Please keep discussion on today's events as they unfold here, so I can easily follow them and don't have to browse oddly-named threads on their 45th pages.
Thanks!
I'll kick off with this pros and cons list helpfully provided by Snoop Dogg
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoonbattery.com%2Fsnoop-dog-romney-obama.jpg&hash=66cc9051553b18062e379af4a5153dd0f412987c)
I'm not going to be told by Beets"R"Us what to do. :angry:
Please let Mitt win so he can jam the Feds up Snoop's ass.
Quote from: Gups on November 06, 2012, 08:16:34 AM
I'll kick off with this pros and cons list helpfully provided by Snoop Dogg
Snoop Lion.
Snoop has pretty good handwriting.
His punctuation is erratic. Too much gin. Not enough juice.
Obama's jump shot is a pretty compelling reason to vote for him. :)
Quote from: Valmy on November 06, 2012, 08:28:48 AM
Snoop has pretty good handwriting.
Better then mine. I can't even read mine.
I voted. :)
There was a line, but it still took less thAn 10 minutes for the entire process. Riley went with me so she could see the process in action, and she was sorely disappointed that I wouldn't write-in Joe Biden for president. :D She asked if I knew who all of the candidates were, and I told her that of course I did, I'd done my research before walking into the booth. She seemed impressed, and hopefully, it will mean something for her when she gets to vote.
Since at the moment she wants to be a politician, I suppose now is the time to learn that not all voters do know all of the candidates or the issues, but rather vote straight ticket. Sad, yet true.
Where is a good website to watch things unfold, by the way? Languish is nice and all, but sometimes you guys are a little slow with the info.
Quote from: merithyn on November 06, 2012, 09:17:11 AM
Since at the moment she wants to be a politician, I suppose now is the time to learn that not all voters do know all of the candidates or the issues, but rather vote straight ticket. Sad, yet true.
Send her to college. She will be properly indoctrinated.
QuoteWhere is a good website to watch things unfold, by the way? Languish is nice and all, but sometimes you guys are a little slow with the info.
www.theonion.com
Oh, and no ID required. :D
My polling place was a hot mess. There were like 5 election districts assigned to vote there and when you got in, you had to just blindly find out what line was for your district. Though my line ended up being short - my district voted really slow. Took about 20 minutes - probably about the longest I've ever had to wait.
Also ballot sucked as there were some judge positions where it said pick any 3 and there were only 3 choices.
Quote
The first presidential election results are in - and it's a tie.
President Barack Obama and his Republican rival, Mitt Romney, each received five votes in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire.
The town in the state's northeast corner has opened its polls shortly after midnight each election day since 1960 - but today's tie was the first in its history.
The result was unexpected, said town clerk Dick Erwin. The town has two registered Democrats, three Republicans and five independents.
"Considering the way things are polling around the country, we may have been the first tie of the day," said town clerk Dick Erwin, noting the national polls showing a virtual dead heat in the race. "Keep your eyes on the news reports, because it's going to be a wild ride."
The town, home to about a dozen residents, has drawn national media attention for being the first place in the country to make its presidential preferences known.
Unlike some parts of the country, election officials never have to worry about lack of interest. Dixville Notch has had 100% voter turnout since it started its first-in-the-nation voting tradition.
Under New Hampshire voting law, a poling place can be closed once all registered voters have officially cast their ballots. With all 10 registered voters on hand, the community had its tally shortly after midnight.
However, since 1996, another small New Hampshire town - Hart's Location - reinstated its practice from the 1940s and also began opening its polls at midnight.
The result there? Obama 23; Romney 9
The result in Dixville Notch is hardly a reliable bellwether for the eventual winner of the White House - or even the result statewide.
Although the community typically leans Republican, residents went for Obama in 2008 - the first time the majority of folks in Dixville Notch went for a Democrat in 40 years.
I voted. The wait was maybe two minutes, tops. Place was packed though. :cool:
Quote from: garbon on November 06, 2012, 09:22:12 AM
Also ballot sucked as there were some judge positions where it said pick any 3 and there were only 3 choices.
Yeah, that's real sneaky, and a shitty way of doing things. Electable judicial positions are such fucked up processes.
Quote from: garbon on November 06, 2012, 09:22:12 AM
Also ballot sucked as there were some judge positions where it said pick any 3 and there were only 3 choices.
That happens all the time here. Same with some School Board positions, etc. You don't have to vote for three, though, so technically you did have choices. :)
I got in and out. Voted no on both ohio ballot issues. Voted for some dems on the local level.
No foreigner observers to harass. :(
I voted... like a week ago via mail, like everyone else in Washington. i kinda miss the polling places.
I voted last week. I just want this shit to be over. I've avoided watching television for the last two weeks. :(
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 09:34:52 AM
I voted last week. I just want this shit to be over. I've avoided watching television for the last two weeks. :(
I avoid watching television all the time. It's quite nice, actually. :bowler:
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:35:48 AM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 09:34:52 AM
I voted last week. I just want this shit to be over. I've avoided watching television for the last two weeks. :(
I avoid watching television all the time. It's quite nice, actually. :bowler:
You are a stronger man than I'll ever be. :D
I'm missing a new Tosh.0 because of this bullshit.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:35:48 AM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 09:34:52 AM
I voted last week. I just want this shit to be over. I've avoided watching television for the last two weeks. :(
I avoid watching television all the time. It's quite nice, actually. :bowler:
There's a lot of good stuff on cable.
Best election ad of all time?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRgCOXaiDjQ
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 09:49:11 AM
There's a lot of good stuff on cable.
If it's good enough I'll watch it on DVD later (e.g. The Sopranos).
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 09:41:36 AM
You are a stronger man than I'll ever be. :D
Yeah, I am a pretty amazing guy, to be honest. :showoff:
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:51:54 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 09:49:11 AM
There's a lot of good stuff on cable.
If it's good enough I'll watch it on DVD later (e.g. The Sopranos).
:yes:
I hate watching things when they are topical.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 09:50:17 AM
Best election ad of all time?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRgCOXaiDjQ
This one still has it beat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iQ7ZDUutU4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iQ7ZDUutU4)
I've seen vlogs with better production values than that coroner ad.
Holy Shit! If this is true Obama's gonna get his clock cleaned! :wacko: :yucky:
QuoteCincinnati.com put up early voter numbers on their site showing
Obama: 605,546 v. Romney: 697,143 before taking it down.
Scroll down without Xingout the ad and you can read it.
http://news.cincinnati.com/proart/20121106/news010601/311060015/ohio-presidential-vote-by-counties?odyssey=nav|head&pagerestricted=1 (http://news.cincinnati.com/proart/20121106/news010601/311060015/ohio-presidential-vote-by-counties?odyssey=nav%7Chead&pagerestricted=1)
Timmay taint on Obama. Sorry seedy.
They're showing Romney ahead in Cuyahoga county, which gave Obama 70% last time. :hmm:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 10:17:02 AM
They're showing Romney ahead in Cuyahoga county, which gave Obama 70% last time. :hmm:
Now that would be a shocker. 4 in the butt style.
False alarm
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121106/CINCI/121106009/Early-votes-not-yet-counted-Ohio?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1 (http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121106/CINCI/121106009/Early-votes-not-yet-counted-Ohio?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7C&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1)
QuoteA Cincinnati.com front-page link to a chart with dummy data, created as a design template for election results, was inadvertently posted early Tuesday morning.
It purported to show early voting totals in Ohio counties. However, no votes have been counted yet – by law counting doesn't start until the polls close.
Cincinnati.com regrets the error.
That was harder than I thought.
An Obama victory is probably going to cost me a few thou next year. But hey you get what you pay for. Like Johnny Mac said "country first"
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/election-day-perspective-6-things-to-keep-in-mind/264590/
Quote1) If one candidate wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, that doesn't tell us how the election would've turned out under a popular-vote system. Under a different set of rules, both campaigns would have made different decisions about rhetoric, what issues to focus on, where to spend time campaigning, where to buy ads, where to invest resources in ground organization, etc. Should we change to a popular-vote system? Maybe. It's legitimate to argue as much -- but saying after the fact that the popular vote confers legitimacy this year makes no sense.
2) News organizations that "call" a state minutes before competitors haven't achieved a scoop worth touting. As Jay Rosen puts it, "The extreme opposite of an enterprise scoop is the ego scoop. This is where the news would have come out anyway -- typically because it was announced or would have been announced--but some reporter managed to get ahead of the field and break it before anyone else. From the user's point of view, there is zero significance to who got it first. This kind of scoop is essentially meaningless, but try telling that to the reporter who feels he or she has one .... Journalists who are defending an ego scoop are engaged in an intramural competition that has nothing to do with public service, and everything to do with bragging rights."
3) Many of the most dire predictions about what a Romney or Obama victory will mean are hyperbole. America will muddle through, same as always, and the new president can be significantly constrained in two years time if the people decide it is wise to hobble him, even in the realm of foreign policy (if the people elect a more activist version of Congress). Unfortunately, many of the most problematic policies in America will continue regardless of today's victor.
4) Change can and should be effected in many ways besides electoral politics. If people put as much energy into charity, volunteerism, mentoring, entrepreneurship, and creating non-governmental solutions as they do into politics, our elections would matter a whole lot less.
5) Within politics, a letter-writing campaign targeting your congressional representative and senator would mean far more than your vote did. Participating in your local Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, or Green Party organization would give you still more influence over American politics.
6) Says Alan Jacobs, "As the election has drawn nearer, I have seen (we all have seen) more and more articles, blog posts, and comments premised on the assumption that the writer's political enemies really are enemies -- wicked people bent on the destruction of all that is good and right in the world. As for me, I don't think people who disagree with me -- about abortion, politics, religion, literature, whatever -- are, on balance, any more wicked than I am. I just think that on the points where we disagree they happen to be wrong. That shouldn't be such a difficult distinction to keep in mind."
:cheers:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 10:39:55 AM
That was harder than I thought.
An Obama victory is probably going to cost me a few thou next year. But hey you get what you pay for. Like Johnny Mac said "country first"
Watching Rudy Giuliani and Newt Gingrich this AM, telling us that the President's and FEMA's response to Sandy has been a complete and total failure, worse than Katrina because Sandy was "smaller".
So kiss those dollars goodbye as a total waste.
I voted on my way to work this morning. No one in line at all when I arrived, though a couple of minutes later there were 4-5 people. Having a polling place in the lobby of your own building is pretty convenient.
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
Does Romney support that? Don't see how he'd still be ahead in Florida. :hmm:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
I wonder if Republicans played too much of the original Deus Ex. :hmm:
I'm sure Romney is a big fan.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
Not only to the states to fend for themselves, but with the additional bonus of privatization. I am curious, however, how a for-profit private sector company would see a payoff in disaster recovery. Recoup from insurers? Bill the disaster-stricken? Would the states get a bill from Haliburton or KBR? Or is it all going to be "faith-based"?
What I don't get is how, considering the nature of emergency management since 9/11, the idea of delegating it to the states--especially after Katrina--would even be considered. It's one thing to respond to a localized, specific incident such as 9/11, Oklahoma City or the WTC in '92, but Katrina (and soon to be Sandy) is now the new model: what happens when an incident is of such a magnitude that local government is, in effect, rendered incapacitated (New Orleans), and the state in question is broke/incompetent/ineffectual (Louisiana)? Florida may be able to handle a hurricane better on its own than, say, Louisiana or Mississippi, because it's far wealthier, but we don't pick where hurricanes land; Mother Nature does. And we're just talking natural disasters, people forget the post-9/11 concerns regarding chemical or radiological terror-related events.
There's only so much resiliency that can be built into municipal and state models.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 11:39:57 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
Does Romney support that? Don't see how he'd still be ahead in Florida. :hmm:
See for yourself.
http://youtu.be/oqXk5XxHKx8
47 seconds' worth. Kinda ironical.
Quote"Including disaster relief, though?" debate moderator John King asked Romney.
"We cannot -- we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids," Romney replied. "It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we'll all be dead and gone before it's paid off. It makes no sense at all."
Of course, like SNL's skit this past weekend noted, he said that when it was sunny out.
There are news crews in town from Japan and UK.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 06, 2012, 12:19:31 PM
There are news crews in town from Japan and UK.
Cleveland OH ?
Something to get CdM's juices flowing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QdpGd74DrBM&noredirect=1
I suppose the machine is just shoddily built.
Quote from: celedhring on November 06, 2012, 12:30:06 PM
Something to get CdM's juices flowing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QdpGd74DrBM&noredirect=1
I suppose the machine is just shoddily built.
Imagine that.
Pundit predictions!
QuoteNate Silver, FiveThirtyEight: Obama 303, Romney 235. "The model estimates that Mr. Romney would need to win the national popular vote by about one percentage point to avert a tossup, or a loss, in the Electoral College," Silver writes.
Sam Wang, Princeton Election Consortium: Obama 303, Romney 235. "In terms of EV or the Meta-margin, [Obama has] made up just about half the ground he ceded to Romney after Debate #1."
Drew Linzer, Emory University: Obama 326, Romney 212. "The accuracy of my election forecasts depend on the accuracy of the presidential polls," Linzer writes. "As such, a major concern heading into Election Day is the possibility that polling firms, out of fear of being wrong, are looking at the results of other published surveys and weighting or adjusting their own results to match."
Michael Barone, The Examiner: Romney 315, Obama 223. "Both national and target state polls show that independents, voters who don't identify themselves as Democrats or Republicans, break for Romney."
Ezra Klein, The Washington Post: Obama 290, Romney 248. "I have a simple rule when predicting presidential elections: The polls, taken together, are typically pretty accurate. Systemic problems, while possible, aren't likely."
Larry Sabato, UVA Center for Politics: Obama 290, Romney 248. "Who could have imagined that a Frankenstorm would act as a circuit-breaker on the Republican's campaign, blowing Romney off center stage for three critical days in the campaign's last week, while enabling Obama to dominate as presidential comforter-in-chief, assisted by his new bipartisan best friend, Gov. Chris Christie (R)?"
Josh Putnam, Davidson College: Obama 332, Romney 206. "Everything above is based on a graduated weighted average of polls in each state conducted in 2012," Putnam wrote in explaining his methodology. "The weighting is based on how old a poll is. The older the poll is the more it is discounted. The most recent poll is given full weight."
Jay Cost, Weekly Standard: Romney victory. "For two reasons," Cost writes. "(1) Romney leads among voters on trust to get the economy going again. (2) Romney leads among independents."
Philip Klein, The Examiner: Obama 277, Romney 261. "I've given Romney the states that are essentially tied, in which he's led in at least some recent polls. But in states where Romney has trailed in nearly all polls, and in some cases by a comfortable margin, I'm giving them to Obama."
Ross Douthat, New York Times: Obama 271, Romney 267. " In general, I think that the political class tends to overestimate the power of the Hispanic bloc, whose influence is growing more slowly than many pundits and strategists acknowledge. In general, I think that the political class tends to overestimate swing voters' sympathy for strident social liberalism, and to imagine a lockstep support for legal abortion among female voters that doesn't actually exist."
Simon Jackman, Stanford University: Obama 332, Romney 206. "The model uses poll data (and house effect corrections) to generate estimates of Obama and Romney levels of support in the states (and at the national level). The modeling is done simultaneously: if you will, there are up to 52 latent quantities (e.g., Obama support in 50 states, the District of Columbia, plus the national level) moving over time, with polls giving us (noisy) snapshots as to where the latent targets might be on any given day."
Kenneth Bickers, University of Colorado and Kevin Berry, CU-Denver: Romney 330, Obama 208. "While many election forecast models are based on the popular vote, the model developed by Bickers and Berry is based on the Electoral College and is the only one of its type to include more than one state-level measure of economic conditions."
Jamelle Bouie, The American Prospect: Obama 303, Romney 235. "If Obama wins on Tuesday, the political science on debates will have won out; they can shift the short-term situation, but they don't fundamentally change the direction of an election."
George Will, The Washington Post: Romney 321, Obama 217. " I guess the wild card in what I've projected is I'm projecting Minnesota to go for Romney. Now, that's the only state in the union, because Mondale held it — native son Mondale held it when Romney was — when Reagan was getting 49 states — the only state that's voted Democratic in nine consecutive elections. But this year, there's a marriage amendment on the ballot that will bring out the evangelicals and I think could make the difference."
Ben Domenech, The Transom: Romney 278, Obama 260. "In sum, I see the bottom slipping out from under Obama's feet, and a campaign hoping to hold on just long enough to salvage a slim victory, one where he is almost certain to lose the popular vote. He is underperforming among whites and independents, and particularly among those likeliest to vote. I have never believed in running the prevent defense, and Obama has been running it for months."
Markos Moulitsas: Obama 332, Romney 206. "Currently, national polling assumes a big dropoff from registered voters to likely voters. I don't believe that'll be the case, and we're certainly not seeing it in the early vote—Democratic turnout is up. And the RV models have been more accurate historically."
Karl Rove: Romney 285, Obama 253. He's got Romney winning Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, Colorado, and Florida.
Xu Cheng, Moodys' Analytics: Obama 303, Romney 235. Note that this prediction was made back in February: "This prediction is tied to the Moody's Analytics current baseline forecast for U.S. growth, which assumes that most states will continue to recover at slow to moderate speeds."
James Pethokoukis: Romney 301, Obama 227. "Many pollsters are not catching the stratospheric GOP enthusiasm, particularly among voters of faith, in voting for Romney and Paul Ryan — not just against Obama and Joe Biden. In this way, the Bush-Kerry parallel from 2004 does not hold up"
Joe Trippi, Democratic consultant, Obama 303, Romney 235. Trippi sent in his by e-mail–he's going with these states.
Dick Morris, FoxNews: Romney 325, Obama 213. "It will be the biggest surprise in recent American political history," Morris said. "It will rekindle the whole question on why the media played this race as a nailbiter where in fact Romney's going to win by quite a bit."
Jim Cramer, CNBC: Obama 440, Romney 98. Here's a tweet from Cramer: "No one is going to recall the guy who picks Obama by 10 electorals if it turns out to be 150 margin. Believe me."
Dean Chambers, UnskewedPolls.com: Romney 275, Obama 263. "Many others in the media project very favorable maps and projections for Obama but those doing so fail to realize or accept how heavily-skewed polls distort any average or analysis that relies on them."
Also, Fox News has just called the election for Romney.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:54:27 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 06, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
Devolving FEMA to the states is the single worst policy proposal this entire election season that did not involve Michelle Bachmann.
