release.pdf
Ill wait
RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try to fucking follow closely. You said Huffington post uses all polls yet they did not do that with Gallop but they did with Rasmusse
> One other thing and pay very close attention because I will only teach you this once. that individual polls in the state are used to get the avg for their national poll for each state.
> One more time cherry picking is cherry picking and when you lie don't get pissed when called. Class is over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything I posted is confirmed in both of our links. Thanks for confirming my belief that you are the dumbest bastard on this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a fucking liar
> Where is this poll in your huffingtonpost pol?
> Associated Press/GfK
> 
> http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK Poll September 2012 Topline_1st release.pdf
> Ill wait
> RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


Click on the last link I posted and then "see more" at the bottom of the list. It is there.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Really, at this point, against all odds and unless their is some "silver bullet" to use against
Romney, it is over for Papa Obama

He is trending in the wrong direction for a sitting President







Mene, Mene, Tekel u-Pharsin




Here boy


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything I posted is confirmed in both of our links. Thanks for confirming my belief that you are the dumbest bastard on this board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a fucking liar
> Where is this poll in your huffingtonpost pol?
> Associated Press/GfK
> 
> http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK Poll September 2012 Topline_1st release.pdf
> Ill wait
> RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Click on the last link I posted and then "see more" at the bottom of the list. It is there.
Click to expand...

I went to the date of the poll and it's not there in the cheery picking huffington post poll liar.

The date of the poll in question was 9/13 - 9/17 now crawl away liar.


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're a fucking liar
> Where is this poll in your huffingtonpost pol?
> Associated Press/GfK
> 
> http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK Poll September 2012 Topline_1st release.pdf
> Ill wait
> RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click on the last link I posted and then "see more" at the bottom of the list. It is there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I went to the date of the poll and it's not there in the cheery picking huffington post poll liar.
> 
> The date of the poll in question was 9/13 - 9/17 now crawl away liar.
Click to expand...


Hit "show more" a few times, dummy.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

AceRothstein said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Click on the last link I posted and then "see more" at the bottom of the list. It is there.
> 
> 
> 
> I went to the date of the poll and it's not there in the cheery picking huffington post poll liar.
> 
> The date of the poll in question was 9/13 - 9/17 now crawl away liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hit "show more" a few times, dummy.
Click to expand...

I did stupid I went to the date of the poll that poll is not there at the time of the date which was 9/13 - 9/17


----------



## AceRothstein

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I went to the date of the poll and it's not there in the cheery picking huffington post poll liar.
> 
> The date of the poll in question was 9/13 - 9/17 now crawl away liar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hit "show more" a few times, dummy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did stupid I went to the date of the poll that poll is not there at the time of the date which was 9/13 - 9/17
Click to expand...


You are either lying or you are even dumber than I thought.    Just to add, they aren't going to show polls from 2, 3 or 6 months back as they aren't counting those at this point.


----------



## mamooth

Every major poll aggregator shows Obama well ahead in the EC. Where do these conservatives come up with this belief that Romney is doing well? Everyone looking at the actual polls shows Romney as behind.


----------



## AceRothstein

mamooth said:


> Every major poll aggregator shows Obama well ahead in the EC. Where do these conservatives come up with this belief that Romney is doing well? Everyone looking at the actual polls shows Romney as behind.



Once you take into account the PUMA's lying to the pollsters and the Bradley effect then...

Oops, wrong election.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Romney is going to win, despite you guys, and we are going to take care of you after the election.  Do not trolls like you or weirdos like bigrebnc.

So you are saying that Hitler did not kill the socialists, NeoTrotsty.  That's typical of your lying.

Come here now, little troll!  



Neotrotsky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> His stubborness more than his stupidity is his major failing here, Ace.
> 
> Ask him about his great p'wn on the video that supposedly showed Hitler as a socialist (this after he had killed or jailed all the socialists).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your stupidity and lying far surpasses my stubbornness but I make it up with kicking you to the curb every time. That is what Romney will do to the left wing liberals like you who call themselves Republicans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed
> 
> But the last thing 'concern trolls' care about is the
> truth or real debate
> 
> Besides this 'concern troll' has been caught before
> in lies- see here- it is too funny
> 
> As such, their word is no good or can not be trusted
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...


