[Kevin Gibson]

According to Politico, from the standpoint of Electoral votes, Obama is well ahead. Swing-State Map, List & Polls - POLITICO.com

I gotta say, this is the first thing I've seen that has Obama ahead, but it's pretty significant.

If Obama wins in 2012 I will be twice as shocked as when Clinton won in '96.

 

[Retmsgt.]

Kevin, That's Politically-Motivated BS! I don't know about the other states on that graph but Ohio is firmly in Romney's camp. Even people I know that are on the Welfare Rolls are realizing he's poison.

It's one of the three big lies Friend, Lies, Damned Lies and, Statistics.

 

[TommyGunn]

:shocked:

Oh Lordie.....I'm gonna have to turn in my "100% Conservative-pure- as Apple-Pie American" card....... I agree with Kevin! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Actually it isn't as "cut & dried" as the "electoral map" might suggest. There are "winner take all" states and proportional representation states. The popular vote does effect these.
Right now Romney & Obama are neck/neck with Romney slightly ahead in some polls and Obama in others.....but the inertia right now seems to be favoring Romney.

I too will be shocked if Obama wins 4 more years. I don't really know what I'll do; I don't believe America can withstand another term. The economy sucks. A slow recovery?:ek: Well, that's the best that can be said; the slowest economic recovery in history. A lot of people don't think we're in any recovery. A neighbor of mine is firmly in this camp. I can't repeat what he says on this forum.
In spite of some rumors to the contrary [ ] I am not that sanquin about Romney's ability to set things right. I wonder if anyone can at this point. But Romney remains the best shot this country has, so Romney it will be when I vote. :hearseespeak:
Oh well. Tomorrow I get some practice when I go to the poll and vote for our city's next mayor. If I can do it without puking I am fairly confident that this November I can charge enthusiastically into the polling booth and pull the lever for Romney.

:sm_angel:​

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Tommy,

I wasn’t awere any states were on a proportional system; can you tell me which ones are?

I don’t agree with the America can’t withstand another Obama term; we can, it just won’t be fun. Remember we all thought the sky was going to fall when Clinton won a second term, and Clinto pushed even more of a leftist agenda than Obama (I think Obama would like more of a leftist agenda, he’s just not nearly as effective of a leader as Clinton was).

To be honest, where things count, I don’t think there would be much difference between Obama and McCain. McCain was 110% for TARP and Stimulus, so chances are after 4 years of McCain we’d be right here wondering how we got into this handbag. Yeah some little things would be differernt…we wouldn’t have had Solyndra, but we would have had something very much like it for one of McCain’s buddies.

And 4 years of Romney scares me about as much as 4 more years under Obama (choose your poison?). Romney can’t wait to get us into a war with Iran…Talk about something we can’t afford.

As for this report, I just don’t know, it could be right and it could be wrong. But I have to say, I this is the first time I’ve seen anything that’s had Obama ahead. Maybe I need to pay a little more attention to those who are stumping for Obama just to get an idea of what their take is? I didn’t do that in ’96 and I have to tell you I was shocked that America went for 4 more of Clinton.

 

[WaltGraham]

Nope, Politico is using an aggregate of polls, many of which sample registered voters as opposed to likely ones. RV polling ain't nearly as accurate as LV. In addition, many of the left leaning pollsters pad their polls by oversampling Dems.

Things will begin to tighten up after the conventions; these guys don't want to lose all their credibility.

In the meantime, enjoy.

 

[TommyGunn]

Tommy,

I wasn't awere any states were on a proportional system; can you tell me which ones are?

I don't agree with the America can't withstand another Obama term; we can, it just won't be fun. Remember we all thought the sky was going to fall when Clinton won a second term, and Clinto pushed even more of a leftist agenda than Obama (I think Obama would like more of a leftist agenda, he's just not nearly as effective of a leader as Clinton was).