Not only to the states to fend for themselves, but with the additional bonus of privatization. I am curious, however, how a for-profit private sector company would see a payoff in disaster recovery. Recoup from insurers? Bill the disaster-stricken? Would the states get a bill from Haliburton or KBR? Or is it all going to be "faith-based"?
What I don't get is how, considering the nature of emergency management since 9/11, the idea of delegating it to the states--especially after Katrina--would even be considered. It's one thing to respond to a localized, specific incident such as 9/11, Oklahoma City or the WTC in '92, but Katrina (and soon to be Sandy) is now the new model: what happens when an incident is of such a magnitude that local government is, in effect, rendered incapacitated (New Orleans), and the state in question is broke/incompetent/ineffectual (Louisiana)? Florida may be able to handle a hurricane better on its own than, say, Louisiana or Mississippi, because it's far wealthier, but we don't pick where hurricanes land; Mother Nature does. And we're just talking natural disasters, people forget the post-9/11 concerns regarding chemical or radiological terror-related events.
There's only so much resiliency that can be built into municipal and state models.
I think that the plan was to go to the Gilded Age model: Anyone who isn't killed outright by the disaster or the related shortages/lawlessness will starve to death when they can't find work.
Mind you, it seems much more likely to me that all that talk about FEMA is bullshit designed to trick the Republican faithful into voting for him. It's more useful to pay attention to his actions as a governor than it would be to pay attention to the things he says to the idiot wing of his party. Obama did the same thing in 2008 when he was talking about renegotiating NAFTA (although it was harder to decipher that as bullshit as Obama's inexperience precluded us from going to his record).
Quote from: Kleves on November 06, 2012, 12:36:45 PM
Also, Fox News has just called the election for Romney.
:lol:
Quote from: Neil on November 06, 2012, 12:37:09 PM
Mind you, it seems much more likely to me that all that talk about FEMA is bullshit designed to trick the Republican faithful into voting for him.
Well, considering that the Dumbfuckistanis along the Gulf Coast keep sending representatives and senators to DC to consistently vote against it, as well as electing Republican governors that poo-poo it, it's not like there's that much bullshit involved.
http://live.nydailynews.com/Event/Obama_v_Romney_Election_Day_Nov_6_2012_-_Live_from_the_polls
Quote"One lady said 'I'm voting for Romney because I don't vote for imbeciles like Obama."
Quote from: Kleves on November 06, 2012, 12:36:45 PM
Also, Fox News has just called the election for Romney.
Where? I just checked their website and didn't see anything.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 12:43:43 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 06, 2012, 12:37:09 PM
Mind you, it seems much more likely to me that all that talk about FEMA is bullshit designed to trick the Republican faithful into voting for him.
Well, considering that the Dumbfuckistanis along the Gulf Coast keep sending representatives and senators to DC to consistently vote against it, as well as electing Republican governors that poo-poo it, it's not like there's that much bullshit involved.
None of those guys are Mitt Romney though. Romney's not an idiot, he's just a little bit callous.
Irish bookie Paddypower calling it for Obama and paying out the bets already.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/obama-wins-paddy-power-irish-bookmaker-pays-bets_n_2081975.html
Quote from: celedhring on November 06, 2012, 01:31:03 PM
Irish bookie Paddypower calling it for Obama and paying out the bets already.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/obama-wins-paddy-power-irish-bookmaker-pays-bets_n_2081975.html
:huh:
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 01:02:55 PM
Where? I just checked their website and didn't see anything.
I was being facetious. :secret:
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
Quote from: celedhring on November 06, 2012, 01:31:03 PM
Irish bookie Paddypower calling it for Obama and paying out the bets already.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/obama-wins-paddy-power-irish-bookmaker-pays-bets_n_2081975.html
:huh:
It's a publicity stunt, albeit an expensive one if Romney wins.
Did we really need another election thread? <_<
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 01:02:55 PM
Quote from: Kleves on November 06, 2012, 12:36:45 PM
Also, Fox News has just called the election for Romney.
Where? I just checked their website and didn't see anything.
They seem mainly concerned with black panthers and a mural of Obama at a polling station in Philly.
Gearing up for calling foul.
Quote from: lustindarkness on November 06, 2012, 01:59:40 PM
Did we really need another election thread? <_<
This is THE election thread. The others were impossible to follow. Here is where the important things are posted. Ignore everything else.
This election thread beets the other election threads. :hug:
Like gypsies, election news must be free to move around from thread to thread. :P
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 02:10:49 PM
Like gypsies, election news must be free to move around from thread to thread. :P
+1
This is the one to check if you are hungary for the latest and best election commentary.
The other are not as horthy of your attention.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fth1239.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff519%2FRhosyn_Calypso%2Fth_rolleyes.gif&hash=e91051ee0e13009de8c71adb3b65ad3e41825fcf)
So I voted. Definitely the best time of day to go.
Naturally, I voted against Romney. Also went with Ben Cardin for Senate, and my main man and congressman Dutch Ruppersburger, the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and an anti-Chinese IP stealing Democrat even Republicans can love, and he gets along with Mike Rogers. You may remember him from 60 Minutes a few weeks back over that whole Huawei thing. A responsible, sensible member of Congress. One day, I'd like to see him fist Michelle Bachmann with Peter King's forehead.
But more importantly that the shoo-in Democrats in the People's Republic of Maryland were the ballot initiatives.
Voted for the Maryland Dream Act, which allows the children of illegals who are technically illegals themselves who finish high school in 3 years, as opposed to 4, to qualify for in-state tuition rates for Maryland public universities.
Despite the extremely annoying self-centered and selfish majority of Languishite pillowbiters, I voted for the Same-Sex Marriage Amendment. Fags have the universal and human right to have their marriages in participating churches legally recognized by the state, and to be as miserable as every other married couple I know.
Voted against the really big issue of expansion of casino gambling under the questionable auspices of enhancing the education budget. It's bullshit: casinos are in the business of making money for casinos, not schools. And besides, how do we get to the point in a society when something as basic and fundamental as public education has to be supplemented by a participatory sin tax? I don't believe in enabling addictive behavior aimed a a particular subset of society, and you know who the fuck I'm talking about. If we want to fund public schools, tax everybody through the nutsack equally.
Also voted for all the ballot initiatives for floating bonds and borrowing money for various initiatives, since Bigger Government is Better.
I then celebrated America with my "I Voted" sticker, and hit McDonald's to try their new Cheddar, Bacon and Onion Angus burger. Democracy never tasted so good.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
I then celebrated America with my "I Voted" sticker, and hit McDonald's to try their new Cheddar, Bacon and Onion Angus burger. Democracy never tasted so good.
That sounds good, even if it is McDonald's.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
Voted against the really big issue of expansion of casino gambling under the questionable auspices of enhancing the education budget. It's bullshit: casinos are in the business of making money for casinos, not schools. And besides, how do we get to the point in a society when something as basic and fundamental as public education has to be supplemented by a participatory sin tax?
It's not that. It's just in vogue to put education and schools on every proposed tax increase. I guess it sells better that way.
Democratic down the line. Didn't intend for it to come out that way, but the NJ Republicans in question have been really shitty. Yes to both ballot questions for NJ (state can match funds for college projects, state can withhold benefit contributions from justices' and judges' salaries).
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 06, 2012, 02:39:39 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
I then celebrated America with my "I Voted" sticker, and hit McDonald's to try their new Cheddar, Bacon and Onion Angus burger. Democracy never tasted so good.
That sounds good, even if it is McDonald's.
Well, it was a certainly more reliable choice than that shitty Diebold machine with its Access 2.0 database I voted on. At least at McD's I know my choice won't result in a fucking NULL string.
The machines the use here are great. Super-easy to use. Everything prints out inside the glass and gets saved in case they need to hand-count. Wonderful things.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
Also voted for all the ballot initiatives for floating bonds and borrowing money for various initiatives, since Bigger Government is Better.
:cheers:
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 06, 2012, 02:53:27 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
Also voted for all the ballot initiatives for floating bonds and borrowing money for various initiatives, since Bigger Government is Better.
:cheers:
Like hell it is.
You people should move to Hungary. Here the state knows everything about you, has its hand in everything, and takes half of your income. Your life would be a constant sociagasm.
Sounds alot like here. You see the problem isn't big government, it's Hungarians.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 06, 2012, 03:01:02 PM
Sounds alot like here. You see the problem isn't big government, it's Hungarians.
Let's agree at "both are the problem"
Quote from: Tamas on November 06, 2012, 03:08:46 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 06, 2012, 03:01:02 PM
Sounds alot like here. You see the problem isn't big government, it's Hungarians.
Let's agree at "both are the problem"
I would agree with half of that statement.
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 03:11:10 PM
Quote from: Tamas on November 06, 2012, 03:08:46 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 06, 2012, 03:01:02 PM
Sounds alot like here. You see the problem isn't big government, it's Hungarians.
Let's agree at "both are the problem"
I would agree with half of that statement.
Yep, he is 50% correct which is something considering Hungarians are the problem.
My son, Carter, will be here tonight. :cool:
Obama Election Rally at McCormick Place (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-10-18/news/chi-source-obama-election-night-rally-to-be-at-mccormick-place-20121017_1_election-night-mccormick-place-event)
QuotePresident Barack Obama plans to hold his election-night rally at Chicago's McCormick Place convention center, a move aimed at easing concerns over weather and security, sources with knowledge of the event said Wednesday.
Given the indoor location, the event seems unlikely to match the electric atmosphere of Obama's 2008 outdoor victory rally in Grant Park. That event drew an estimated 240,000 people downtown and created picturesque images of the city's skyline that were seen worldwide.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 06, 2012, 03:12:43 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 03:11:10 PM
Quote from: Tamas on November 06, 2012, 03:08:46 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 06, 2012, 03:01:02 PM
Sounds alot like here. You see the problem isn't big government, it's Hungarians.
Let's agree at "both are the problem"
I would agree with half of that statement.
Yep, he is 50% correct which is something considering Hungarians are the problem.
I enjoy your state of denial as the economic order you hold dear is falling apart in front of our very eyes.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 02:36:23 PM
Voted for the Maryland Dream Act, which allows the children of illegals who are technically illegals themselves who finish high school in 3 years, as opposed to 4, to qualify for in-state tuition rates for Maryland public universities.
Is there a high incidence of individuals who finish in 3 years instead of 4?
Is there a high incidence of children of illegal immigrants finishing high school at all? :hmm:
Massachusetts voting -- got to love the overtime-collecting cop stationed in the firehouse, playing with her iPhone. :lol:
Voted for the Native American for Senator, some "unaffiliated" challengers for other spots, and an Armenian for Sheriff. Voted "yes" on medical MJ, "yes" on assisted suicide for the terminally ill, and "no" on some car parts consumer protection bill. :)
Looks like The Onion is going to be dead to me now. Can't see myself paying for their content. -_-
Quote from: Tamas on November 06, 2012, 02:07:51 PM
Quote from: lustindarkness on November 06, 2012, 01:59:40 PM
Did we really need another election thread? <_<
This is THE election thread. The others were impossible to follow. Here is where the important things are posted. Ignore everything else.
No, outside of the military, I have a hard time following orders.
This thread is not very "Grand" either.
I prefer to argue why I will not post in this thread instead of the elections anyway.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 06, 2012, 03:58:45 PM
Massachusetts voting -- got to love the overtime-collecting cop stationed in the firehouse, playing with her iPhone. :lol:
Heh, I forgot that they station cops at polling places up there. Not here. Of course, there are actually more polling places in my county than there are cops. :cool:
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 03:57:54 PM
Is there a high incidence of children of illegal immigrants finishing high school at all? :hmm:
I wonder if it is like what California did:
QuoteThe bill, dubbed the California Dream Act, passed the state Legislature earlier this month and aims at helping illegal immigrants who earned a diploma after attending at least three years of high school in the state.
But yeah I wonder how many actually take advantage of this.
I'm not sure I understand the point of legislation like that. Sure, it's nice to earn a college degree, but don't most employers screen for citizenship and therefore will not hire you if you're an illegal immigrant?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/philadelphia-election-official-looking-obama-mural-complaint-174758326.html
QuoteJudge orders Obama mural covered in Philadelphia polling station
A judge has ordered that a mural of President Barack Obama be covered up at a Philadelphia polling place after Republicans complained, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Republican National Committee official Tim Miller complained on Twitter that the polling place set up voting booths right next to a mural of Obama. The location of the polling site is 35th ward-D18 Franklin School, according to the Weekly Standard. Miller wrote that the Pennsylvania GOP has filed a complaint.
Electioneering is not allowed within 10 feet of a polling place.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Ftheticket%2Fmural.jpg&hash=a4a11a74da374e49d1d803720c41b3ba6adf0786)
:lol: Yeah, cause Romney has a REAL shot of winning Philadelphia County if that pesky mural gets covered up.
Apparently there was a clusterfuck in Madison, Wisconsin. My sis went to her polling place, and they told her she wasn't registered. Fortunately they had same day voter registration. She said the whole place was filled with people filling out the paperwork for that because the polling places didn't have accurate lists.
I just took my pre election coverage dump.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 06, 2012, 03:58:45 PM
Massachusetts voting -- got to love the overtime-collecting cop stationed in the firehouse, playing with her iPhone. :lol:
Voted for the Native American for Senator, some "unaffiliated" challengers for other spots, and an Armenian for Sheriff. Voted "yes" on medical MJ, "yes" on assisted suicide for the terminally ill, and "no" on some car parts consumer protection bill. :)
Yeah. Cop at my place was awake and mostly alert. Probably because it was a school. I voted for the auto parts thing since AAA recommended it.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 04:20:27 PM
Apparently there was a clusterfuck in Madison, Wisconsin. My sis went to her polling place, and they told her she wasn't registered. Fortunately they had same day voter registration. She said the whole place was filled with people filling out the paperwork for that because the polling places didn't have accurate lists.
Wasn't very convenient voting for me today either. I think there probably isn't a lot of malfeasance going on or anything, but the simple truth is all the large scale changes to voter registration procedures, identification requirements etc have added a layer of bureaucracy to the process. As a long time bureaucrat I'll tell you bureaucracy muddles things and introduces many points of failure. I think a lot more people than usual will be inconvenienced at the polls today, not through maliciousness at the polling place level or even higher up, but just because the new regulations are creating a clusterfuck. Now, that's most likely what the highest levels of State government that pushed these regulations wanted, but I don't think they're taking a direct hand. I think they basically knew they were going to make things messy.
Quote from: Tamas on November 06, 2012, 03:42:57 PM
I enjoy your state of denial as the economic order you hold dear is falling apart in front of our very eyes.
I take it that Hungarian news reporting of the economic health of Canada is as incompetant as the Hungarian problem itself.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 04:29:20 PM
I just took my pre election coverage dump.
did it lean to the left or the right.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
Wasn't very convenient voting for me today either. I think there probably isn't a lot of malfeasance going on or anything, but the simple truth is all the large scale changes to voter registration procedures, identification requirements etc have added a layer of bureaucracy to the process. As a long time bureaucrat I'll tell you bureaucracy muddles things and introduces many points of failure. I think a lot more people than usual will be inconvenienced at the polls today, not through maliciousness at the polling place level or even higher up, but just because the new regulations are creating a clusterfuck. Now, that's most likely what the highest levels of State government that pushed these regulations wanted, but I don't think they're taking a direct hand. I think they basically knew they were going to make things messy.
I call bullshit. They all know, and have known, exactly what they were doing, what was going to happen, and what they wanted to accomplish. It's more than just bureaucracy being bureaucracy: it's bureaucracy as political weapon.
Mary Matalin has had a facelift. Or its the hairstyle.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 05:11:28 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
Wasn't very convenient voting for me today either. I think there probably isn't a lot of malfeasance going on or anything, but the simple truth is all the large scale changes to voter registration procedures, identification requirements etc have added a layer of bureaucracy to the process. As a long time bureaucrat I'll tell you bureaucracy muddles things and introduces many points of failure. I think a lot more people than usual will be inconvenienced at the polls today, not through maliciousness at the polling place level or even higher up, but just because the new regulations are creating a clusterfuck. Now, that's most likely what the highest levels of State government that pushed these regulations wanted, but I don't think they're taking a direct hand. I think they basically knew they were going to make things messy.
I call bullshit. They all know, and have known, exactly what they were doing, what was going to happen, and what they wanted to accomplish. It's more than just bureaucracy being bureaucracy: it's bureaucracy as political weapon.
What are you talking about. What party could possibly benefit from poor marginalized people being prevented from voting.
So i was reflecting on something. I do not believe in my lifetime I've ever been surprised at the results of an election.
I was too young to really follow Reagan-Carter, that may have been one that would have shocked me as the polls were very close and Reagan beat Carter like Simon Legree's overseers beat Uncle Tom.
But the elections I followed since (was old enough to at least notice an election in '84 despite being too young to vote) I pretty much knew the outcomes that happened were either likely or strongly possible. I knew Reagan and Bush I were gonna kill their opponents in 84, 88. In '92 I thought Bush had a good chance to hold on but knew Clinton had a chance to beat him with the Perot insurgency and Clinton turning out to be a much better folksy and spirited campaigner than the Patrician Bush. I don't know that anyone took Dole's candidacy seriously, even though I thought him a great man and patriot and someone who would have been a fine President. I knew 2000 would be close, and I suspected Bush would win in a close election in '04. I knew McCain was toast long before election day, and this year while I lean towards thinking Obama wins neither result would surprise me.
The only thing that would surprise me this year would be a landslide win by either candidate. For that matter I guess I can say I was surprised in 2000 not by the close result or the winner, but I never would've expected it to drag on for a month and end up in the SCOTUS.
The thing that would shock me is if Mittens won. Has there ever been a candidate that no one really liked who won the Presidency.
In Canada we had the phenomenon occur once (Joe Clarke) but that is the only time I can recall it happening.
Quote from: garbon on November 06, 2012, 04:11:37 PM
I wonder if it is like what California did:
QuoteThe bill, dubbed the California Dream Act, passed the state Legislature earlier this month and aims at helping illegal immigrants who earned a diploma after attending at least three years of high school in the state.
But yeah I wonder how many actually take advantage of this.
Yeah, it's the same thing; graduate in three years, or attend at least 3 and graduate, or earn 60 credits at a community college, and the illegals get in-state tuition rates. There were also caveats as well, like Selective Service registration, as well as the illegal's parents having to have filed tax returns during the time they
muchachitos attended high school.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:14:34 PM
I don't know that anyone took Dole's candidacy seriously, even though I thought him a great man and patriot and someone who would have been a fine President.