----------



## Neotrotsky

The Rabbi said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.
Click to expand...


So true
the left is getting more unstable by the day

Hopefully, the violence suggested by many on the left will
not be the case- the radical polices of Papa Obama were bad enough

But there is no need for violence by the left


----------



## AceRothstein

Here's what I mean about RCP cherry picking polls.  Why isn't the WT/JZ Analytics poll included?


----------



## JakeStarkey

To recap: The far right and the the far left (and the libers all by themselves)) continue to demonstrate they don't get what America is about.  But God love them all anyway.

We are 8 days out and almost nothing will change between now and Election Tuesday.

I wish you all the best as Americans, and I will pray that you remember that which unites us more than divides us.


----------



## Rinata

longknife said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> who says penn. isn't really up for grabs for starters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is up by 6 in PA. And they have voted for the Democratic nominee in the last 3 elections.
> 
> Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map
> 
> 2012 Pennsylvania President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
Click to expand...


I'll bet you did not even look at it. It's a summary of all other polls so it would be hard to lie.


----------



## Rinata

bigrebnc1775 said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we are supposed to believe a poll from the Huffington/puffingtonPost?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...


It's right here!!!

2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama


----------



## Samson

Rinata said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize they just use poll averages like RCP, right? The only difference is that RCP cherrypicks the polls they use and Huffington uses all of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's total bull shit where is Gallop in this poll?
> 2012 Nevada President: Romney vs. Obama
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's right here!!!
> 
> 2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Click to expand...




Gallup does not have a poll for Nevada, but it is included in the national results




> HuffPost Model Estimate
> 
> Mitt Romney   47.5%
> Barack Obama   46.9%
> Undecided   0.0%
> Other
> 
> 
> Currently tracking 554 polls



Here are the results from your website for Nevada:




> HuffPost Model Estimate
> 
> Barack Obama   49.8%
> Mitt Romney   46.5%
> Undecided
> Other
> 
> 
> Currently tracking 38 polls



It is interesting to note that 

Rasmussen
Obama +2 


however the results also include;


Grove Insight (D-Project New America/USAction)NEW!
Obama +6 

PPP (D)
Obama +4 

Mellman (D-Americans United for Change)
Obama +8 

Grove Insight (D-Project New America)
Obama +7 

Grove Insight is counted twice: The more frequently any poller reports results, the heavier it is weighted. Interestingly Huffpo counts Democratic Pollers...shocking, huh?


----------



## Rinata

Neotrotsky said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Obama being ahead in all the swing states except NC and FL means Obama is really behind.
> 
> Hey, ask the conservatives about it. It's their logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So true
> the left is getting more unstable by the day
> 
> Hopefully, the violence suggested by many on the left will
> not be the case- the radical polices of Papa Obama were bad enough
> 
> But there is no need for violence by the left
Click to expand...


What are you talking about??


----------



## Samson

Rinata said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually that he is losing in the swing states as polling shows more and more support for Romney, with 2 weeks still to go.  Looking in the past is so leftwing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So true
> the left is getting more unstable by the day
> 
> Hopefully, the violence suggested by many on the left will
> not be the case- the radical polices of Papa Obama were bad enough
> 
> But there is no need for violence by the left
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you talking about??
Click to expand...


He is Parroting Limbuagh.

Ash him if he wants a crackah


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Listening

November 6th can't get here soon enough.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Samson said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> So true
> the left is getting more unstable by the day
> 
> Hopefully, the violence suggested by many on the left will
> not be the case- the radical polices of Papa Obama were bad enough
> 
> But there is no need for violence by the left
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is Parroting Limbuagh.
> 
> Ash him if he wants a crackah
Click to expand...


Indeed, 
as one parrots a left talking point...
how original of you...


Just like Michael Moore&#8217;s Latest Ad Dems To Burn America Down if Romney wins
or
Like Actor Richard Belzer tweeted that if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election by a small margin of victory, &#8220;America will explode,&#8221;
---------------------------------

No doubt if any violence from the Left occurs after Romney's victory
the left will blame racism and Rush



Yes we must go forward
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8TjbbpVLh4&feature=plcp"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8TjbbpVLh4&feature=plcp[/ame]


----------



## decker

JakeStarkey said:


> To recap: The far right and the the far left (and the libers all by themselves)) continue to demonstrate they don't get what America is about.  But God love them all anyway.
> 
> We are 8 days out and almost nothing will change between now and Election Tuesday.
> 
> I wish you all the best as Americans, and I will pray that you remember that which unites us more than divides us.