To be honest, where things count, I don't think there would be much difference between Obama and McCain. McCain was 110% for TARP and Stimulus, so chances are after 4 years of McCain we'd be right here wondering how we got into this handbag. Yeah some little things would be differernt…we wouldn't have had Solyndra, but we would have had something very much like it for one of McCain's buddies.

And 4 years of Romney scares me about as much as 4 more years under Obama (choose your poison?). Romney can't wait to get us into a war with Iran…Talk about something we can't afford.

As for this report, I just don't know, it could be right and it could be wrong. But I have to say, I this is the first time I've seen anything that's had Obama ahead. Maybe I need to pay a little more attention to those who are stumping for Obama just to get an idea of what their take is? I didn't do that in '96 and I have to tell you I was shocked that America went for 4 more of Clinton.

The more I think about the "winner take all" the more I wonder if I was mis-remembering something. I'll have to see if I can find some information on it.
I disagree that Romney "can't wait to get us iinto a war with Iran." I don't see him wanting that at all. I don't have great solutions for Iran; I think they are developing nukes and if they want them they are going to eventually make them. The facilities they have for making them are separated and highly protected. It's going to take some truly hard hitting and penetrative ordnance to smash them.
What effect will that have? Delay their program or TKO it?
I don't really know. I do think that the situation is scaring the ***** out of the Israelis right now. They have the biggest stake in the matter as Iran has repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel.

So far as our ability to survive 4 more years of Obama..... America will not be a barren wasteland in 4 years, any more than the Italian boot was after the Roman Empire dried up and blew away. It will be a very different, poorer life, in a world where military powers like China and Russia have markedly more power in relation to America and are much more willing to project it. We'll no longer be the "big boy" on the block and if China decides to make Taiwan a summer resort for the Chinese High Command our lack of power will force us to sit it out, or we'll get clobbered by the Chinese in an attempt to live up to our defense agreements with Taiwan.
The UN will have a larger presence in our legal structure and Agenda 21 will be stronger than ever because of it. This one area is where Romney is going to also be a failure, though.
I tend to think that both Clinton and Obama were about the same as far as leftists. Only Clinton failed with healthcare (I thank Hillary for that) and Obama won. Clinto passed an assault weapon ban and Obama has not attempted one (yet). Clinton's one virtue was a greater willingness to compromise with political opponents than Obama has shown.
Mainly Obama is a hellish bigtime spender, doesn't understand free enterprise, and it is especially here that 4 more years will kill America.
I tell you we can't take it. We just can't.

 

[stand watie]

TommyGunn; ALL,

Tommy, as usual you are CORRECT.

as to polling, the last CBS/NYT poll was "adjusted" FOUR times to get BHO to lead by THREE POINTS.

The Chicago Sun poll stated last monday that their results showed that Obama would get 99+% of all minority votes & over 70% of UNDECIDED votes.
(pardon me, but are the folks at the SUN drinking some REALLY strong booze?)

otoh, the latest poll out of The Universiry of Colorado shows Romney winning by 54 to 42% & getting 320 votes inThe Electoral College.
(fwiw, the UC poll has picked the winner for more than 30 years.)

yours, sw

 

[Kevin Gibson]

Well I fully expect Obama to get the vast majority of the minority votes. The Dems are really good at giving lip service to minorities, and Republicans just plain suck at it. Now we can debate it all day as to why that is (and chance are we’ll probably all agree on the why’s), but it doesn’t change things; Obama will mostly own the minority vote.

But it’s not the minority vote or any other group of dedicated voters who will really decide this election, it’s the people in the middle who decide elections. Obama is doing a piss poor job getting his message out, and Romney is knocking the ball out of the park. Obama’s campaign reminds me of Bush’s (version 1.0) 1992 campaign; just horrible.

 

[SpecialEd]

The pendulum swings and life goes on. The world didn't end for the right under eight years of Clinton, as it didn't end for the left under eight years of Bush, etc., etc. The pendulum swings one way then corrects back the other way for the most part. The timing becomes important when members of SCOTUS retire and the like but they don't always turn out the way you'd expect either.