He was a much better candidate, and would've been a much better President, in '88. He had the lead going into New Hampshire, and similar to McCain in 2000, he had a large chunk of the liberal media on his side.
Poppy fucked him hardcore. Imagine that. The Bush-A-Matic Smear Machine. Go fig.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 04:20:27 PM
Apparently there was a clusterfuck in Madison, Wisconsin. My sis went to her polling place, and they told her she wasn't registered. Fortunately they had same day voter registration. She said the whole place was filled with people filling out the paperwork for that because the polling places didn't have accurate lists.
Wasn't very convenient voting for me today either. I think there probably isn't a lot of malfeasance going on or anything, but the simple truth is all the large scale changes to voter registration procedures, identification requirements etc have added a layer of bureaucracy to the process. As a long time bureaucrat I'll tell you bureaucracy muddles things and introduces many points of failure. I think a lot more people than usual will be inconvenienced at the polls today, not through maliciousness at the polling place level or even higher up, but just because the new regulations are creating a clusterfuck. Now, that's most likely what the highest levels of State government that pushed these regulations wanted, but I don't think they're taking a direct hand. I think they basically knew they were going to make things messy.
Thanks for that, interesting.
And I agree with what you, Money and others sad in the other thread about having national standard for what are federal elections after all.
Why states get to meddle in the conduct of polls for national elections, whether presidential or congressional seems very odd and anti-common sense.
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 05:26:59 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 04:20:27 PM
Apparently there was a clusterfuck in Madison, Wisconsin. My sis went to her polling place, and they told her she wasn't registered. Fortunately they had same day voter registration. She said the whole place was filled with people filling out the paperwork for that because the polling places didn't have accurate lists.
Wasn't very convenient voting for me today either. I think there probably isn't a lot of malfeasance going on or anything, but the simple truth is all the large scale changes to voter registration procedures, identification requirements etc have added a layer of bureaucracy to the process. As a long time bureaucrat I'll tell you bureaucracy muddles things and introduces many points of failure. I think a lot more people than usual will be inconvenienced at the polls today, not through maliciousness at the polling place level or even higher up, but just because the new regulations are creating a clusterfuck. Now, that's most likely what the highest levels of State government that pushed these regulations wanted, but I don't think they're taking a direct hand. I think they basically knew they were going to make things messy.
Thanks for that, interesting.
And I agree with what you, Money and others sad in the other thread about having national standard for what are federal elections after all.
Why states get to meddle in the conduct of polls for national elections, whether presidential or congressional seems very odd and anti-common sense.
Well congressional still kind of makes sense as in the case of the senate, that's representing the state. I'd guess then that after you concede so much to the state - it'd be a little weak to then put in regulations just for presidency.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 06, 2012, 05:17:10 PM
The thing that would shock me is if Mittens won. Has there ever been a candidate that no one really liked who won the Presidency.
In Canada we had the phenomenon occur once (Joe Clarke) but that is the only time I can recall it happening.
There is some parallel with George H.W. Bush, he wasn't really the most likable guy. Too stiff and patrician. I really liked him though, probably the last Republican other than 2000 McCain where I could basically unabashedly support him. I supported a lot of the W. Bush stuff through the rough years because I felt the Democratic alternatives were not any better. (Cut and run in Iraq, for example.) But there was a range of issues where I think it was hard for me to support W. Bush, specifically some of his gluttonous spending practices.
To me I kind of think it was to the long term harm of the country and the Republican party that Clinton beat Bush in '92, because it convinced the GOP upper leadership that the way you beat folksy Democrats like Clinton was to go full bore hardcore Christian, totally embrace what up til then had been a relatively fringe element of the party and basically cast all opponents as gay or un-American to get ignorant voters angry enough to vote for you.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 05:22:07 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:14:34 PM
I don't know that anyone took Dole's candidacy seriously, even though I thought him a great man and patriot and someone who would have been a fine President.
He was a much better candidate, and would've been a much better President, in '88. He had the lead going into New Hampshire, and similar to McCain in 2000, he had a large chunk of the liberal media on his side.
Poppy fucked him hardcore. Imagine that. The Bush-A-Matic Smear Machine. Go fig.
You don't fuck with Poppy. Dude is CIA.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:33:22 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 06, 2012, 05:17:10 PM
The thing that would shock me is if Mittens won. Has there ever been a candidate that no one really liked who won the Presidency.
In Canada we had the phenomenon occur once (Joe Clarke) but that is the only time I can recall it happening.
There is some parallel with George H.W. Bush, he wasn't really the most likable guy. Too stiff and patrician. I really liked him though, probably the last Republican other than 2000 McCain where I could basically unabashedly support him. I supported a lot of the W. Bush stuff through the rough years because I felt the Democratic alternatives were not any better. (Cut and run in Iraq, for example.) But there was a range of issues where I think it was hard for me to support W. Bush, specifically some of his gluttonous spending practices.
To me I kind of think it was to the long term harm of the country and the Republican party that Clinton beat Bush in '92, because it convinced the GOP upper leadership that the way you beat folksy Democrats like Clinton was to go full bore hardcore Christian, totally embrace what up til then had been a relatively fringe element of the party and basically cast all opponents as gay or un-American to get ignorant voters angry enough to vote for you.
I don't know if there have been any candidates on either ticket that are generally considered to be unpleasant human beings in the last several decades. With the sole exception of John Edwards.
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 05:26:59 PM
Why states get to meddle in the conduct of polls for national elections, whether presidential or congressional seems very odd and anti-common sense.
Which is why, in such a close and narrow election, I am calling a Romney victory.
There are far too many shenanigans going on in swing states whose electoral processes are run by Republican-led state leaders in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado: just enough shenanigans and intended bureaucratic fuck-ups to make the difference in a razor-thin election.
Voters being challenged at the polls in Florida to such an incredible degree that the polls get hung up, and people leave after waiting for hours upon hours.
Thousands of absentee ballot requests in Ohio ignored and not mailed out two weeks ago due to a "glitch", though they had no problem mailing out the notifications of election required by law with the wrong date of the election.
Last minute changing of the rules in Florida on absentee ballots to match signatures on voter registration cards, some decades old, turning poll workers into subjective handwriting experts.
And so on. And so on. There's more, but why bother at this point. It's all bullshit anyway.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 05:33:51 PM
You don't fuck with Poppy. Dude is CIA.
And you don't speaketh ill of a fellow Republican in the '88 primaries, sayeth the Gipper. POPPY BROKE HIS LAW
Bob Dole was nothing less than a war hero, a stellar member of the United States Senate and the salt of the earth, the last of the Good Republicans(tm). Fucking Bushes.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 05:49:41 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 05:33:51 PM
You don't fuck with Poppy. Dude is CIA.
And you don't speaketh ill of a fellow Republican in the '88 primaries, sayeth the Gipper. POPPY BROKE HIS LAW
Bob Dole was nothing less than a war hero, a stellar member of the United States Senate and the salt of the earth, the last of the Good Republicans(tm). Fucking Bushes.
IT WAS POPPY'S TURN.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 05:52:18 PM
IT WAS POPPY'S TURN.
Poppy's turn, my black ass. He lost his fucking turn for selling out in '80.
I'll be watching the election returns tonight with a bottle of beer in hand, awaiting the thousand-years of darkness that will begin with a Republican-controlled congress and a Republican President meekly obeying the shouting and yelping of their Tea Part constituents.
Good night, sweet ladies. Good night, good night.
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 05:57:35 PM
I'll be watching the election returns tonight with a bottle of beer in hand, awaiting the thousand-years of darkness that will begin with a Republican-controlled congress and a Republican President meekly obeying the shouting and yelping of their Tea Part constituents.
Good night, sweet ladies. Good night, good night.
I have my brown shirt ready for just such an occasion. :)
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 06:00:17 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 05:57:35 PM
I'll be watching the election returns tonight with a bottle of beer in hand, awaiting the thousand-years of darkness that will begin with a Republican-controlled congress and a Republican President meekly obeying the shouting and yelping of their Tea Part constituents.
Good night, sweet ladies. Good night, good night.
I have my brown shirt ready for just such an occasion. :)
:D
The first thing I'll do is denounce my bozo Facebook friends who kept posting political screeds for three months.
Quote from: Barrister on November 06, 2012, 05:41:18 PM
I don't know if there have been any candidates on either ticket that are generally considered to be unpleasant human beings in the last several decades. With the sole exception of John Edwards.
Romney is a fairly unpleasant human being. I remember back in 2008 he was detested by the other Republican candidates. I remember reading that some of the other candidates didn't care who won the primary so long as Romney lost. They seemed to think he was a slimy, dishonest backstabber.
I just hope my new Mormon robe fits me as well as Albert Brooks' in Defending Your Life. That would be nice.
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
Exit polls favor Obama, but they always favor the Dems, so I don't know
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/06/exit_polls.html
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:09:16 PM
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
American Leftists are notoriously neurotic. Knowledge brings uncertainty, and ignorance brings confidence.
Oh noes! Romney landslide!
https://news.google.com/news/section?pz=1&cf=all&topic=el&ict=rhc
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:09:16 PM
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
I'm having trouble imagining how this is anything but an Obama win. The numbers may be tight, but it'll never be in doubt.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 06:13:41 PM
Oh noes! Romney landslide!
https://news.google.com/news/section?pz=1&cf=all&topic=el&ict=rhc
It currently displays 43 votes counted in NH. That's cute.
Quote from: Barrister on November 06, 2012, 06:20:38 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:09:16 PM
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
I'm having trouble imagining how this is anything but an Obama win. The numbers may be tight, but it'll never be in doubt.
Same here, but I'm consciously choosing not to think about voter fraud, or tactics that essentially amount to that in spirit. I think that's the biggest known unknown of this election.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 06:10:17 PM
Exit polls favor Obama, but they always favor the Dems, so I don't know
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/06/exit_polls.html
Deserves own thread. :menace:
The amazing thing is that it got this tight at all. Obama certainly got outcampaigned in the last month or so. I mean, Romney was a decent candidate and all, but every time a Republican candidate for Congress opened his mouth on abortion, or how slavery was a good thing, or how all good American supported the Bund, it cost him votes. That first debate is Nixon/Kennedy-esque.
Oh dear, they're back to using a good ol' whiteboard here. Screw your 3D election coverage.
Alex Wagner :wub:
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 05:33:22 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 06, 2012, 05:17:10 PM
The thing that would shock me is if Mittens won. Has there ever been a candidate that no one really liked who won the Presidency.
In Canada we had the phenomenon occur once (Joe Clarke) but that is the only time I can recall it happening.
There is some parallel with George H.W. Bush, he wasn't really the most likable guy. Too stiff and patrician. I really liked him though, probably the last Republican other than 2000 McCain where I could basically unabashedly support him.
But that is my point. H.W. appealed to at least part of his base. I get the sense that most if not all Republicans are holding their noses voting for Mittens.
Quote from: Barrister on November 06, 2012, 06:20:38 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:09:16 PM
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
I'm having trouble imagining how this is anything but an Obama win. The numbers may be tight, but it'll never be in doubt.
Right, it's going to be a Truman-Dewey style result in that I think Obama convincingly wins the EC but by thin margins in a few States.
Now, what I've also said is I will be surprised if every State Nate Silver says is likely to go for Obama actually goes for Obama, the election is just a lot closer this year than it was in 2008 and some of those aggregated polls will prove to be off the mark. But a lot of them, more than is reasonable to suspect, will have to be off for Romney to win the whole shebang.
That's why I'm expecting a surprise here or there tonight on a state-by-state level, but generally expect Obama to win.
What would it take for your government to become functional again - ie one party actually being able to pass the legislation it wants.
BBC are reporting over $131 million spent in Virginia alone.
That's versus total party spending during the 2010 UK general election of $50 million, plus the small amount each individual candidate is allow to spend themselves, iirc that no more than 3,000 dollars each.
How sad do you guys think the pundits would be if Obama or Romney won it big time early on? They'd not get their night long wank fest they'd been dreaming of.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 06, 2012, 06:20:38 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 06:09:16 PM
I find it odd. A lot of Obama supporters I know on the internet seem to think Romney is going to win, basically every Romney supporter I know on the internet or in real life thinks Romney is going to win. It seems like only me, some die hard Obama supporters, and the statistics nerds think Obama will win comfortably.
I'm having trouble imagining how this is anything but an Obama win. The numbers may be tight, but it'll never be in doubt.
Right, it's going to be a Truman-Dewey style result in that I think Obama convincingly wins the EC but by thin margins in a few States.
Now, what I've also said is I will be surprised if every State Nate Silver says is likely to go for Obama actually goes for Obama, the election is just a lot closer this year than it was in 2008 and some of those aggregated polls will prove to be off the mark. But a lot of them, more than is reasonable to suspect, will have to be off for Romney to win the whole shebang.
That's why I'm expecting a surprise here or there tonight on a state-by-state level, but generally expect Obama to win.
Yeah Silver posted a list showing states where there were three or more polls right before every election since 1980 and while there was some divergence the leaders in the polls usually won (in all but three examples) and, maybe more importantly, when polls were wrong in one state they generally didn't carry over to being wrong in other states. In other words, polls weren't all wrong in the same direction; in each election, some would be off but the mistakes did not uniformly favor one candidate. Romney, though, basically needs the polls to all be wrong in one direction. I'm confident Obama will win, and though I'm certainly not sure of the result I think Obama is more likely to hit 330 in the EC than Romney is to hit 270.
BBC are calling Indiana as a Romney gain, by a clear margin.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 06, 2012, 06:54:29 PM
I get the sense that most if not all Republicans are holding their noses voting for Mittens.
The sad thing is, they'll probably say in the post-mortem that they didn't run a conservative enough candidate.
SANTORUM 2016
HITLER 2016
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 07:01:30 PM
How sad do you guys think the pundits would be if Obama or Romney won it big time early on? They'd not get their night long wank fest they'd been dreaming of.
I hope not, I stockpiled enough munchies to last to 4am.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 07:03:58 PM
The sad thing is, they'll probably say in the post-mortem that they didn't run a conservative enough candidate.
SANTORUM 2016
I thought they'd already annointed Rubio. :hmm:
Kentucky: Romney
Indiana: Romney
West Virginia: Romney
Vermont: Obama
Virginia: too close to call
No surprises so far.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 07:04:47 PM
HITLER 2016
The new orders from the Republican party is that Hitler was in fact a liberal. Cause he didn't eat meat, and he didn't smoke.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 07:42:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 07:04:47 PM
HITLER 2016
The new orders from the Republican party is that Hitler was in fact a liberal. Cause he didn't eat meat, and he didn't smoke.
Sigh.
DOMITIAN 2016
South Carolina: Romney
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 07:42:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 07:04:47 PM
HITLER 2016
The new orders from the Republican party is that Hitler was in fact a liberal. Cause he didn't eat meat, and he didn't smoke.
Meh, Big Government type. Although, he did have an energetic foreign policy.
GERMANY WILL NOT BE SHAPED BY EVENTS
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/facebook-insights/?hpt=hp_t4_7 (http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/facebook-insights/?hpt=hp_t4_7)
Obama's leading in 42 states! :o
Got the following PM from AR:
Quote from: alfred russellHey, I'm in a place without election news and have such a horrible internet connection I can't visit intrade. I also can't post in the forum for some reason.
Could you post a request for periodic requests for intrade odds?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 07:51:35 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 06, 2012, 07:42:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 07:04:47 PM
HITLER 2016
The new orders from the Republican party is that Hitler was in fact a liberal. Cause he didn't eat meat, and he didn't smoke.
Meh, Big Government type. Although, he did have an energetic foreign policy.
GERMANY WILL NOT BE SHAPED BY EVENTS
Republican history is a lot like Russian history, it's written in pencil.
And fuck the board is slow tonight.
Intrade is 70% for Obama now, as it has been all day. I expect it to move radically within the next hour.
Damn I'm failing in the last furlong:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62fPLtL8h7s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62fPLtL8h7s)
This is getting boring, please just end it, please can we have a quick clean result. :(
Oklahoma: Romney
Illinois: Obama
Maryland: Obama
Delaware: Obama
Connecticut: Obama
Massachusetts: Obama
Rhode Island: Obama
Maine: Obama
Looks like we're really competitive in Florida. Kind of surprising, or at least comforting.
District of Columbia: Obama (duh)
Projected;
56 Obama to 40 Romney on 12 states called so far.
Again, no surprises so far.
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 08:04:48 PM
Looks like we're really competitive in Florida. Kind of surprising, or at least comforting.
Current numbers in Virginia not so much, though I'm sure it'll tighten up.
Yeah, the Virginia numbers make it looks like Romney will win there in a blowout, but the precincts reporting are still way too low to glean much meaning from that.
The 'hunting' amendment wins in Kentucky. :cool:
Georgia: Romney
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 08:04:48 PM
Looks like we're really competitive in Florida. Kind of surprising, or at least comforting.
Any results less than 10,000 votes on either side, and it'll be 2000 all over again. Considering the bullshit involved in the absentee balloting issues, which affect 3% of the total ballots cast in the state, both sides will challenge.
So even though I filled out my vote-by-mail ballot a week or so ago apparently I couldn't be arsed to actually get a stamp on it and get it in the mail so I just had to drop it off at the drop box at the community pool.
Besides getting to vote for a foreign Muslim I also voted to legalize pot and to legalize privately owned, non-tribal casinos. What a country.
If NC is close (and it probably will be) expect to hear a lot of complaints from here. Things seem to be a mess. There were only 3 people in line ahead of me when I went to vote, and 2 of them were in the wrong polling place. I was in the right polling place, though why it's my polling place, I don't understand--there's one much closer to our house.
NC is basically tied at this point in the count (as is Florida).
Arkansas: Romney
Tennessee: Romney
I've seen a couple of exit polls with Romney down from McCain's totals of white evangelicals, Tucker Carlson's said overall he looks to be down around 7% in that group. Maybe after a campaign when it seemed that his Mormonism didn't matter, it turned out it did :(
And ohio "leans" Brak. Seedy's panic over vote rigging in ohio: overblown and histeronic
Turnout looks higher than anyone expected :mellow:
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:37:47 PM
Turnout looks higher than anyone expected :mellow:
I love America. :showoff:
NBC has said Indiana's too close to call at this point. That strikes me as bad news for Romney.
Feeling good about my 281-257 projection
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:42:38 PM
NBC has said Indiana's too close to call at this point. That strikes me as bad news for Romney.