Americans will come together whatever the result.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


>



Do you post just to show your dumbassed sig line ?

Or was this a pre-condition to the board allowing your sorry ass back ?


----------



## Lakhota

I look forward to hearing your deranged bullshit on Tuesday night...or Wednesday...


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> I look forward to hearing your deranged bullshit on Tuesday night...or Wednesday...



If Romney loses, I'm off the board.  I have a bet.

I have the balls to back up my claims.

If I leave, I won't miss knowing there are morons like you in the world who suck off the government tit and whine when others think you might need a job to support your sorry ass.


----------



## Lakhota

Well, don't let the door hit your retarded ass on the way out...


----------



## mamooth

Listening said:


> I have the balls to back up my claims.



Bravely brave Sir Robin, bravely ran away ...


----------



## Listening

mamooth said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have the balls to back up my claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bravely brave Sir Robin, bravely ran away ...
Click to expand...


And what have you wagered ?


----------



## Listening

Lakhota said:


> Well, don't let the door hit your retarded ass on the way out...



In you case, it would be made out of cardboard...if you even have a door to your hogan.


----------



## mamooth

Listening said:


> And what have you wagered ?



I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.


----------



## Listening

mamooth said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what have you wagered ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
Click to expand...


I think cash wagers are against the rules.

Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.

I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.


----------



## candycorn

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...


Looking more and more like it.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Listening

The delusional left is hard at it.

I hope they don't seriously hurt anyone else in their suicide attempts.


----------



## candycorn

Listening said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what have you wagered ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
Click to expand...


Yeah...

Here are some boards looking for other members:

XMFan.com :: #1 Fan Site of Sirius XM Satellite Radio :: XM Radio Community Forums.  They're desperate; they'll take anyone.  Even you.

Political Forum.  Its sort of the minor leagues so you may not be qualified there.

Debate Politics Forums.  They are heavily moderated and you must keep a civil tongue.  You're ill suited for the board

www.disgruntledconservatives.com.  You'll fit right in.

Pack your bags loser.


----------



## LoneLaugher

Listening said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what have you wagered ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
Click to expand...


Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.


----------



## Listening

LoneLaugher said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.
Click to expand...


Nobody is going to lose with class around here.

That is for darn sure.


----------



## Listening

candycorn said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah...
> 
> Here are some boards looking for other members:
> 
> XMFan.com :: #1 Fan Site of Sirius XM Satellite Radio :: XM Radio Community Forums.  They're desperate; they'll take anyone.  Even you.
> 
> Political Forum.  Its sort of the minor leagues so you may not be qualified there.
> 
> Debate Politics Forums.  They are heavily moderated and you must keep a civil tongue.  You're ill suited for the board
> 
> www.disgruntledconservatives.com.  You'll fit right in.
> 
> Pack your bags loser.
Click to expand...


Most boards have rules against posting about other boards.

My guess is this is a list of boards where the mods have already told you to f**k off for being stupid and ignorant.


----------



## candycorn

LoneLaugher said:


> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep offering even money cash wagers, but no Romney backer will accept such a wager. It seems any time something of actual value is put at stake, the conservatives run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.
Click to expand...


Tea Party Samurai and I have a sig line bet.  She hasn't been seen in about a month....basic conservative reaction to personal accountability.  I fully expect the four people I have a bet with; Listening, Amazed, Conservative, and TPS to be here after 11/6 as if nothing happened.  Integrity is a foreign concept to these people.


----------



## Listening

candycorn said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tea Party Samurai and I have a sig line bet.  She hasn't been seen in about a month....basic conservative reaction to personal accountability.  I fully expect the four people I have a bet with; Listening, Amazed, Conservative, and TPS to be here after 11/6 as if nothing happened.  Integrity is a foreign concept to these people.
Click to expand...


But you, being a pillar of nobility, will honor your side of the bet ?  Correct ?