 

[Kevin Gibson]

The pendulum swings and life goes on. The world didn't end for the right under eight years of Clinton, as it didn't end for the left under eight years of Bush, etc., etc. The pendulum swings one way then corrects back the other way for the most part. The timing becomes important when members of SCOTUS retire and the like but they don't always turn out the way you'd expect either.

Well said my friend. I think many take politics far too seriously. But I think you nailed it spot on.

 

[stand watie]

to ALL,

reference "not turning out the way that one would expect": i offer EARL WARREN, appointed by GEN Eisenhower as "Exhibit one."

yours, sw

 

[TommyGunn]

The pendulum swings and life goes on. The world didn't end for the right under eight years of Clinton, as it didn't end for the left under eight years of Bush, etc., etc. The pendulum swings one way then corrects back the other way for the most part. The timing becomes important when members of SCOTUS retire and the like but they don't always turn out the way you'd expect either.

At a point in time where the U.S. has a record ## of population on some kind of economic support things are different.
We were doing very well under Clinton, largely because a lot of R&D begun under Reagan came to fruition. Also, despite Clinton's penchant for chasing skirts he had a greater knowledge of the economy and free enterprise than Obama.
We desparatly need to reign in our spending, deal with the debt, and there's just no way Obama understands the need to do this or can do it, especially not when he's aided and abetted by the likes of Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid.

 

[Snake45]

Also, despite Clinton's penchant for chasing skirts he had a greater knowledge of the economy and free enterprise than Obama.

The main difference is that BJ Clinton's not really all that political. He's just interested in the fame, the money, the tail, and the admiration of millions. He didn't have the talent to be a rock musician, a movie star, or even a comedian, so he went into politics. If he'd thought he'd have had a better shot at success as a conservative Republican, he'd have been a conservative Repubican. He's just your typical malignant narcissist with charisma.

Now Hillary--Hillary's political. She's basically White Vagino-bama. She is MUCH scarier than Bill for that reason.

 

[Snake45]

And I have a feeling that for whatever reason, "the polls" are inflating King Hussein's numbers*. I think a significant number of people just don't want to tell a pollster that they don't like him, don't support him, and won't be voting for him, so they either lie or just hang up/refuse to answer. But the truth will come out in the sanctity of the secret ballot in November.

*Even IF they're being run and reported honestly, which I'm also not too confident about.

 

[William R. Moore]

Remember guys, it's not necessarily how the votes are cast, it's how the votes are counted.

 

[WaltGraham]

Remember guys, it's not necessarily how the votes are cast, it's how the votes are counted.

I believe you're channelling Stalin...

 

[SpecialEd]

Not to worry... Jimmy Carter is going to count the votes personally.

 

[stand watie]

William RMoore; all,

you are 100% CORRECT. - i was a VA election official for over 15 years & i truly expect VOTE FRAUD to be the WORST in modern history & since we have a CHEAP CROOK & PERJURER as AG, the CROOKS know that NOTHING will be done to them, when they commit criminal acts to steal the election.

yours, sw

 

[William R. Moore]

I believe you're channelling Stalin...

Not intentionally-you sure it''s not the original Mayor Daley? At one time I was doing dignitary protection and had several assignments as outer security for some big city politicos. I stayed out in the hall so no one could listen at keyholes (the preatorian guard was on the city payroll and was trustworthy-they were inside, probably as witnesses should the other parties try turning prosecution witness). On the other hand, this frequently put me in earshot of training sessions of those "volunteers" who were going to assist with get out the vote campaigns and be election workers who counted ballots.

A pencil stub hidden between fingers could mark multiple choices for an office and invalidate the ballot if it was a "wrong" ballot. I also learned how vote suppression isn't limited to requiring IDs at the polls.

'Twas a most educational series of assignments. It came at a cost though, I was left with an overwhelming need to burn my clothes and bathe in carbolic acid after every assignment.

 

[WaltGraham]

Not intentionally-you sure it''s not the original Mayor Daley?

"You know, comrades," says Stalin, "that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this - who will count the votes, and how."