They've called Indiana
http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/all#.UJm8fGd3iCX
Jeremy Vine on the BBC coverage is really irritating.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 08:43:24 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:42:38 PM
NBC has said Indiana's too close to call at this point. That strikes me as bad news for Romney.
They've called Indiana
That was via Andrew Neil (:wub:) from a few minutes ago. CBS called it ages ago. The fact that NBC were being cautious about it for that long is still a bad sign for Romney.
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 08:44:19 PM
Jeremy Vine on the BBC coverage is really irritating.
The BBC coverage is dire. If you've an internet connection you've no excuse for not watching one of the American channels.
Alabama: Romney
Mississippi: Romney
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:46:18 PM
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 08:44:19 PM
Jeremy Vine on the BBC coverage is really irritating.
The BBC coverage is dire. If you've an internet connection you've no excuse for not watching one of the American channels.
OK shelf, quickly pick the best one for me. :)
I enjoyed the Fox News (not the real Fox News :() host say 'grazie' to a departing Spanish speaking pundit. Right now I'm watching CBS, seems good. Later I may flick to ABC and CNN
God I love Mike Huckabee, 'I think Republicans have done a pathetic job of reaching out to people of color.' :wub:
Edit:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/dorsey/huckabee-republicans-pathetic-at-reaching-out-t
Love this man.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:50:47 PM
I enjoyed the Fox News (not the real Fox News :() host say 'grazie' to a departing Spanish speaking pundit. Right now I'm watching CBS, seems good. Later I may flick to ABC and CNN
:cheers:
just tried nbc NBC and it wasn't working.
I was curious and turned on the BBC's streaming online coverage.
Who the hell are these old boring codgers? :yucky:
Reports of lines up to 4 hours long in Virginia and Florida. Ridiculous
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
Obama up to 72% on Intrade. Not exactly the radical movement I was expecting. I predict that it'll reach 80% by the end of the month.
Quote from: Maximus on November 06, 2012, 08:54:39 PM
Reports of lines up to 4 hours long in Virginia and Florida. Ridiculous
This is why there should be federal standards for elections. This is an outright travesty for a country claiming to be a democracy.
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
Hello :)
DGuller, Obama's odds have tumbled over the last hour.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:57:41 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
Hello :)
DGuller, Obama's odds have tumbled over the last hour.
:huh: Where? Intrade just upticked to 74%.
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 08:58:16 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 08:57:41 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
Hello :)
DGuller, Obama's odds have tumbled over the last hour.
:huh: Where? Intrade just upticked to 74%.
Actually Nate Silver just posted on this. Intrade's an outlier and has been more pro-Romney all along. Betfair and all the British bookies are roughly the same and have slashed Obama's odds over the last hour. May not be accurate, but striking.
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
:hug: Howdy, Sask. Couldn't be arsed to break out CCR's Big Board, but we're keeping tabs on it, as usual.
Finally Intrade has started moving. Now up to 75.5%.
I wonder if someone finally discovered a way to arbitrage the multiple markets. That would expect the movement in different directions in different markets.
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
:hug:
Good to see you pal!
Louisiana: Romney
Texas: Romney
Kansas: Romney
Nebraska: Romney
South Dakota: Romney
North Dakota: Romney
Wyoming: Romney
New Mexico: Obama
New York: Obama
Michigan: Obama
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
Hey, welcome back; how are things going ? :cheers:
Intrade up to 79%.
15% of precincts in PR
Statehood is crushing the other options.
STATEHOOD 74,029 64.91%
SOVEREIGN FREE ASSOCIATED STATE 35,272 30.93%
INDEPENDENCE 4,753 4.17%
Intrade up to 82%. I think what's driving it is the fact that exit polls pretty much match 538 predictions, and that's bad news for Romney.
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
:thumbsup:
Languish allows me to watch Finding Bigfoot. :)
I do flip over to Univision/Fox/CNN/NBC on commercials.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 09:11:12 PM
15% of precincts in PR
Statehood is crushing the other options.
STATEHOOD 74,029 64.91%
SOVEREIGN FREE ASSOCIATED STATE 35,272 30.93%
INDEPENDENCE 4,753 4.17%
However, surprisingly the NO on change is leading though, I thought Yes would get by pretty easy and then Statehood and FSA would fight it out.
NO
92,020 53.22%
YES
80,897 46.78%
Quote from: lustindarkness on November 06, 2012, 09:14:55 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on November 06, 2012, 08:54:59 PM
Hey folks, just visiting for a bit. I figure I can get as good updates here as anywhere else.
:thumbsup:
Languish allows me to watch Finding Bigfoot. :)
I do flip over to Univision/Fox/CNN/NBC on commercials.
Univision's host is a guy in a bumblebee suit and a chick wearing almost nothing.
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
With ~70% of the votes counted in Florida the margin is a mere 300 votes right now. Hanging chads, anyone? :)
Pennsylvania: Obama
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 09:18:26 PM
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
Your use of the 'we' is almost as annoying as Timmays.
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 09:18:26 PM
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
Although I agree that Obama is very likely going to win, I don't think Pennsylvania was ever really in play... not sure why Romney wasted so much energy campaigning there at the last minute.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 09:21:49 PM
Your use of the 'we' is almost as annoying as Timmays.
I was trying to think of a clever way to call him out on that actually. :blush:
MSNBC looks like they're about to break out the champaign lol
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 09:21:49 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 09:18:26 PM
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
Your use of the 'we' is almost as annoying as Timmays.
Spellus is from Chicago. I'm sure he helped participate in electoral fraud for the Democrats at one point, so he feels like he's part of the team.
Intrade up to 91%. Another 5%, and it's realistically a lock for Obama.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:19:54 PM
With ~70% of the votes counted in Florida the margin is a mere 300 votes right now. Hanging chads, anyone? :)
Florida won't matter this time, methinks.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:22:50 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 09:18:26 PM
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
Although I agree that Obama is very likely going to win, I don't think Pennsylvania was ever really in play... not sure why Romney wasted so much energy campaigning there at the last minute.
I remember thinking this in 2004. Pennsylvania is a redneck state outside of Philadelphia and its environs, but that's such a huge part of the State (basically aside from Pittsburgh the rest of Pennsylvania is
really rural) it's very difficult to credibly overcome the Democrat advantage in those areas. I don't think I've thought of Pennsylvania as a swing state in like ever...it went for Gore-Kerry-Obama handily (and Clinton before that.) I think you have to go back to '88 landslide to see a Republican win PA.
Whew, that was close...still, with zero percent of the votes counted Wyoming went firmly to Romney.
Wolf Blitzer just creamed his pants on air over Florida.
Wolf Blitzer just ejaculated upon seeing a ~600 margin in Florida. I didn't need to see that.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 09:31:14 PM
Wolf Blitzer just creamed his pants on air over Florida.
Fuck you.
New Jersey: Obama (forgot that one earlier I think)
Wisconsin: Obama
Florida just 1200 votes in it.
I need Romney to lose vote share in Virginia and to gain in Florida to maintain my overall predictions.
Scott Pelley on CBS:
"Electrical Votes"
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 09:16:08 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 09:11:12 PM
15% of precincts in PR
Statehood is crushing the other options.
STATEHOOD 74,029 64.91%
SOVEREIGN FREE ASSOCIATED STATE 35,272 30.93%
INDEPENDENCE 4,753 4.17%
However, surprisingly the NO on change is leading though, I thought Yes would get by pretty easy and then Statehood and FSA would fight it out.
NO
92,020 53.22%
YES
80,897 46.78%
Whoops, NO is YES on this issue! Yay!
http://i.imgur.com/aWsXY.png
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 09:28:09 PM
Intrade up to 91%. Another 5%, and it's realistically a lock for Obama.
It always has been. Intrade doesn't decide the election, you backwards fuck.
Wait, so are we going to have the shittiest state ever to join the union? This should be bigger news than the Presidential election...
Fox News in full-fledged panic mode
Quote from: PDH on November 06, 2012, 09:29:37 PM
Whew, that was close...still, with zero percent of the votes counted Wyoming went firmly to Romney.
Same! :w00t:
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 09:29:32 PM
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:22:50 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 06, 2012, 09:18:26 PM
We've got PA and none of the Southern swing states are called. We've got this.
Although I agree that Obama is very likely going to win, I don't think Pennsylvania was ever really in play... not sure why Romney wasted so much energy campaigning there at the last minute.
I remember thinking this in 2004. Pennsylvania is a redneck state outside of Philadelphia and its environs, but that's such a huge part of the State (basically aside from Pittsburgh the rest of Pennsylvania is really rural) it's very difficult to credibly overcome the Democrat advantage in those areas. I don't think I've thought of Pennsylvania as a swing state in like ever...it went for Gore-Kerry-Obama handily (and Clinton before that.) I think you have to go back to '88 landslide to see a Republican win PA.
Very similar to Oregon. Portland, Salem and Eugene go very heavily blue while the entire rest of the state is very, very red; they can't overcome the population advantage in the cities though.
And there goes liquidity at Intrade. Obama is at 93%, but Romney is at 0.5%. Another bad sign for Romney.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 09:37:32 PM
Wait, so are we going to have the shittiest state ever to join the union? This should be bigger news than the Presidential election...
Are we obligated to accept them? :unsure:
At one point a few years ago, Congress passed legislation that basically said if Puerto Rico voted for Statehood, we'd take them.
I do not know how binding that was/is.
Several rightist Republicans have now said Romney's problem was that he was insufficiently conservative :bleeding:
Quote from: katmai on November 06, 2012, 09:38:01 PM
Quote from: PDH on November 06, 2012, 09:29:37 PM
Whew, that was close...still, with zero percent of the votes counted Wyoming went firmly to Romney.
Same! :w00t:
Yeah, but I had to suffer through months of living next to a swing state...Jesus the Broncos AND the election in Colorado suck
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 09:42:04 PM
Several rightist Republicans have now said Romney's problem was that he was insufficiently conservative :bleeding:
Yep, predictable.
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 09:37:32 PM
Wait, so are we going to have the shittiest state ever to join the union? This should be bigger news than the Presidential election...
Are we obligated to accept them? :unsure:
It's in both party platforms. With Hispanics growing as a voting bloc probably will be enough GOP reps to to pass it with all the Dems on the board.
Ewwww Puerto Rico.
Woah! :o CNN projects Dems to flip another two seats in the Senate.
Where do you see Puerto Rico exits? I don't see it being reported on at any of the major news sites.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 09:51:17 PM
Where do you see Puerto Rico exits? I don't see it being reported on at any of the major news sites.
Yep, I'd love to see that too.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 06, 2012, 09:11:12 PM
15% of precincts in PR
Statehood is crushing the other options.
STATEHOOD 74,029 64.91%
SOVEREIGN FREE ASSOCIATED STATE 35,272 30.93%
INDEPENDENCE 4,753 4.17%
It is about time. I hope Congress will do the right thing.
CBS is going nuts with commercials, so every other minute they switch feed to this one guy who's stuck in the studio at home and all he does is translate what just happened on CBS.
This is rubbish.
Dude on Fox News just shit his pants about Republicans not picking up more Senate seats :lol:
My Twitterfeed's now equally divided between cheerful liberals, glum conservatives and all uniting in gleefully mocking Dick Morris :)
Utah is projected for Romney. :o
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 09:51:17 PM
Where do you see Puerto Rico exits? I don't see it being reported on at any of the major news sites.
YES/NO
http://div1.ceepur.org/REYDI_NocheDelEvento/index.html#en/default/CONDICION_POLITICA_TERRITORIAL_ACTUAL_ISLA.xml
Territorial Options
http://div1.ceepur.org/REYDI_NocheDelEvento/index.html#en/default/OPCIONES_NO_TERRITORIALES_ISLA.xml
These wetbacks better get that bullshit spanish off their shit when they become a state.
Montana: Romney
Utah: Romney
Quote from: DGuller on November 06, 2012, 10:01:13 PM
Utah is projected for Romney. :o
Yikes. If he can win California and Nevada too, he'll probably have it.
New Hampshire: Obama
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 10:03:46 PM
These wetbacks better get that bullshit spanish off their shit when they become a state.
English and Spanish are the state languages of New Mexico.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 09:43:51 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 09:42:04 PM
Several rightist Republicans have now said Romney's problem was that he was insufficiently conservative :bleeding:
Yep, predictable.
What are they going to alienate many women still further ?
Introduced mandatory chastity belts for unmarried women ?
I love Rahm :wub:
Sarah Palin's analysing on Fox News! :wub:
I think Wisconsin may have been called for Obama too soon. Romney is substantially up there with 15% of the vote counted.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 10:15:51 PM
Sarah Palin's analysing on Fox News! :wub:
She looks terrible :bleeding:
'It's a perplexing time for many of us if things continue as they have earlier tonight' :mellow:
I love the escalating scale of certainty on CBS. Nevada's gone from too close to call, to lean Obama, to likely Obama, 'but it is not yet projected for Obama' :lol:
Hmm, wow I guess I'm surprised.
Mind that Ohio all the early voting we knew was going big Obama, but Romney is narrowing the lead there steadily...whereas I don't see Florida, with 86% in, going for Romney at this point. So I'm calling Florida for Obama.
We could end up in theory with Obama losing Ohio and winning Florida, so instead of winning 290-248, he'd win 292-246. Now, he could also win Ohio too in which case his margin would be bigger.
But for me...I see the race narrowing and narrowing in Ohio, but in Florida Obama is maintaining his lead and we have almost 90% in...will be hard for Romney to win there.
I've been playing some CK2 during this, election isn't keeping my interest as I had expected...
Quality throthing on Fox, equating Benghazi with Watergate. :hmm:
I love that "Class warfare" scream on Fox News, that channel is just way more lively and fun compared to CBS. :P
Fox News are now projecting Ohio for... "NOT YET!" "NOT YET!". :D
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 10:18:02 PM
I think Wisconsin may have been called for Obama too soon. Romney is substantially up there with 15% of the vote counted.
I've seen that...but I've seen States like this called before and usually correctly. I think what happens is the networks see some early returns that are heavily in the loser's area of the State, and their exits are strong everywhere else for the other guy, so the network calls it for the other guy even though technically reported votes aren't yet in the winners favor.
I agree with this tweet by a Republican consultant who was McCain's campaign chief in 2000 and (early 2008), and for Huntsman in 2012:
'To do list: Get right /Hispanics (rapidos); embrace science; deal with fiscal cliff responsibly; tax reform for everyone; marriage freedom.'
More old people will need to die first though.
Arizona: Romney
I'm all for more dead old people, regardless of their political positions.
Someone was droning on being interviewed on NBC but I agree with what he said. "The Democrats are the bigger tent party." That's pretty much why I expected Romney to lose (and the polling, obviously), the GOP has become so rigid we don't want to accept anyone who doesn't fit within a narrow band of policy positions. That makes it extremely difficult to win national elections.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 10:00:26 PM
My Twitterfeed's now equally divided between cheerful liberals, glum conservatives and all uniting in gleefully mocking Dick Morris :)
Someone just retweeted Michael Moore. I'm no longer following them. :angry:
The smugness is strong with that one democrat on Fox News.
Quote from: Liep on November 06, 2012, 10:50:32 PM
The smugness is strong with that one democrat on Fox News.
Christ. From a Dane as well :P
Missouri: Romney
Quote from: Liep on November 06, 2012, 10:50:32 PM
The smugness is strong with that one democrat on Fox News.
Suspenders guy? Beckel is old school Democrat.
Minnesota: Obama
Florida should be called Obama, and the election. I think the pundits are just not wanting to end their night...all the remaining counties are heavily Democrat so there is really no reason to assume Obama doesn't win Florida and the election. At that point it matters not at all how close the Ohio vote gets, or whether Romney wins/loses Virginia and North Carolina. Although really North Carolina is done, it's like 86% in with a 80,000 Romney lead.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 06, 2012, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: Liep on November 06, 2012, 10:50:32 PM
The smugness is strong with that one democrat on Fox News.
Suspenders guy? Beckel is old school Democrat.
There's more than one? I've only been watching it for 20 minutes, the CBS feed got very boring. Watching FOX trying to avoid defeat is more fun. :P
I was thinking about the blond girl who worked for Al Gore.
I'm intrigued by the popularity of striped ties in the US. In the UK most go for single blocks of colour.
I think the specter of 2000 hangs too heavy 12 years later, a lot of these states would have already been called back in the day. But people are so afraid of looking wrong they wait until a ridiculous surety is present before calling a state.
California: Obama
Washington: Obama
Hawaii: Obama
Watching BBC America's coverage is marginally as exciting as watching Premier League results. Maybe because it's 4am over there, and they're all pretty much pooped by now.
"Trump, the crazy man" - Fox anchor.
CBS just called NC for Romney.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 10:58:15 PM
I'm intrigued by the popularity of striped ties in the US. In the UK most go for single blocks of colour.
It's a hangover from the 50s and early 60s, at the time stripped ties were popular in the UK.
North Carolina: Romney
Idaho: Romney
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 11:03:33 PM
It's a hangover from the 50s and early 60s, at the time stripped ties were popular in the UK.
Even simpler. Americans are fatter. Stripes tend to be slimming.
On-topic: InTrade's been pretty much on the money so far. Virginia seems to be the only blip so far, so it still seems fairly safe that Obama will actually pull over 300 EC votes.
I believe it's all over. Looking at the outstanding precincts in Ohio and Florida, they're pretty much all in heavily Democratic urban counties (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Miami/Dade), and Obama is already ahead in both states.
So after four controversial years and unemployment's nigh on 8%. Still the Republicans have lost the White House and are losing seats in the Senate and the House. Hopefully they'll change.
And imagine what would've been if Huntsman were running.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 11:00:12 PM
I think the specter of 2000 hangs too heavy 12 years later, a lot of these states would have already been called back in the day. But people are so afraid of looking wrong they wait until a ridiculous surety is present before calling a state.
There are waaaaay too many absentee ballots currently in play in Florida to call it; remember, all the early voters from the past week that were jammed out of the polls were allowed to file absentee ballots.
Looks like Colorado is likely to go Obama, and with that I'm off to bed since Princesca is yelling at me. :blush:
Someone else can MC this shit if there's still any point to doing so. :)
Quote from: mongers on November 06, 2012, 11:03:33 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 10:58:15 PM
I'm intrigued by the popularity of striped ties in the US. In the UK most go for single blocks of colour.
It's a hangover from the 50s and early 60s, at the time stripped ties were popular in the UK.
There's probably a worry about old school, club or regimental ties too.