----------



## freedombecki

Lakhota said:


> Liberals dont want to jinx it. It terrifies the right. And the press would prefer a nail-biter. But the fact is that finding Romneys path to victory is getting harder every day.
> 
> Theres a secret lurking behind everything youre reading about the upcoming election, a secret that all political insiders knowor shouldbut few are talking about, most likely because it takes the drama out of the whole business. The secret is the electoral college, and the fact is that the more you look at it, the more you come to conclude that Mitt Romney has to draw an inside straight like youve never ever seen in a movie to win this thing. This is especially true now that it seems as if Pennsylvania isnt really up for grabs. Romneys paths to 270 are few.
> 
> Its beginning to look like Obama can lose the big Eastern fourOhio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida: all of em!and still be reelected.​
> 
> 
> 
> More: Michael Tomasky on the (Possible) Coming Obama Landslide - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

No landslide. Today's Rasmussen Report and Gallup noted that the overall picture is 49% Romney and 48% Obama. Even so, they both say it's too close to call. The American people will speak tomorrow, at least those who haven't already voted. 

No matter how many times he was criticized, Obama just wouldn't do his part in setting a budget. This resulted in early and frequent overspending the deficit into the oblivion of $16 trillion dollars.

That's why I'm truly hoping he gets a pink slip at least until he rehabilitates his sense of responsibility to the people in the working force who provided their taxes for him to spend. I'm sorry, but he hasn't anything in reserve now if something big befell our nation. You need a ready reserve to move the wheels of survival in a nation this large.

It's not fair for a president to spend more than will be repaid on his  watch unless we're in a war. Obama released our troops from the fracas, so unless we are attacked, we're in a terrible place with a deficit of 16 trillion.

U.S. National Debt Clock


----------



## Neotrotsky




----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Amazed

candycorn said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tea Party Samurai and I have a sig line bet.  She hasn't been seen in about a month....basic conservative reaction to personal accountability.  I fully expect the four people I have a bet with; Listening, Amazed, Conservative, and TPS to be here after 11/6 as if nothing happened.  Integrity is a foreign concept to these people.
Click to expand...



Thats called projection sweetie...you wouldn't know what integrity was if it bit you in the ass.


----------



## AmyNation

CBS exit polls not looking good for Obama....


----------



## Conservative

AmyNation said:


> CBS exit polls not looking good for Obama....



neither are CNN's


----------



## Amazed

AmyNation said:


> CBS exit polls not looking good for Obama....



After 2004 exit polling is irrelevant.
I remember Morris calling it for Kerry.


----------



## Conservative

candycorn said:


> LoneLaugher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listening said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think cash wagers are against the rules.
> 
> Most people agree to put avatars and sig lines they don't agree with.
> 
> I have a bet with someone....if Romney wins they leave the board forever.  If Obama wins, I do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone knows that this is simply your way to ensure that you don't have to man up and lose with class. You win...you sit there and gloat. You lose, you leave. Your lame ass wins either way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tea Party Samurai and I have a sig line bet.  She hasn't been seen in about a month....basic conservative reaction to personal accountability.  I fully expect the four people I have a bet with; Listening, Amazed, Conservative, and TPS to be here after 11/6 as if nothing happened.  Integrity is a foreign concept to these people.
Click to expand...

We both know that when you lose the bet, you will still post.

On the off chance I lose, I'll make a single 'goodbye' thread, then be gone. Unlike libtard fuckwads like you... I keep my word.


----------



## AmyNation

Well CBS is questions not "who'd ya vote for". Lots of "state of the economy" "direction of the nation". 

Let's just say, people are unhappy.


----------



## Conservative

AmyNation said:


> Well CBS is questions not "who'd ya vote for". Lots of "state of the economy" "direction of the nation".
> 
> Let's just say, people are unhappy.



same on CNN.... Obama has a few ahead, but most are flashing by with Romney ahead.


----------



## Amazed

Virginia closes in 15 minutes...it will start to take shape then.


----------



## paravani

If Obama takes Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, it's effectively over for Romney.  

The Prez is ahead in Ohio polls because Romney's lies about Jeep didn't sit well with the folks who make 'em; he's way ahead in Florida because the hispanics are turning out to vote; and he's ahead in Virginia because...  