CNN gives Iowa to Obama. Ohio and Oregon puts Obama on 270 now. I had Iowa for Romney in my 269-269 prediction. So Obama is on 275 imho.
At this point, any of the FL/OH/CO/VA going for Obama will officially seal it.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 11:09:21 PM
I believe it's all over. Looking at the outstanding precincts in Ohio and Florida, they're pretty much all in heavily Democratic urban counties (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Miami/Dade), and Obama is already ahead in both states.
That's where I'm at. Right now I can't see Romney winning Florida or Ohio, so that makes the situation impossible for him. But it doesn't even matter, Romney can win Virginia, Ohio, and Florida but he still would lose 272-266 unless he wins Colorado or Nevada which look simply unlikely. The only other path is Romney winning Florida, Ohio and then one of the already called states would have to flip.
Makes it sleep time for me.
Fox News is a funeral :cry:
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 06, 2012, 11:09:39 PM
So after four controversial years and unemployment's nigh on 8%. Still the Republicans have lost the White House and are losing seats in the Senate and the House. Hopefully they'll change.
They won't. They will continue to place a premium on the same neanderthal social agenda topics, they won't ever get any mainstream traction.
QuoteAnd imagine what would've been if Huntsman were running.
Just imagine. Would've busted the hell out of the big banks, and taken the populist air out of Obama's sails. And speak Cantonese, for fuck's sake.
Obama wins!
CBS calling Ohio for Obama.
Fox called it for Obama. :yeah:
:punk:
The victory party on MSNBC is hilarious. You would think George Washington was just re-elected.
Quote from: Caliga on November 06, 2012, 11:11:01 PM
Looks like Colorado is likely to go Obama, and with that I'm off to bed since Princesca is yelling at me. :blush:
Someone else can MC this shit if there's still any point to doing so. :)
Thanks Cal.
After disliking him for 6 long years I'm glad Romney'll be able to retire and become a likeable person I rather admire :lol:
The wailing on Fox is hilarious. :lol:
This election was worth it for this tweet from Donald Trump:
'He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!'
:lol:
Also more Republicans are now saying Romney-Ryan was not right wing enough :bleeding:
Fox isn't giving up the ghost. Karl Rove says Ohio is still in play. DAMN THE LEGATIONS
Hilarious.
What are the chance that one goes to sleep with Obama re-elected, waking up to find the lawyer have been brought in to turn it over. :unsure:
Online FOX is focusing on the important part: that this election was the most tweeted.
Rove is in denial :lol:
More from Donald Trump:
'We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!' :lol:
Trump. :lol:
Florida is still far from decided, and the Romney campaign is waiting out the rest of the Ohio results.
Karl Rove refuses to believe Fox's own decision desk. :lol:
THEYRE SENDING MEGHAN TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS
I found a Fox stream. Delicious. :D
What the fuck is happening on Fox News :lol: :lol:
http://ufreetv.com/foxnews.html
Finally. Now let's get some shit actually done.
Now they're interviewing their own stats nerds :lmfao:
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 11:34:55 PM
What the fuck is happening on Fox News :lol: :lol:
They're getting to the bottom of this!
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:36:53 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 11:34:55 PM
What the fuck is happening on Fox News :lol: :lol:
They're getting to the bottom of this!
I don't know who that little blonde bitch is but I would like to get to the bottom of her.
The Foxnews.com stream was much much more sober compared to their cable feed.
Colbert is also having a good time. :D
"What was his name? Mitt? No.. that can't be right, that's not a name."
This is compelling, extraordinary TV.
It's like watching the bizarre post-modern reality of Fox News crashing into facts :mmm:
Quote from: sbr on November 06, 2012, 11:38:14 PM
I don't know who that little blonde bitch is but I would like to get to the bottom of her.
Meg Kelly? Oh, I'd facefuck her hard.
edit: The Romney campaign is not conceding Ohio at this point.
Was Trump alive 12 years ago?
Trump continues:
'This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!'
This is actually better than the election :o
Ed Schultz is a total orgasmic pile of Big Labor bratwurst, God bless 'em.
Andrew Sullivan on stopping Obama now: There's a black man in power with nothing to lose.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:41:28 PM
Quote from: sbr on November 06, 2012, 11:38:14 PM
I don't know who that little blonde bitch is but I would like to get to the bottom of her.
Meg Kelly? Oh, I'd facefuck her hard.
edit: The Romney campaign is not conceding Ohio at this point.
Yea, absolutely vain.
Hans is having a melt down......
Quote from: 11B4V on November 06, 2012, 11:46:24 PM
Hans is having a melt down......
Considering how he swore he'd resign from the service if John Kerry won in 2004, I doubt he's taking this one so hard.
Who's the disappointed leatherface psychiatrist? "Romney's a Northeastern liberal, that's not where we're going."
So what's up in Puerto Rico, I woke back up thinking about it. The margins haven't changed at all as the precincts have came in, it's holding rock steady at 53% wanting to change their relationship with the United States and over 60% wanting to become a state if the first part passes...are we looking at State 51?
I just find it mind boggling that isn't in the mainstream news at all. I mean I know it's Presidential election night...but we have those every four years. We've not had a new State in my entire life.
Florida District 18
96% in
Allen West 50% 152,648
Patrick Murphy 50% 151,217
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 11:50:06 PM
So what's up in Puerto Rico, I woke back up thinking about it. The margins haven't changed at all as the precincts have came in, it's holding rock steady at 53% wanting to change their relationship with the United States and over 60% wanting to become a state if the first part passes...are we looking at State 51?
I just find it mind boggling that isn't in the mainstream news at all. I mean I know it's Presidential election night...but we have those every four years. We've not had a new State in my entire life.
I think Grumbler is only one around to see new states, of course he's seen all 50...
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:51:33 PM
Florida District 18
96% in
Allen West 50% 152,648
Patrick Murphy 50% 151,217
:unsure:
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 11:50:06 PM
I just find it mind boggling that isn't in the mainstream news at all. I mean I know it's Presidential election night...but we have those every four years. We've not had a new State in my entire life.
That's a shitload of flags to replace, man.
I dunno; if you were Puerto Rican, what would you prefer: being the poorest state in the union, or an independent nation, the wealthiest in the Caribbean?
OK, so wealthiest in the Caribbean is no great claim to fame, but the PR indy movement never really went away, either.
Quote from: Liep on November 06, 2012, 11:48:58 PM
Who's the disappointed leatherface psychiatrist? "Romney's a Northeastern liberal, that's not where we're going."
Not watching the feed, but from the description, I'd assume you're talking about Charles Krauthammer.
Quote from: Liep on November 06, 2012, 11:48:58 PM
Who's the disappointed leatherface psychiatrist? "Romney's a Northeastern liberal, that's not where we're going."
Charles Krauthammer.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 06, 2012, 11:50:06 PM
So what's up in Puerto Rico, I woke back up thinking about it. The margins haven't changed at all as the precincts have came in, it's holding rock steady at 53% wanting to change their relationship with the United States and over 60% wanting to become a state if the first part passes...are we looking at State 51?
I just find it mind boggling that isn't in the mainstream news at all. I mean I know it's Presidential election night...but we have those every four years. We've not had a new State in my entire life.
Yeah this is by far the most interesting thing going on tonight to me. I would like to hear somebody somewhere comment on it.
I guess the Republicans will start drawing up their articles of impeachment.
Best thing tonight? Trump and Rove post-prediction.
Quote from: Valmy on November 06, 2012, 11:57:41 PM
I guess the Republicans will start drawing up their articles of impeachment.
Con law question: if you impeach a sitting President after they've been reelected, do they still get to come back when the next term starts??
Quote from: Valmy on November 06, 2012, 11:57:41 PM
I guess the Republicans will start drawing up their articles of impeachment.
Yeah I can see them going that way.
edit:
David Axelrod seems like a polite, self-effacing kind of guy.
Quote from: katmai on November 06, 2012, 11:53:11 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:51:33 PM
Florida District 18
96% in
Allen West 50% 152,648
Patrick Murphy 50% 151,217
:unsure:
It's Allen West, dude. Mr. There Are 80 Members of the Communist Party in Congress? Not ringing any bells?
One of my favorite right wingnuts.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 12:05:13 AM
Quote from: katmai on November 06, 2012, 11:53:11 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 11:51:33 PM
Florida District 18
96% in
Allen West 50% 152,648
Patrick Murphy 50% 151,217
:unsure:
It's Allen West, dude. Mr. There Are 80 Members of the Communist Party in Congress? Not ringing any bells?
One of my favorite right wingnuts.
What can i say, too many of those wingnuts for me to keep track of them all.
Given how little Republicans seem to like Romney, this post-mortem will be brutal.
Edit: Fox News suggesting that the conservative message wasn't conservative, bold or acute enough and that Romney focused too much on the economy not on Benghazi :bleeding:
And Obama's won Colorado - at this rate it looks like Mitt's only managed to win North Carolina :mellow:
The popular vote difference is down to 220,000.
Michele Bachmann is in big, big trouble.
With Colorado decided, Ohio doesn't matter. Mitt should man up and give up now.
Romney camp not giving up on Ohio.
Difference between the votes there is about 11,000 with around 1 million votes still to count.
I know this won't go over well with some people here, but Gary Johnson has now received more votes than any other Libertarian Presidential candidate ever, and is on track to break 1M votes.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on November 07, 2012, 12:24:36 AM
I know this won't go over well with some people here, but Gary Johnson has now received more votes than any other Libertarian Presidential candidate ever, and is on track to break 1M votes.
You are welcome Mr. Johnson.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on November 07, 2012, 12:24:36 AM
I know this won't go over well with some people here, but Gary Johnson has now received more votes than any other Libertarian Presidential candidate ever, and is on track to break 1M votes.
So he can join the club with Perot and Nader. :P
Obama just pulled ahead slightly in the popular vote.
edit:
Grrr, this election finally defeated me; damn you Romney, why did you have to prolong the agony still further. :(
:P
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 12:33:26 AM
Obama just pulled ahead slightly in the popular vote.
I've been laughing as that seems to be the straw Fox News were clutching at.
I'm re-posting this here, because this is where the action is.
So marijuana legalization passed in Washington, and it looks like we're going to elect a mouth-breathing Democrat governor over a Republican who got the endorsement of every newspaper in the state. An initiative requiring a 2/3 vote in the legislature to raise taxes will also pass. :rolleyes:
On the upside, we're going to legalize gay marriage.
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 12:35:51 AM
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 12:33:26 AM
Obama just pulled ahead slightly in the popular vote.
I've been laughing as that seems to be the straw Fox News were clutching at.
Heh, maybe Trump is at this very moment turning around his minutemen on the New Jersey turnpike*.
* i have no idea if this road exists and if it does, if it's anywhere near DC.
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 12:35:51 AM
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 12:33:26 AM
Obama just pulled ahead slightly in the popular vote.
I've been laughing as that seems to be the straw Fox News were clutching at.
Their new line is he's been a 'small' President for the last two years and that'll continue.
Karl Rove is now saying a President needs to be 'first' to compromise and make sure they're very careful with their language :blink:
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 12:43:36 AM
Karl Rove is now saying a President needs to be 'first' to compromise and make sure they're very careful with their language :blink:
They have been talking all night about Obama "moving to the middle" and compromising like he is the outlier, not the crazy as fuck, rapist apologists.
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 12:40:44 AM
* i have no idea if this road exists and if it does, if it's anywhere near DC.
Yes, it does, and no, it doesn't. He'd be marching his minutemen across the AC Expressway and then he'd be marching them for a while down I-95. :P
1st openly gay Senator as well tonight it seems.
Krauthammer also repeating the line that Romney wasn't a 'natural' conservative, even though he run the best campaign he could given that he 'spoke conservatism as a second language' :blink:
Hearing Virginia is now being called for Obama too, where is that straightjacket for seedy?
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 12:52:44 AM
Krauthammer also repeating the line that Romney wasn't a 'natural' conservative, even though he run the best campaign he could given that he 'spoke conservatism as a second language' :blink:
The rats are jump off the sinking ship. They have to find excuses now.
Could I get a consice, written for a 12 year old explanation of what the conservatives' hard-on about Libya is about? I don't get it, but I've been trying not to follow the news recently.
Quote from: 11B4V on November 07, 2012, 12:56:02 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 12:52:44 AM
Krauthammer also repeating the line that Romney wasn't a 'natural' conservative, even though he run the best campaign he could given that he 'spoke conservatism as a second language' :blink:
The rats are jump off the sinking ship. They have to find excuses now.
It is just hilarious if they really believe they would have had a better chance with Santorum or Newt as the candidate.
Haha, the locals here are wondering how their fasts they held for Mitt on Sunday didn't get results. :P
I don't get the thing about Libya either. I asked about it on here and I still don't understand what the criticism is.
QuoteIt is just hilarious if they really believe they would have had a better chance with Santorum or Newt as the candidate.
In fairness they seem to think Romney was the best choice but that he was, as Krauthammer put it, 'a North-Eastern liberal...I mean moderate.'
Edit: A Brit journo's just pointed out how red-eyed Mitt looks. Crying or dog tired. After 6 years of running for President this must be an agonising speech to give :(
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 01:01:47 AM
I don't get the thing about Libya either. I asked about it on here and I still don't understand what the criticism is.
QuoteIt is just hilarious if they really believe they would have had a better chance with Santorum or Newt as the candidate.
In fairness they seem to think Romney was the best choice but that he was, as Krauthammer put it, 'a North-Eastern liberal...I mean moderate.'
Edit: A Brit journo's just pointed out how red-eyed Mitt looks. Crying or dog tired. After 6 years of running for President this must be an agonising speech to give :(
Oh i know Shelf, but calls to be more conservative seem to be misguided. Hell i'm more shocked to see the amount of states voting for giving homos the right to vote and legalizing pot, and as long as the GOP keeps on with their current stance on immigration as it kills their chance with Latinos who may support them on other aspects.
I agree. Gay marriage is an issue they should just move on from, have a pact of silence rather than a party line. But even moving on immigration doesn't matter if the Republicans don't develop policies that middle class people think could help them. You could call it something like, say, 'compassionate conservatism'.
Trump's meltdown gloriously continues:
'Lets fight like hell & stop this great disgusting injustice! World is laughing at us.'
Edit: I suppose I think the problem with Hispanics is about more than immigration. It's about economic policy (or the lack of one), healthcare policy (or the lack of one) and the tone.
:lol: Rich Lowry said the figure that mattered tonight wasn't the Electoral College, or the popular vote but the President's approval ratings in the exit polls. Apparently it was 54%.
On the other hand this consensus on Fox News about immigration is good. Could get immigration reform passed soon?
Austrian commentator said that Romney lost the election because the Republican party has so far failed to acknowledge the demographic change in the U.S., driving blacks, hispanics and young voters to the Democrats, and because the Republicans alienated women voters.
I think this Daily Mail piece is the best bit of election analysis I've ever seen:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2228803/Downton-Abbey-fans-expected-turn-Obama-Romney-threatens-cut-PBS-funding.html
Ever since the 2004 election, media over here seem to be obsessed with the U.S. presidizzle elections. We get coverage of the primaries, of the conventions, debates and everything. Granted, not as obnoxious as in the U.S., but in the past weeks the election was front page material over here - which is kinda silly, because the influence on people over here will be marginal at best. Even worse are people who root for Obama and cheer him like a sports star.
In 2004, I saw a white Austrian woman and her friend on the subway:
- "We partied all night, because we finally got into the White House! It's such a huge step for us!"
- "I thought your husband is from Nigeria?"
- "This is not about nations!"
I admit the U.S. elections make for better TV than German or Austrian elections, though.
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 01:25:26 AM
Austrian commentator said that Romney lost the election because the Republican party has so far failed to acknowledge the demographic change in the U.S., driving blacks, hispanics and young voters to the Democrats, and because the Republicans alienated women voters.
Seems to be the general narrative over here, too. They've been going particularly nuts over the hispanic disenfranchisement.
Celebrated at a bar. Relief runs in waves.
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 01:36:00 AM
I admit the U.S. elections make for better TV than German or Austrian elections, though.
I can't speak for Austria or Germany, but I find UK / Canadian election nights are far more entertaining than US elections...
This is an alright speech. I had hoped Obama was going to say 'right. Sharia...' :(
Hell of a speech
Mitt Romney will now fade into history like his father. With no office, I see no reason why he should ever show up in national circles or stages ever again. Romney should go to bed bitterly disappointed at failing his father, his legacy, and the Mormon people. Knowing his narrative, I say this from his perspective, not from my personal views. :D
Hopefully, Romney spends his last years giving away all his hundreds of millions of dollars to charity and community. If he instead chooses to continue the circle, then expect one of the five Romney sons to run for political office in the future...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphics8.nytimes.com%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2F07%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-Y53H%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-Y53H-hpLarge.jpg&hash=e6c66c143246b36295b8c0d857154262826aa913)
If he had only touted that Mexican heritage eh Phil?
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 02:25:16 AM
If he had only touted that Mexican heritage eh Phil?
Correct. One of his biggest campaign failures.
I'm pretty sure Mitt Romney will survive. The man is building an elevator for his cars. for Christ's sake. A net wealth of $250 million is one hell of a pillow to cry in.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 02:35:35 AM
I'm pretty sure Mitt Romney will survive. The man is building an elevator for his cars. for Christ's sake. A net wealth of $250 million is one hell of a pillow to cry in.
Who let you out of the straightjacket?
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 02:38:20 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 02:35:35 AM
I'm pretty sure Mitt Romney will survive. The man is building an elevator for his cars. for Christ's sake. A net wealth of $250 million is one hell of a pillow to cry in.
Who let you out of the straightjacket?
Ed Shultz dropped by, and gave me a Big Labor reach-around while we watched
Hoffa in the nude, feeding me brats like grapes. It was divine.
In the spirit of bipartisanship, Obama will betroth his eldest daughter to me for marriage at the end of his second term.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphics8.nytimes.com%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2F07%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-ZD8V%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-ZD8V-hpLarge.jpg&hash=13eb23a9e42a43fbf75c97cdabeb695b8d069027)
Quote from: Phillip V on November 07, 2012, 02:53:08 AM
In the spirit of bipartisanship, Obama will betroth his eldest daughter to me for marriage at the end of his second term.
Shouldn't he wed her to somebody a bit more prominent?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 07, 2012, 03:01:00 AM
Quote from: Phillip V on November 07, 2012, 02:53:08 AM
In the spirit of bipartisanship, Obama will betroth his eldest daughter to me for marriage at the end of his second term.
Shouldn't he wed her to somebody a bit more prominent?
I am the 99%
I honestly didn't think it would wind up like this.
Then again, I thought Ryan Leaf would have a bigger career than Peyton Manning, too.
Quote from: Phillip V on November 07, 2012, 02:53:08 AM
In the spirit of bipartisanship, Obama will betroth his eldest daughter to me for marriage at the end of his second term.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphics8.nytimes.com%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2F07%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-ZD8V%2F20121107_HP_OBAMA-slide-ZD8V-hpLarge.jpg&hash=13eb23a9e42a43fbf75c97cdabeb695b8d069027)
The House would block it.
It's 3:20am, and Michele Bachmann's race has yet to be called with 85% in.
It's still breaking news here that Obama won. They really, really love that yellow label. :bleeding:
Also, did Trump explode when the popular vote turned around?
Quote from: Liep on November 07, 2012, 03:24:18 AM
Also, did Trump explode when the popular vote turned around?
Trump gets to explode inside a sexy wife. He wins.
Quote from: Phillip V on November 07, 2012, 03:29:03 AM
He wins.
Eventually, he will die, same as all the rest of us.
Good speech, that was.
I envy your politics, people. That your leader can
a) talk of his greatest rival with great respect
b) does not diss democracy and debate
These are unthinkable in Hungary's present climate :(
Quote from: Tamas on November 07, 2012, 04:54:00 AM
Good speech, that was.
I envy your politics, people. That your leader can
a) talk of his greatest rival with great respect
b) does not diss democracy and debate
These are unthinkable in Hungary's present climate :(
Immigrate to America. :)
Quote from: sbr on November 07, 2012, 12:57:33 AM
Could I get a consice, written for a 12 year old explanation of what the conservatives' hard-on about Libya is about? I don't get it, but I've been trying not to follow the news recently.
I couldn't get much of an answer out of Derspeiss, except that the President blamed it on angry crowd for two weeks even when everyone knew it was preplanned. I pointed out that nobody has been apprehended for the crime so nobody knows how they were organized, and second that since nobody knows, it's not exactly a big deal that people would have different theories on how it was carried out. Derspeiss never got back to me on that. I took to checking around the net, and a thread on FreeRepublic that Congress should impeach Obama over it though. My guess, Republican didn't like Obama blaming the riots and stuff on an anti-Islamic movie being made. That hits a little to close to home.
Wasn't there also claims that the PotUS could/should have flown in Marines or something?
Btw, my favorite commentator gaffe this morning on the radio: "Obama is only the second Democrat president after Bill Clinton to be re-elected." :lol:
So when do I get my Obama Phone? :)
Quote from: Razgovory on November 07, 2012, 05:02:41 AM
Quote from: sbr on November 07, 2012, 12:57:33 AM
Could I get a consice, written for a 12 year old explanation of what the conservatives' hard-on about Libya is about? I don't get it, but I've been trying not to follow the news recently.
I couldn't get much of an answer out of Derspeiss, except that the President blamed it on angry crowd for two weeks even when everyone knew it was preplanned. I pointed out that nobody has been apprehended for the crime so nobody knows how they were organized, and second that since nobody knows, it's not exactly a big deal that people would have different theories on how it was carried out. Derspeiss never got back to me on that. I took to checking around the net, and a thread on FreeRepublic that Congress should impeach Obama over it though. My guess, Republican didn't like Obama blaming the riots and stuff on an anti-Islamic movie being made. That hits a little to close to home.
Conservatives consider the post-attack trickle of information as a cover up, not as a confusing area of operations with hard-to-identify actors and no real HUMINT in a fluid, post-revolutionary country.
Everything you need to know about the conservatives POV is being said by Dan Issa.
Batshit Bachmann wins.
QuoteBachmann, whose controversial statements leading up to the election included accusing President Obama of "apology and appeasement across the globe," was declared the winner by the Associated Press with 98 percent of precincts reporting. She led Graves, a prominent businessman, by just over 3,000 votes out of nearly 350,000 votes cast.
House Committee on Financial Services
Member, Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
Member, Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence
Lovely.
QuoteThe exit poll largely told the story. In the nineteen-to-twenty-nine age group, Obama won sixty per cent of the vote. He got ninety-three per cent of the black vote, seventy per cent of the hispanic vote, and seventy-five per cent of the Asian vote. Fifty-six per cent of women voted for him, as did sixty-three per cent of unmarried people, two-thirds of secular voters, and about four-fifths of gays and lesbians. Romney carried fifty-nine per cent of white voters (male and female); a majority of all Americans aged forty-five or over; and fifty-seven per cent of married people. In ideological terms, Obama forged a liberal-moderate course to victory. Despite his post-Convention lurch to the center, Romney couldn't win over enough self-identified moderates. In that group, Obama took fifty-seven per cent of the vote.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/11/victory-for-obamas-america.html#ixzz2BXLKQwSC
Linda McMahon lost the Senate race. Wrestling might be good again.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 06:42:37 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 07, 2012, 05:02:41 AM
Quote from: sbr on November 07, 2012, 12:57:33 AM
Could I get a consice, written for a 12 year old explanation of what the conservatives' hard-on about Libya is about? I don't get it, but I've been trying not to follow the news recently.
I couldn't get much of an answer out of Derspeiss, except that the President blamed it on angry crowd for two weeks even when everyone knew it was preplanned. I pointed out that nobody has been apprehended for the crime so nobody knows how they were organized, and second that since nobody knows, it's not exactly a big deal that people would have different theories on how it was carried out. Derspeiss never got back to me on that. I took to checking around the net, and a thread on FreeRepublic that Congress should impeach Obama over it though. My guess, Republican didn't like Obama blaming the riots and stuff on an anti-Islamic movie being made. That hits a little to close to home.
Conservatives consider the post-attack trickle of information as a cover up, not as a confusing area of operations with hard-to-identify actors and no real HUMINT in a fluid, post-revolutionary country.
Everything you need to know about the conservatives POV is being said by Dan Issa.
A cover up of what? Republicans are like Arafat was, they say one thing for general public consumption and another to the rank in file. Maybe Issa thinks that Vince Foster's killer was behind it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 06:47:41 AM
Batshit Bachmann wins.
That's good for Dems, she'll keep firing up donations while not having any actual influence.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 02:41:56 AM
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 02:38:20 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 02:35:35 AM
I'm pretty sure Mitt Romney will survive. The man is building an elevator for his cars. for Christ's sake. A net wealth of $250 million is one hell of a pillow to cry in.
Who let you out of the straightjacket?
Ed Shultz dropped by, and gave me a Big Labor reach-around while we watched Hoffa in the nude, feeding me brats like grapes. It was divine.
I wake up and I read this. :bleeding:
Good morning, sunshine.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 08:22:46 AM
I wake up and I read this. :bleeding:
Life sucks in Obama's America.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 08:23:19 AM
Good morning, sunshine.
G'morning. I watched the news and the tea party got a kick in the nuts. I'm feelin alright.
Quote from: PDH on November 07, 2012, 08:25:40 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 08:22:46 AM
I wake up and I read this. :bleeding:
Life sucks in Obama's America.
My mother said she's going to take her medical marijuana and puff until she forgets that Warren now represents her.
Of course your mother has a medical marijuana.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 07, 2012, 08:54:26 AM
Of course your mother has a medical marijuana.
MA just passed it silly. ;)
I rather liked this tweet from an Egyptian activist:
Mona Eltahawy @monaeltahawy 6h
"I look forward to the day when women, the youth and minorities deliver a defeat to religious conservatives in #Egypt too #Election2012"
OBAMA!! :nelson:
I told you it was in the bag. :secret:
Prince of Darkness coming to a theater near you in the Fall of 2016!
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 09:23:48 AM
I rather liked this tweet from an Egyptian activist:
Mona Eltahawy @monaeltahawy 6h
"I look forward to the day when women, the youth and minorities deliver a defeat to religious conservatives in #Egypt too #Election2012"
Did she manage to get out a follow-up tweet before her execution?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 09:29:25 AM
Quote from: mongers on November 07, 2012, 09:23:48 AM
I rather liked this tweet from an Egyptian activist:
Mona Eltahawy @monaeltahawy 6h
"I look forward to the day when women, the youth and minorities deliver a defeat to religious conservatives in #Egypt too #Election2012"
Did she manage to get out a follow-up tweet before her execution?
Just a re-tweet from a good journalist.
But it's interesting to see the Muslim Brotherhood in their domestic political role; they're a deeply conservative movement, I bet they'd have a lot more common ground with the tea baggers than many would assume.
Man, I made a mistake watching CNNi. Johhny Foriegner is unbearable this morning. Ugh.
I hate furrigners.
I love how some disenfranchise Republicans are taking to twitter to yell that they are moving here, to Canada.
Especially those that threaten to do it because of Obamacare. Do you guys not know we have Universal Healthcare?
You know, I'd feel a lot better about this election if the Republicans had taken back the Senate and the Democrats had taken back the House (though sans Pelosi). I think that would be a much better arrangement. Oh well.
Just a quick note to congratulate America for resisting the urge to fall to the Dark Side(TM). :thumbsup:
G.
Oh and (newly elected) Senator Elizabeth Warren for President in 2016! :wub:
G.
Quote from: Kleves on November 07, 2012, 10:23:28 AM
and the Democrats had taken back the House (though sans Pelosi).
She may very well hang up her gavel, so there may be some hope for everybody yet.
*checks* my portfolio this morning :bleeding:
Quote from: Caliga on November 07, 2012, 10:32:23 AM
*checks* my portfolio this morning :bleeding:
Fucking Draghi.
Yi sighting! :w00t: Welcome back!
Oh, and I want my money. :menace:
Quote from: Kleves on November 07, 2012, 12:39:28 AM
and it looks like we're going to elect a mouth-breathing Democrat governor over a Republican who got the endorsement of every newspaper in the state.
Another demonstration of why negative campaigning works. Inslee ran a campaign based entirely on hate, and it worked.
NEWS FLASH
Fox News says "Sandy" is a reason Mittens lost.
Umm, a news flash typically indicates that it is a new breaking story. We already had people say that immediately after election results (and even before).
Shut-up
:grr:
Quote from: DGuller on November 07, 2012, 10:34:28 AM
Yi sighting! :w00t: Welcome back!
Oh, and I want my money. :menace:
I'll give it the same prompt attention you did last time. :whistle:
The black Marxist was on CNN at lunch. I guess he has been rehabilitated.
Just got this in an e-mail
Quote90% of Gays and Lesbians Vote for Barack Obama
*unique snowflake* :showoff:
A garbon 2016 GOP candidacy seems in order. :)
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
A garbon 2016 GOP candidacy seems in order. :)
Ahem. I'd only be old enough for Congress.
Quote from: garbon on November 07, 2012, 02:47:31 PM
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
A garbon 2016 GOP candidacy seems in order. :)
Ahem. I'd only be old enough for Congress.
No one's gonna ask for a birth certificate.
I hope.
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
A garbon 2016 GOP candidacy seems in order. :)
Mia Love and Allan Houston both got beat. :(
Allan Houston the ex nba player?
My bad, it's Allan West.
Why can't Florida run an election better than a third world nation?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 07, 2012, 02:53:35 PM
Quote from: Syt on November 07, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
A garbon 2016 GOP candidacy seems in order. :)
Mia Love and Allan Houston both got beat. :(
Needed some rainbow sprinkles on that.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 07, 2012, 03:07:08 PM
Why can't Florida run an election better than a third world nation?
Why would it want to? It wouldn't get any attention otherwise.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 07, 2012, 02:19:25 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 07, 2012, 10:34:28 AM
Yi sighting! :w00t: Welcome back!
Oh, and I want my money. :menace:
I'll give it the same prompt attention you did last time. :whistle:
The black Marxist was on CNN at lunch. I guess he has been rehabilitated.
Them ponies couldn't get to Iowa in a day. :whistle:
Oh right, it's Adam Houston.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 07, 2012, 03:13:20 PM
Oh right, it's Adam Houston.
Wow, not one Adam Houston in all of Wikipedia. :D
Quote from: sbr on November 07, 2012, 03:14:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 07, 2012, 03:13:20 PM
Oh right, it's Adam Houston.
Wow, not one Adam Houston in all of Wikipedia. :D
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.007unleashed.com%2Fgif-goldfinger-shocking.jpg&hash=1957622d76f2318e68b2da4be410e673bd19ea61)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa0.twimg.com%2Fprofile_images%2F1763706410%2F219.PNG&hash=e12e49134d21f8763e673b6e226ae2e255ed6db7)
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 07, 2012, 03:07:08 PM
Why can't Florida run an election better than a third world nation?
It doesn't want to, and as far as it's concerned, it doesn't have to.
What exactly is the deal with Florida?
Are their electoral votes still in doubt?
Does Obama win without?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 07, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
What exactly is the deal with Florida?
Are their electoral votes still in doubt?
Does Obama win without?
Jesus, Yi, where the fuck are you? :huh:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 07, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
What exactly is the deal with Florida?
Are their electoral votes still in doubt?
Does Obama win without?
No.
No.
Yes.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 07, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
What exactly is the deal with Florida?
Are their electoral votes still in doubt?
Does Obama win without?
303-29=274
206+29=235
:rolleyes:
You guess
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.zeit.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2F2012-11%2Ffs-us-wahl-2-images%2F05-Reuters-%28mecom%29-00016016026531-HighRes.jpg&hash=1813e9144056d17519c918b788573712d9a1e119)
Quote from: 11B4V on November 07, 2012, 04:05:59 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 07, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
What exactly is the deal with Florida?
Are their electoral votes still in doubt?
Does Obama win without?
303-29=274
206+29=235
:rolleyes:
You guess
Actually it's 303-235 if Romney gets them, 332-206 if Obama does.
Here is a small piece of meat for the Silver haters. He made another set of predictions, much less publicized, about the Senate elections. There, he didn't get a perfect score. He didn't get it right for two of the races. In Nebraska, his odds were close enough, but in North Dakota, he gave the loser a 92% probability of victory.
Again, that's perfectly explainable; if the events to which you assign non-zero probabilities never happen, then you're actually a pretty shitty handicapper. However, I'm surprised that there hasn't been a single Silver nayser that grasped at this straw. I did this analysis entirely on my own (shut up, Meri).
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 07, 2012, 02:02:45 AM
Hell of a speech
Best he gave for the entire campaign. Which is a mark of how weak Romney was.
Incidentally this is striking:
QuoteA glance at the exit polls showed that Obama won the foreign policy question pretty handily. Only five percent of respondents thought that foreign policy was the most critical issue in this campaign -- but of those five percent, voters went for Obama over Romney by 56% to 33%. Voters were also more likely to trust Barack Obama in an international crisis (57%-42%) than Mitt Romney (50%-46%). This is the first exit poll in at least three decades where the Democrat has outperformed the Republican on foreign policy and national security.
If that holds I think that could be as important as the demographics (and in both cases Romney exacerbated this issue - not mentioning foreign policy once in his acceptance speech and the whole 'self-deportation' nonsense). If the long-term impact of Bush is that the Republicans are no longer the party of national security and the economy then that could be a big challenge for them.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 07:27:00 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 07, 2012, 02:02:45 AM
Hell of a speech
Best he gave for the entire campaign. Which is a mark of how weak Romney was.
Obama's acceptance speech ?
Worth catching on the iplayer ?
Considering how gray Obama's hair has gotten since 2008, after the next 4 years he's going to look like Morgan Freeman by the time he leaves.
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
Should've called right before his speech.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
:yes:
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 11:04:54 PM
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
FROSTED STRUDEL BURN
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 11:04:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
I slept on my king sized bed stuffed with hundreds. I slept well.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 07, 2012, 11:06:25 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 11:04:54 PM
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
FROSTED STRUDEL BURN
Don't try the chocolate frosted strawberry. Looks like shit covered strudel. Tastes worse.
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 11:04:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
My mother went to bed earlier as she was like - I'll have nightmares if I learn Obama wins before bed.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 11:09:41 PM
I slept on my king sized bed stuffed with hundreds. I slept well.
Hundreds of what? Strudels?
Quote from: garbon on November 07, 2012, 11:11:36 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 07, 2012, 11:04:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
crying yourself to sleep don't count 1%
My mother went to bed earlier as she was like - I'll have nightmares if I learn Obama wins before bed.
Yo momma is wack!
Quote from: DGuller on November 07, 2012, 07:19:00 PM
Here is a small piece of meat for the Silver haters. He made another set of predictions, much less publicized, about the Senate elections. There, he didn't get a perfect score. He didn't get it right for two of the races. In Nebraska, his odds were close enough, but in North Dakota, he gave the loser a 92% probability of victory.
Again, that's perfectly explainable; if the events to which you assign non-zero probabilities never happen, then you're actually a pretty shitty handicapper. However, I'm surprised that there hasn't been a single Silver nayser that grasped at this straw. I did this analysis entirely on my own (shut up, Meri).
:lol:
I'm just sayin'... a little boom-boom wouldn't go amiss for you. You just keep proving it... :whistle:
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 07, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
I know I was.
You're a normal person. These are two people, interested enough in politics to be Speaker and Senate Minority Leader.
Edit: Despite that I'm still a big fan of Boehner. He's the sort of politician I thought had died out.
That doesn't mean they need to listen to the pres blow hot air in real time.
Best news in this entire election! :w00t:
World of Warcraft chick wins state senate seat (http://www.salon.com/2012/11/08/maine_dem_wins_race_despite_%E2%80%9Cworld_of_warcraft%E2%80%9D_hobby/)
She's a rogue. :nelson: @ seedy
Fucking rogues.
Ah, magnolias.
QuoteObama re-election protest escalates at Univ. of Mississippi; racial slurs, 2 arrests reported
JACKSON, Miss. — A protest at the University of Mississippi against the re-election of President Barack Obama grew into crowd of about 400 people with shouted racial slurs as rumors of a riot spread on social media. Two people were arrested on minor charges.
The university said in a statement Wednesday that the gathering at the student union began late Tuesday night with about 30 to 40 students, but grew within 20 minutes as word spread. Some students chanted political slogans while others used derogatory racial statements and profanity, the statement said.
The incident comes just after the 50th anniversary of violent rioting that greeted the forced integration of Ole Miss with the enrollment of its first black student, James Meredith.
Ole Miss Chancellor Dan Jones promised an investigation and said "all of us are ashamed of the few students who have negatively affected the reputations of each of us and of our university."
On Wednesday night, about 700 people held up candles and called for racial harmony outside the administrative building at the university in Oxford, countering Tuesday's protest over Obama's re-election.