...  Hmm, maybe they don't think his handling of Sandy has been that shoddy after all?

-- Paravani


----------



## AmyNation

No way Obama takes FL


----------



## liarintheWH

OBAMAGIRL2012 said:


> You can also look up the Youtube video under "Lisa Powell Graham voting for Obama is hot"



Fuck you.


----------



## paravani

DAY-um!!  Woah, this came right outa left field:

Obama wins in the first precinct to report in SOUTH CAROLINA by 85%???

WTH?  They're smack dab in the middle of the red zone!

-- Paravani


----------



## Amazed

OBAMAGIRL2012 said:


> Check out the Youtube video: Obama Girl Part II, 2012 Edition: The Redhead (can be searched in Youtube as Lisa Powell Graham: Voting for Obama is Hot) for a summary of the top ten reasons why "voting for Obama is hot" - accompanying Website includes facts, figures and links... This election is so critical when it comes to women's issues, the environment, marriage equality... This Website and video is a fast and easy way to digest the issues...



Noboby gives a shit kid.

Shut up and watch the results.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## rightwinger

This one could very well turn into an Obama landslide which can carry the Senate also


----------



## JakeStarkey

No landslide, Obama looks like he will win, Dems increase Senate majority.


----------



## rightwinger

Looks like a landslide with Ohio in the Presidents column and Florida will make it complete 

Dems may pick up more seats in the Senate


----------



## bigrebnc1775

rightwinger said:


> Looks like a landslide with Ohio in the Presidents column and Florida will make it complete
> 
> Dems may pick up more seats in the Senate



Land slide? still smoking crack I see.


----------



## Old Rocks

300 and a big +


----------



## paravani

Yup, looks like a landslide to me, too.

9:22 Pacific Time

Obama has 290 electoral votes, Romney has 200

Of the remaining states, Romney probably has Alaska (3) and Montana (3),  for a grand total of 206 electoral votes.

Obama probably has Virginia (13) and Florida(29), for a total of 332 total electoral votes.

Double-checking my count:  206 plus 332 = 538...  check.

332/538 = 61% of the electoral votes went to Obama.

Now, 61% isn't quite as steep a landslide as the Prez had four years ago...  but it's a comfortable enough margin that I don't envision the Republicans contesting Florida and/or Ohio and/or Virginia...  because even if all three of those states flipped to Romney, Obama would still stay in the White House.

So yeah, I'd call any race where the Prez could lose three key states and still be the winner a "landslide".

-- Paravani


----------



## Lakhota

Yep, it really was a landslide!


----------



## AceRothstein

I don't know if it qualifies as a landslide but it was a thorough beating.


----------



## Lakhota

It looks like a shellacking to me.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Lakhota

I sort of miss all those NaziCon retards who made bets to leave the board if Obama won.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

Lakhota said:


> Yep, it really was a landslide!



More of a "near landslide"


----------



## rightwinger

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, it really was a landslide!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More of a "near landslide"
Click to expand...


Obama did what he set out to do....win battleground states
He took nine out of the ten that were targeted. Romney was skunked

Landslide


----------



## Katzndogz

obama didn't win a landslide.  He won with a barely eked out majority of leeches.   What he has to contend with after his win, is a population of which 48% are intent on obstructing his policies and frustrating his efforts.  What obama won was a Pyrrhic Victory.


----------



## jillian

Katzndogz said:


> obama didn't win a landslide.  He won with a barely eked out majority of leeches.   What he has to contend with after his win, is a population of which 48% are intent on obstructing his policies and frustrating his efforts.  What obama won was a Pyrrhic Victory.



that's why rightwingnuts take more from the feds than they pay, right, toon?

reality isn't your thing... clearly.

you really should give it up. you don't think well enough.


----------



## Samson

jillian said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> obama didn't win a landslide.  He won with a barely eked out majority of leeches.   What he has to contend with after his win, is a population of which 48% are intent on obstructing his policies and frustrating his efforts.  What obama won was a Pyrrhic Victory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's why rightwingnuts take more from the feds than they pay, right, toon?
> 
> reality isn't your thing... clearly.
> 
> you really should give it up. you don't think well enough.
Click to expand...


You're saying "rightwingnuts" get the greater share of a $16T Federal Deficit.




Where do I sign up?


----------



## Katzndogz

Samson said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> obama didn't win a landslide.  He won with a barely eked out majority of leeches.   What he has to contend with after his win, is a population of which 48% are intent on obstructing his policies and frustrating his efforts.  What obama won was a Pyrrhic Victory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's why rightwingnuts take more from the feds than they pay, right, toon?
> 
> reality isn't your thing... clearly.
> 
> you really should give it up. you don't think well enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're saying "rightwingnuts" get the greater share of a $16T Federal Deficit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where do I sign up?
Click to expand...


It's a liberal myth that is best ignored.   It's the kind of falsehood that maintains California isn't bankrupt but Texas is.   A response confers an unwarranted dignity.


----------



## jillian

Samson said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> obama didn't win a landslide.  He won with a barely eked out majority of leeches.   What he has to contend with after his win, is a population of which 48% are intent on obstructing his policies and frustrating his efforts.  What obama won was a Pyrrhic Victory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's why rightwingnuts take more from the feds than they pay, right, toon?
> 
> reality isn't your thing... clearly.
> 
> you really should give it up. you don't think well enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're saying "rightwingnuts" get the greater share of a $16T Federal Deficit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where do I sign up?
Click to expand...


red states take more from the federal budget than they put in.

blue states put in more than they take.

i don't think i said anything about the deficit. you'd have to take military spending into account.


----------



## Samson

jillian said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> that's why rightwingnuts take more from the feds than they pay, right, toon?
> 
> reality isn't your thing... clearly.
> 
> you really should give it up. you don't think well enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're saying "rightwingnuts" get the greater share of a $16T Federal Deficit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where do I sign up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> red states take more from the federal budget than they put in.
> 
> blue states put in more than they take.
> 
> i don't think i said anything about the deficit. you'd have to take military spending into account.
Click to expand...


Actually SOME red states take more, SOME blue states take more.

For example, Colorado, a "Blue State" puts in more, New Mexico, another "Blue State," takes twice the dollars that it puts in.

Texas, a "Red State," takes in slightly more than it gives. Wyoming, also a "Red State," takes more than in gives.

Regardless, the Deficit remains at $16T, meaning that ALL the states need to spend a helluva lot less. Whether or not this is Military spending, Medicade, or Social Security is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic.


----------



## AceRothstein

Wow, this thread is a treasure trove of right wing delusions.


----------



## Lakhota

Obama kicked ass!  Now Romney gets to live the rest of his psycho life in disgrace.


----------



## Lakhota

ROMNEY ON SUICIDE WATCH


----------



## Meathead

AceRothstein said:


> Wow, this thread is a treasure trove of right wing delusions.


The delusion is that someone who couldn't get 51% of the vote in a two-way race won by a landslide.


----------



## Lakhota

What A Romney Win Would Have Meant


----------



## candycorn

AmyNation said:


> No way Obama takes FL



The same group that says he couldn't make the GOP bend on taxes, get decent gun control on the books, etc....  How soon they forget.


----------



## Wolfsister77

Ha!! I wasn't expecting him to take FL either. He did exacted what he planned to do from the beginning. Concentrate on the battleground States and getting the vote out. 

Mission Accomplished!!


----------



## AceRothstein

Meathead said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, this thread is a treasure trove of right wing delusions.
> 
> 
> 
> The delusion is that someone who couldn't get 51% of the vote in a two-way race won by a landslide.
Click to expand...


51.1% once all the votes were tallied.


----------



## Meathead

AceRothstein said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, this thread is a treasure trove of right wing delusions.
> 
> 
> 
> The delusion is that someone who couldn't get 51% of the vote in a two-way race won by a landslide.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 51.1% once all the votes were tallied.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's a very powerful rebuttal. Sure, *now* we can call it a landslide!


----------



## AceRothstein

Meathead said:


> AceRothstein said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The delusion is that someone who couldn't get 51% of the vote in a two-way race won by a landslide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 51.1% once all the votes were tallied.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, that's a very powerful rebuttal. Sure, *now* we can call it a landslide!
Click to expand...


Hey, you're the one who put yourself out there for it.  I never said it was a landslide or what would constitute a landslide.


----------



## 1Templar

Prophetic.


----------