Police were initially alerted to Tuesday's uproar by people who saw Twitter posts about it. The students were told to leave, but about 100 came back later. One person was charged with public intoxication and another with failure to comply with police orders. There were no reports of injuries or property damage.
Rumors about the situation were fueled on Twitter after the university's student journalists posted a video referring to the gathering as "riots." The student newspaper posted a video of the crowd, but much of what the students said in it is unintelligible other than the "Hotty Toddy" cheer, which is common at football games and other school gatherings.
One picture that spread rapidly on social media shows people burning an Obama campaign sign, but the university hasn't confirmed that the picture was taken on campus. The chancellor said some photos shared on social media showed things that were not seen by police on campus, but the reports of uncivil language and racial slurs appeared to be accurate.
Some students and teachers used social media to condemn the conflict.
Ellen Meacham, an Ole Miss journalism instructor, posted on Facebook that "anyone who calls that a riot has never read or heard anything about 1962."
She was referring to when Meredith became the first black student to enroll at the university on Oct. 1, 1962. Federal authorities deployed more than 3,000 soldiers and more than 500 law enforcement officers to Oxford during the integration. An angry mob started an uprising that killed two white men. More than 200 people were injured. Ole Miss sponsored lectures and other events this year to commemorate the 50th anniversary.
"Now, 50 years later, about 2 percent of the overall student body goes out to protest when their guy doesn't win the presidency and a portion of that small percentage displays the ugly strain that still infects too many in our student body," Meacham wrote.
In a state with a 37 percent African-American population, Ole Miss now has a black enrollment of about 16.6 percent. The current student body president, Kim Dandridge, is the fourth black person elected to the post.
Jones said the campus was back to normal Wednesday.
The university was planning an event for Wednesday evening called the "We are One Mississippi Candlelight Walk" to condemn the protest, according to Thomas J. "Sparky" Reardon, vice chancellor for student affairs.
I'm sure that will help in football recruiting.
Football players don't watch the news.
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 12:30:23 AM
Best news in this entire election! :w00t:
World of Warcraft chick wins state senate seat (http://www.salon.com/2012/11/08/maine_dem_wins_race_despite_%E2%80%9Cworld_of_warcraft%E2%80%9D_hobby/)
No it isn't lovely that someone so irresponsible got elected.
Feigning surprise that MS is full of rackets...:yawn:
I have to say that the bloodletting on rightwing sites right now is rather amusing. Predictably most of the complaints center around Romney being too far left and a RINO. :lol:
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2012, 08:05:56 AM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 12:30:23 AM
Best news in this entire election! :w00t:
World of Warcraft chick wins state senate seat (http://www.salon.com/2012/11/08/maine_dem_wins_race_despite_%E2%80%9Cworld_of_warcraft%E2%80%9D_hobby/)
No it isn't lovely that someone so irresponsible got elected.
:huh:
By all accounts, she's a very responsible individual. Why do you say otherwise?
Because she play WoW. those people disgust me.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 09:44:17 AM
Because she play WoW. those people disgust me.
Because she goes to church. those people disgust me.
Okay, USMartinus.
:lol:
I don't need to pay 15 bucks a month to socialize with people.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 09:51:49 AM
:lol:
I don't need to pay 15 bucks a month to socialize with people.
Of course not. You're breeding your own nation.
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 09:55:21 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 09:51:49 AM
:lol:
I don't need to pay 15 bucks a month to socialize with people.
Of course not. You're breeding your own nation.
A nation of no commies, socialists. A proper, well behaved nation.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 09:51:49 AM
:lol:
I don't need to pay 15 bucks a month to socialize with people.
Yeah, 15 bucks would be pretty cheap unless you are paying by the second. You need to pay a lot more than that to "socialize"
:lol:
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 10:00:17 AM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 09:55:21 AM
Of course not. You're breeding your own nation.
A nation of no commies, socialists. A proper, well behaved nation.
Yeah, right. I've heard the stories about your twins. Nice try. :hide:
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 07, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
Apparently after his speech last night Obama tried to call Boehner and McConnell. He was told they were both asleep :lol:
Fuck, those fuckers should have called him and congratulated him after the acceptance speech. If the fucking PM of Greenland managed to congratulate "W" in 2000 early in the morning fucking leading american politicians should be able to call him in 2012 around midnight.
Everybody's being cautious about their statements. But there's wiggle room to be had. This deal can get done.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 08, 2012, 10:25:20 AM
Everybody's being cautious about their statements. But there's wiggle room to be had. This deal can get done.
I hope they all realize how stupid they are going to look in eyes of the world if they dont.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F085%2F977%2FHATERS.jpg%3F1291355060&hash=0647ce6421e6c31d55973f79daa084d7703afd04)
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 10:18:09 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 08, 2012, 10:00:17 AM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 09:55:21 AM
Of course not. You're breeding your own nation.
A nation of no commies, socialists. A proper, well behaved nation.
Yeah, right. I've heard the stories about your twins. Nice try. :hide:
They just hate one kid. The archenemy of the pack.
Otherwise, they are delightful children.
Now if this chick had played Battlefield 1942, she would be utterly fantastic.
opponent:you ground the carrier!
Her: yes! And took it off the map too!
That's fucked up, Mittens. We know you like to fire people, but man...
QuoteBOSTON -- From the moment Mitt Romney stepped off stage Tuesday night, having just delivered a brief concession speech he wrote only that evening, the massive infrastructure surrounding his campaign quickly began to disassemble itself.
Aides taking cabs home late that night got rude awakenings when they found the credit cards linked to the campaign no longer worked.
"Fiscally conservative," sighed one aide the next day.
In conversations on Wednesday, aides were generally wistful, not angry, at how the campaign ended. Most, like their boss, truly believed the campaign's now almost comically inaccurate models, and that a victory was well within their grasp.
(Outside Republicans and donors are another story. Some are angry over what they felt was an overly rosy picture painted by the campaign, and at what amounts to the loss of their investment.)
Yesterday afternoon, campaign manager Matt Rhoades thanked the staff in one last meeting at the campaign's Boston HQ, as did Romney and his wife, Ann.
Romney was stoic - thanking the team for their hard work and telling them he did not plan to disappear. (Aides to Romney said they were optimistic he would be receptive to a sincere offer from the president to work together)
Ann Romney's remarks brought several staffers to tears as she told the assembled group that they would always be part of the fabric of the Romney family.
After their speeches, Tagg Romney drove the former candidate and his wife home to Belmont.
The office at 585 Commercial St. was largely packed up by the close of business Wednesday (one aide said it looked like it had been sacked by Visigoths), but some staffers will return today to remove their things.
The Mitt Romney for President financial entity survives for as long as two more years, as bills are paid and FEC documents are filed.
Thousands of hours of campaign and family videos stored on a server will soon find a home for safekeeping for the family.
Many Romney aides borrowed from the Capitol Hill staffs of other top Republicans, like John Boehner and Paul Ryan, return to work this week.
Most everyone else takes a break and starts looking for work again -- with vacations planned in the mountains of Colorado, rounds of golf booked in Florida and rental vans on hold to move lives back to D.C. and other parts unknown.
It's dry season for campaign operatives though, and a few aides said they expect it to be January before they're re-employed. Some said they would be quitting politics, at least for now.
In the meantime, lots of Marriott points will be cashed in.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 08, 2012, 02:26:09 PM
Tagg Romney
Oh geeze, the Republicans nominated Sarah Palin again, but this time in the top spot. :lol:
How come no one is talking about the changes that California implemented for elections this year? :unsure:
I like the idea of what they've done, but am not sure of the long-term implications. Basically, they allowed only the top two people in the primaries - regardless of party - to be on the ballot, so there were several races with two Democrats or two Republicans. They also hired an outside, non-partisan company to redraw their representative boundaries rather than having the reigning party do it.
Thoughts? Good? Bad?
My guess would because we no longer have any Californians.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 08, 2012, 02:26:09 PM
That's fucked up, Mittens. We know you like to fire people, but man...
He lost. You can stop bashing him over minor items. :hug:
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 02:36:53 PM
Basically, they allowed only the top two people in the primaries - regardless of party - to be on the ballot, so there were several races with two Democrats or two Republicans.
:o California is so innovative and forward-looking*. :o
* Washington has had this system for years, and Louisiana has been doing it for decades. :P
I'm not so sure about that part, but the redistricting system looks like a good idea. It would be hard to get completely nonpartisan, but easy to get much less partisan than the legislature.
Quote from: Maximus on November 08, 2012, 03:02:36 PM
I'm not so sure about that part, but the redistricting system looks like a good idea. It would be hard to get completely nonpartisan, but easy to get much less partisan than the legislature.
American acceptance of overt gerrymandering always struck me as odd.
Of course you can never be 100% nonpartisan, but you can at least try.
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 03:05:22 PM
Quote from: Maximus on November 08, 2012, 03:02:36 PM
I'm not so sure about that part, but the redistricting system looks like a good idea. It would be hard to get completely nonpartisan, but easy to get much less partisan than the legislature.
American acceptance of overt gerrymandering always struck me as odd.
Of course you can never be 100% nonpartisan, but you can at least try.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/11/07/how_ridiculous_gerrymanders_saved_the_house_republican_majority.html
QuoteHow Ridiculous Gerrymanders Saved the House Republican Majority
By David Weigel | Posted Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012, at 8:28 AM ET
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Mitt Romney made a late play for Pennsylvania. Super PACs dive-bombed the state with ads; the candidate made two stops to the state in the last 48 hours of the race. Despite that, the president carried the state by 5 points, similiar to the margin Al Gore won by in 2000. And despite that, this was what happened in Pennsylvania's House races.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7125%2F8164038143_d4746f7d1a.jpg&hash=20984211ce7d11120d151740d9723b696179457c) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/58372028@N00/8164038143/)
Screen shot 2012-11-07 at 9.41.41 AM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/58372028@N00/8164038143/) by daveweigel1981 (http://www.flickr.com/people/58372028@N00/), on Flickr
Maybe you can't tell, but this map, with Republican-held seats in red and Democratic seats in blue, shows the president's party with five of Pennsylvania's 13 House seats. Democrats have been packed into three uncompetitive seats around Philadelphia, an uncompetitive seat in the Lehigh Valley, and a safe seat in Pittsburgh. The state's suburbs, exurbs, and rural areas have been rigged to be just outside the range where Democrats might win them.
Here's Ohio, a state the president won by 2 points.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7111%2F8164038109_c25347906e.jpg&hash=87eedd6bf0c08a68d42320f7b03f943dd7f53a9f) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/58372028@N00/8164038109/)
Screen shot 2012-11-07 at 9.44.39 AM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/58372028@N00/8164038109/) by daveweigel1981 (http://www.flickr.com/people/58372028@N00/), on Flickr
Same deal. Democrats have been packed into four deep blue districts. Republicans have given themselves the other 14. They controlled the process in North Carolina and Michigan, and gave themselves similar maps. To be perfectly fair, Democrats played the same game in Illinois and Maryland, squeezing out suburban Republicans by packing just enough of Cook County and Montgomery County, respectively, into their districts. But in states that weren't very gerrymandered, like Iowa and Colorado and New Hampshire, you ddin't see a huge divergence between the presidential vote and the House votes. Had some ruthless court gerrymander evenly divided Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and North Carolina, and had Democrats been able to distribute their votes differently, they could have won up to a dozen more seats, knocking on the door of the majority. I predicted this two months ago, but the ridigity of the gerrymander is more impressive when you see it hold off a minor wave.
Quote from: Kleves on November 08, 2012, 02:58:07 PM
:o California is so innovative and forward-looking*. :o
* Washington has had this system for years, and Louisiana has been doing it for decades. :P
Arizona is looking to follow suit soon, too. That's not the point, since both Washington and Louisiana have a miniscule population compared to California. The sheer number of representatives make it a different game.
Quote from: Maximus on November 08, 2012, 03:02:36 PM
I'm not so sure about that part, but the redistricting system looks like a good idea. It would be hard to get completely nonpartisan, but easy to get much less partisan than the legislature.
Actually, it can be trivially easy. Census has a metric shitload of data. All you have to agree upon is the mathematical algorithm that takes census data as an input, and produces optimal congressional districts. This process can be completely put on autopilot, once you settle on the parameters.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:04:40 PM
Quote from: Maximus on November 08, 2012, 03:02:36 PM
I'm not so sure about that part, but the redistricting system looks like a good idea. It would be hard to get completely nonpartisan, but easy to get much less partisan than the legislature.
Actually, it can be trivially easy. Census has a metric shitload of data. All you have to agree upon is the mathematical algorithm that takes census data as an input, and produces optimal congressional districts. This process can be completely put on autopilot, once you settle on the parameters.
Computers can do that for you.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:04:40 PM
Actually, it can be trivially easy. Census has a metric shitload of data. All you have to agree upon is the mathematical algorithm that takes census data as an input, and produces optimal congressional districts. This process can be completely put on autopilot, once you settle on the parameters.
Sure, the algorithm is trivial. The agreement is what's hard.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2012, 04:11:52 PM
Computers can do that for you.
Do what, settle upon parameters?
The ballot issue in Ohio to form a 'non partisan' redistircting board failed.
Quote from: Maximus on November 08, 2012, 04:14:31 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:04:40 PM
Actually, it can be trivially easy. Census has a metric shitload of data. All you have to agree upon is the mathematical algorithm that takes census data as an input, and produces optimal congressional districts. This process can be completely put on autopilot, once you settle on the parameters.
Sure, the algorithm is trivial. The agreement is what's hard.
But it's a one-time thing. You don't need to maintain a group of supposedly independent judges on a commission to keep it working.
For you Joe the Plumber fans, Kaptur pulverized him in ohio district 9.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:17:09 PM
But it's a one-time thing. You don't need to maintain a group of supposedly independent judges on a commission to keep it working.
You'd still need some sort of oversight, but yeah, it would be a lot easier now than in the past.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57547239/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/
Romney shocked by loss? Seriously? Boy, am I glad this country won't rely on his analytic skills. One more sign that these nuts went from acting stupid to method acting stupid.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:23:00 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57547239/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/
Romney shocked by loss? Seriously? Boy, am I glad this country won't rely on his analytic skills. One more sign that these nuts went from acting stupid to method acting stupid.
Not everyone has your zeal and trust for poll statistics.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 06:51:36 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 06:50:32 PM
Alex Wagner :wub:
I would soooooooo punch that chad.
On IM yesterday:
Quote
Me: BTW, the election has given me a new celebrity pass
Wife: oooh who?
Me: Alex Wagner
Wife: chris matthews?
Wife: who the eff is that?
Me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Wagner
Wife: how.... ethnic
Wife: shocker
Wife: just kidding!
Wife: she is very attractive. i approve.
Me: Good to know
Wife: the election has solidified my celebrity pass for brian williams
Wife: especially given his take down of donald trump
Me: Heh
Wife: a fellow NBC "star"
Wife: ACK! wait. she's a no-go
Wife: she describes herself as "progressive"
Wife: UGH
Me: That's what ball agas are for
Wife: LOL
Wife: I just snorted my water
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 04:24:10 PM
Not everyone has your zeal and trust for poll statistics.
At the very least Romney had to consider the possibility that the polls were correct. Instead he assumed that the extraordinary theory of systematic poll bias was not only likely, but also the only probable explanation. That's a very scary lack of ability to evaluate information critically for guy wanting to be a president.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on November 08, 2012, 04:30:52 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 06, 2012, 06:51:36 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 06, 2012, 06:50:32 PM
Alex Wagner :wub:
I would soooooooo punch that chad.
On IM yesterday:
Quote
Me: BTW, the election has given me a new celebrity pass
Wife: oooh who?
Me: Alex Wagner
Wife: chris matthews?
Wife: who the eff is that?
Me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Wagner
Wife: how.... ethnic
Wife: shocker
Wife: just kidding!
Wife: she is very attractive. i approve.
Me: Good to know
Wife: the election has solidified my celebrity pass for brian williams
Wife: especially given his take down of donald trump
Me: Heh
Wife: a fellow NBC "star"
Wife: ACK! wait. she's a no-go
Wife: she describes herself as "progressive"
Wife: UGH
Me: That's what ball agas are for
Wife: LOL
Wife: I just snorted my water
:wub:
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:34:14 PM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 04:24:10 PM
Not everyone has your zeal and trust for poll statistics.
At the very least Romney had to consider the possibility that the polls were correct. Instead he assumed that the extraordinary theory of systematic poll bias was not only likely, but also the only probable explanation. That's a very scary lack of ability to evaluate information critically for guy wanting to be a president.
You're being too hard on the guy.
The fundamental problem (as I understand it) was the GOP assumed that voter turn out would be consistent with 2010 election, and not 2008. In fact however Obama managed to get voter turnout of his supports at close to 2008 levels.
Now it's obvious a flawed assumption. But plenty of bright people who have the ability to evaluate information critically can miss that an assumption they made is in fact incorrect.
She's cute, but just how many of these celebrity passes do you get?
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 04:48:45 PM
Now it's obvious a flawed assumption. But plenty of bright people who have the ability to evaluate information critically can miss that an assumption they made is in fact incorrect.
Being careful with assumptions is only by far the most important part of being a critical thinker. Sometimes you have no choice but to make an assumption, but in that case you have be prepared for cases were alternative assumptions hold instead. Maybe there was nothing Romney could do in case his assumption proved incorrect, so he had not choice but to act on the favorable assumption, but he still should've at least been aware of other possibilities and not be gob-smacked by them.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 05:04:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 04:48:45 PM
Now it's obvious a flawed assumption. But plenty of bright people who have the ability to evaluate information critically can miss that an assumption they made is in fact incorrect.
Being careful with assumptions is only by far the most important part of being a critical thinker. Sometimes you have no choice but to make an assumption, but in that case you have be prepared for cases were alternative assumptions hold instead. Maybe there was nothing Romney could do in case his assumption proved incorrect, so he had not choice but to act on the favorable assumption, but he still should've at least been aware of other possibilities and not be gob-smacked by them.
Why?
Why prepare for an assumption that means you're going to lose?
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 05:18:07 PM
Why?
Why prepare for an assumption that means you're going to lose?
So that you won't be delusional? And who knows, maybe in the future you can hedge for that assumption more than it seems like you can now.
I'm all for not worrying about things you can't control, that's the philosophy I live by. However, not worrying is different from being willfully ignorant.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on November 08, 2012, 04:30:52 PM
On IM yesterday:
Quote
Me: BTW, the election has given me a new celebrity pass
Wife: oooh who?
Me: Alex Wagner
Wife: chris matthews?
Wife: who the eff is that?
Me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Wagner
Wife: how.... ethnic
Wife: shocker
Wife: just kidding!
Wife: she is very attractive. i approve.
Me: Good to know
Wife: the election has solidified my celebrity pass for brian williams
Wife: especially given his take down of donald trump
Me: Heh
Wife: a fellow NBC "star"
Wife: ACK! wait. she's a no-go
Wife: she describes herself as "progressive"
Wife: UGH
Me: That's what ball agas are for
Wife: LOL
Wife: I just snorted my water
Your wife is wonderful. :cheers:
Tulsi Gabbard is the first Hindu and the first female combat veteran elected to Congress.
http://www.businessinsider.com/combat-vet-tulsi-gabbard-2012-11 (http://www.businessinsider.com/combat-vet-tulsi-gabbard-2012-11)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.businessinsider.com%2Fimage%2F509be291ecad048b61000002-400-300%2Ftulsi-gabbard.jpg&hash=a78c057de51733f617338815a8ba6e85120c6851)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 08, 2012, 10:25:20 AM
Everybody's being cautious about their statements. But there's wiggle room to be had. This deal can get done.
Indeed. I think Boehner wants to do something and could even go for a grand bargain. One interesting thing is that Obama gets on very well with Coburn who has said that revenues would have to be part of a big deal. He's also recently said there's 10-15 Republicans who he thinks would support him in going for a grand bargain.
I think we're going to see a split within the Republican party between the hacks who want to become Fox News pundits when they retire and the ones who want to achieve something. It'll be interesting to see what Ryan does if there is movement.
Hopefully Obama will have to fight his party too.
Wow, the GOP could have won the popular vote by 2% and they still would have lost the election 272-266
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/as-nation-and-parties-change-republicans-are-at-an-electoral-college-disadvantage/
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 04:48:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:34:14 PM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 04:24:10 PM
Not everyone has your zeal and trust for poll statistics.
At the very least Romney had to consider the possibility that the polls were correct. Instead he assumed that the extraordinary theory of systematic poll bias was not only likely, but also the only probable explanation. That's a very scary lack of ability to evaluate information critically for guy wanting to be a president.
You're being too hard on the guy.
The fundamental problem (as I understand it) was the GOP assumed that voter turn out would be consistent with 2010 election, and not 2008. In fact however Obama managed to get voter turnout of his supports at close to 2008 levels.
Now it's obvious a flawed assumption. But plenty of bright people who have the ability to evaluate information critically can miss that an assumption they made is in fact incorrect.
No, it's not a reasonable (but wrong) assumption. That can be forgiven.
It was an unreasonable assumption to make when the polls consistently said that the turnout would be similar to that of 2008.
Pennsylvania was indeed "competitive", but only by Romney losing Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada by even larger margins. All the swing states besides Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina were won by good margins.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/as-nation-and-parties-change-republicans-are-at-an-electoral-college-disadvantage/ (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/as-nation-and-parties-change-republicans-are-at-an-electoral-college-disadvantage/)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphics8.nytimes.com%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2F08%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Ffivethirtyeight-1108-2012ev%2Ffivethirtyeight-1108-2012ev-blog480.png&hash=35a38be69c5b0f934cb3f3b46981c785b3134914)
Fox News is in full blown bullshit mode.
The Daily Show has been priceless.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 08, 2012, 11:30:13 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 08, 2012, 04:48:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2012, 04:34:14 PM
Quote from: merithyn on November 08, 2012, 04:24:10 PM
Not everyone has your zeal and trust for poll statistics.
At the very least Romney had to consider the possibility that the polls were correct. Instead he assumed that the extraordinary theory of systematic poll bias was not only likely, but also the only probable explanation. That's a very scary lack of ability to evaluate information critically for guy wanting to be a president.
You're being too hard on the guy.
The fundamental problem (as I understand it) was the GOP assumed that voter turn out would be consistent with 2010 election, and not 2008. In fact however Obama managed to get voter turnout of his supports at close to 2008 levels.
Now it's obvious a flawed assumption. But plenty of bright people who have the ability to evaluate information critically can miss that an assumption they made is in fact incorrect.
No, it's not a reasonable (but wrong) assumption. That can be forgiven.
It was an unreasonable assumption to make when the polls consistently said that the turnout would be similar to that of 2008.
Polls can't tell you what turnout will be.
That's the magic in polling - to take the raw numbers and turn it into "likely voters".
George P. Bush, nephew of former President George W. Bush, will seek political office in Texas. Born to a Mexican mother and former Florida governor Jeb Bush, he considers himself Hispanic.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-p-bush-nephew-for-former-president-george-w-bush-makes-campaign-filing-in-texas/2012/11/08/8d4f4908-2a23-11e2-aaa5-ac786110c486_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-p-bush-nephew-for-former-president-george-w-bush-makes-campaign-filing-in-texas/2012/11/08/8d4f4908-2a23-11e2-aaa5-ac786110c486_story.html)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Frf%2Fimage_404h%2F2010-2019%2FWires%2FOnline%2F2012-11-09%2FAP%2FImages%2FGeorge%2520P%2520Bush-Campaign%2520Filing.JPEG-0082e.jpg&hash=22191e4cb26d4e146671a3af5e6a30f1aab3cc06)
============
In other political family news, Joseph P. Kennedy III of Massachusetts has brought his family back into national office again with his election to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is the son of former U.S. Congressman Joseph Patrick Kennedy II, who is the son of the late U.S. Senator and former U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9662553/Joe-Kennedy-III-elected-to-US-Congress.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9662553/Joe-Kennedy-III-elected-to-US-Congress.html)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F02391%2Fjoe-kennedy_2391968b.jpg&hash=98e72fd334a383633b241d10aef73cc56e9b8bdb)
Looks like Conan. :huh:
Quote from: 11B4V on November 09, 2012, 12:04:06 AM
Fox News is in full blown bullshit mode.
The Daily Show has been priceless.
Yes, the tears of lava spilling down Bullshit Mountain has been delicious.
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreedomslighthouse.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2F2012electoralcountybycountymap110712.jpg&hash=0f37ef08dc502c5a4e2da01e122e1db03d7d598e)
The positive when I look at that though is a lot of places are mixed (shady more lightly)
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 08:49:57 AM
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri have become extensions of the Confederacy over time. Looks like the Border Ruffians won after all.
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 08:49:57 AM
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
Why is this particular map eerie?
Only 5 states seems to be unanimous
Utah
West Virginia
Connecticut
Vermont
Rhode Island
Quote from: DGuller on November 09, 2012, 09:00:18 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 08:49:57 AM
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
Why is this particular map eerie?
I don't know, even the Bible belt has a lot of mixed blue and red in there. If it's all because of the deep red in the middle of the country, that's a very lowly populated area.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 09, 2012, 09:10:30 AM
Only 5 states seems to be unanimous
Utah
West Virginia
Connecticut
Vermont
Rhode Island
Oklahoma too.
Quote from: DGuller on November 09, 2012, 09:00:18 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 08:49:57 AM
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
Why is this particular map eerie?
At first I had a misleading map there that definitely gave each county and the little Dem enclaves seemed overwhelmed. Still a little freaky to see how many counties were swinging Republican.
Ashley Judd is considering a run at Mitch McConnell's Senate seat in Tennessee in 2014. :huh:
I can't find it now, but I saw a map like that that was distorted by population. It's very, very clear by that map that Romney's core came from very small population areas. The blue overwhelmed the red.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 09:32:44 AM
Ashley Judd is considering a run at Mitch McConnell's Senate seat in Tennessee in 2014. :huh:
She's been getting increasingly involved in politics over the years. She's pretty smart by most accounts and has been very outspoken on a number of issues. This doesn't surprise me in the least. She's getting older... too old to play the coquette, anymore. She needs a new career, so why not cash in on her celebrity?
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 10:06:21 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 09:32:44 AM
Ashley Judd is considering a run at Mitch McConnell's Senate seat in Tennessee in 2014. :huh:
She's been getting increasingly involved in politics over the years. She's pretty smart by most accounts and has been very outspoken on a number of issues. This doesn't surprise me in the least. She's getting older... too old to play the coquette, anymore. She needs a new career, so why not cash in on her celebrity?
I know she's a popular concept for Governor, don't know how it would go over for Senate, though. Maybe she should start smaller, like the House.
Ashley's married to Dario Franchitti, a racing driver, so I've seen a lot of her on TV over the years. Ugh. :x She is an utterly annoying attention whore.
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 10:04:30 AM
I can't find it now, but I saw a map like that that was distorted by population. It's very, very clear by that map that Romney's core came from very small population areas. The blue overwhelmed the red.
I saw that two but then that largely represents that Republicans have issue with many of our cities which are Democratic enclaves.
I mean here's a map of what happens to US map when you distort just by population.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2009%2F10%2F02%2Farticle-1217571-06A7BD91000005DC-555_964x464.jpg&hash=93852651115144f13807c11e3ba6bb6ba5350215)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 10:12:29 AM
I know she's a popular concept for Governor, don't know how it would go over for Senate, though. Maybe she should start smaller, like the House.
Especially against someone like Mitch McConnell. The man's been in the Senate since Eve fed Adam the apple. :blink:
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 10:21:53 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 10:12:29 AM
I know she's a popular concept for Governor, don't know how it would go over for Senate, though. Maybe she should start smaller, like the House.
Especially against someone like Mitch McConnell. The man's been in the Senate since Eve fed Adam the apple. :blink:
Eve did not feed Adam the apple in the same year that I was born. :P
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 10:25:24 AM
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 10:21:53 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 10:12:29 AM
I know she's a popular concept for Governor, don't know how it would go over for Senate, though. Maybe she should start smaller, like the House.
Especially against someone like Mitch McConnell. The man's been in the Senate since Eve fed Adam the apple. :blink:
Eve did not feed Adam the apple in the same year that I was born. :P
*sighs*
I need better friends to discuss politics with. Friends who understand hyperbole as a positive. :(
I simply don't like you putting me down as ancient. :P
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 10:21:53 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 10:12:29 AM
I know she's a popular concept for Governor, don't know how it would go over for Senate, though. Maybe she should start smaller, like the House.
Especially against someone like Mitch McConnell. The man's been in the Senate since Eve fed Adam the apple. :blink:
I just don't see a "Hollywood type", no matter how popular she is in Knoxville, doing well in a state-wide race for anything in Tennessee.
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 10:29:39 AM
I simply don't like you putting me down as ancient. :P
How about "ripened"?
Quote from: DGuller on November 09, 2012, 10:41:34 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 10:29:39 AM
I simply don't like you putting me down as ancient. :P
How about "ripened"?
Get out of here - pervert! :angry:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 08:57:04 AM
Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri have become extensions of the Confederacy over time. Looks like the Border Ruffians won after all.
Who would have thought the day would come when supporting the Republicans meant being pro-Confederate?
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 10:53:21 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 08:57:04 AM
Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri have become extensions of the Confederacy over time. Looks like the Border Ruffians won after all.
Who would have thought the day would come when supporting the Republicans meant being pro-Confederate?
No kidding.
Then again, I don't really see Andrew Jackson fitting in with Obama's crowd these days, either. :D
Wait, Jesse Jackson Jr. was re-elected? :bleeding:
Quote from: Kleves on November 09, 2012, 10:58:37 AM
Wait, Jesse Jackson Jr. was re-elected? :bleeding:
In abstentia, yes. :P
He needs the healthcare coverage. :lol:
Quote from: Phillip V on November 09, 2012, 01:07:46 AM
George P. Bush, nephew of former President George W. Bush, will seek political office in Texas. Born to a Mexican mother and former Florida governor Jeb Bush, he considers himself Hispanic.
Well here is hoping he resembles his Grandfather. A Latino Bush? He should only get about 90% of the vote.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 09, 2012, 10:57:13 AM
No kidding.
Then again, I don't really see Andrew Jackson fitting in with Obama's crowd these days, either. :D
Well look on the bright side, North Carolina and Virginia look to be rejoining the Union.
Quote from: Kleves on November 09, 2012, 10:58:37 AM
Wait, Jesse Jackson Jr. was re-elected? :bleeding:
Yeah, that one confounded me. Hasn't he been out of commission for like six months or something dealing with his bi-polar disorder?
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 11:19:33 AM
Quote from: Phillip V on November 09, 2012, 01:07:46 AM
George P. Bush, nephew of former President George W. Bush, will seek political office in Texas. Born to a Mexican mother and former Florida governor Jeb Bush, he considers himself Hispanic.
Well here is hoping he resembles his Grandfather. A Latino Bush? He should only get about 90% of the vote.
That's going to be interesting. I wonder what his stance on immigration will be. :hmm:
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 11:20:10 AM
Well look on the bright side, North Carolina and Virginia look to be rejoining the Union.
Yeah, Yankee migratory patterns remain unabated in those two states.
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 11:21:20 AM
That's going to be interesting. I wonder what his stance on immigration will be. :hmm:
If he is a Texas Poltician he will be both for and against. Perry, for example, got in trouble in the Primary for all his programs helping Illegal Immigrants. But he also has a freaking state navy patrolling the Rio Grande. So they want to stop them at the border but once they get here they pander to them. That way everybody gets warm fuzzies.
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 11:31:06 AM
So they want to stop them at the border but once they get here they pander to them. That way everybody gets warm fuzzies.
In other words, not unlike our policy for Cubans.
Quote from: DGuller on November 09, 2012, 09:22:28 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 09, 2012, 09:10:30 AM
Only 5 states seems to be unanimous
Utah
West Virginia
Connecticut
Vermont
Rhode Island
Oklahoma too.
Connecticut has a pink blotch.
Mitch McConnell, Tennessee? :D
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 09, 2012, 12:12:29 PM
Mitch McConnell, Tennessee? :D
Yeah I was puzzled. Isn't he the big Louisville Grad? Surely he is a Kentucky Senator.
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 12:38:49 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 09, 2012, 12:12:29 PM
Mitch McConnell, Tennessee? :D
Yeah I was puzzled. Isn't he the big Louisville Grad? Surely he is a Kentucky Senator.
The senior senator.
Ashley went to UK.
:blush:
Tennessee, Kentucky, whatever.
Fuck you, derspiess and Lettow. All rebels look the same. :yuk:
It would be sort of cool to be able to google lingerie photos of your senator.
Isn't she a bit too lefty for that place anyway? Recall her getting in trouble with coal miners down there.
He'll smear her into the dust.
Quote from: Valmy on November 09, 2012, 11:31:06 AM
Quote from: merithyn on November 09, 2012, 11:21:20 AM
That's going to be interesting. I wonder what his stance on immigration will be. :hmm:
If he is a Texas Poltician he will be both for and against. Perry, for example, got in trouble in the Primary for all his programs helping Illegal Immigrants. But he also has a freaking state navy patrolling the Rio Grande. So they want to stop them at the border but once they get here they pander to them. That way everybody gets warm fuzzies.
If he commissions USS Texas, no wetback trash could possibly survive.
Quote from: celedhring on November 09, 2012, 09:11:25 AM
Quote from: DGuller on November 09, 2012, 09:00:18 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2012, 08:49:57 AM
This map is pretty eerie when you talk about political division. 2012 election results by county.
Why is this particular map eerie?
I don't know, even the Bible belt has a lot of mixed blue and red in there. If it's all because of the deep red in the middle of the country, that's a very lowly populated area.
The reason there is a lot of mixed blue and red in the bible belt is because you have large concentrations of minorities in the deep south. It probably isn't a sign of health for the south when 95% or so of african americans vote for one candidate, and 75%+ of white voters vote for the other.
Quote from: alfred russel on November 09, 2012, 11:27:15 PM
The reason there is a lot of mixed blue and red in the bible belt is because you have large concentrations of minorities in the deep south. It probably isn't a sign of health for the south when 95% or so of african americans vote for one candidate, and 75%+ of white voters vote for the other.
Yeah, I'm getting a definite "us and them" vibe from this whole thing.
:lol:
Suddenly, the Republicans are for immigration reform, opening the door for citizenship for all of those illegals they've been bashing for the past decade or so. Amazing how, when the numbers come out, the Republicans can be reasonable. Even Hannity is now saying that he's "evolved" on the subject.
It's going to take more than Mr. Rubio reading from a prepared statement to sucker the brown pipples.
I am cautiously optimistic that we will finally get immigration reform during Obama's second term, and if there is still nothing by Fall 2014, Republicans may lose the mid-term elections.
You guys'll love this.
QuoteCharles Darwin earns 4,000 write-in votes against creationist Ga. congressman
ATHENS, Ga. — Charles Darwin earned almost 4,000 write-in votes against a Georgia congressman who denounced evolution and other scientific theories as "lies straight from the pit of hell."
The symbolic votes in Athens-Clarke County were a small percentage of more than 209,000 votes won by Republican Rep. Paul Broun in his unopposed re-election Tuesday.
The Athens Banner-Herald reports that write-in totals weren't immediately available for the other 24 counties in his district.
Broun gave a speech to a church group on Sept. 27 lambasting evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory. Critics urged voters to write in the 19th-century British naturalist who is considered the father of evolution.
QuoteAfter Obama reelection, Murray Energy CEO reads prayer, announces layoffs
By Steven Mufson, Published: November 9
For the chairman and chief executive of Murray Energy, an Ohio-based coal company, the reelection of President Obama was no cause for celebration. It was a time for prayer — and layoffs.
Robert E. Murray read a prayer to a group of company staff members on the day after the election, lamenting the direction of the country and asking: "Lord, please forgive me and anyone with me in Murray Energy Corp. for the decisions that we are now forced to make to preserve the very existence of any of the enterprises that you have helped us build."
On Wednesday, Murray also laid off 54 people at American Coal, one of his subsidiary companies, and 102 at Utah American Energy, blaming a "war on coal" by the Obama administration. Although that charge was repeatedly leveled during the election, energy analysts say that the coal-mining business is suffering because of competition from low-cost natural gas and rising production costs of coal, especially in the Appalachian region.
Murray Energy is the country's largest privately owned coal mining company, with about 3,000 employees producing about 30 million tons of bituminous coal a year, according to its Web site.
The company was the subject of an article in the New Republic that said the firm forced miners to attend a Romney campaign speech in southeastern Ohio in August. Murray denied the account. The New Republic also reported that Murray Energy employees have given more than $1.4 million to Republican candidates for federal office since 2007.
Murray has been a target of environmentalists. Notably, the company has spilled coal slurry into a creek on seven occasions.
Murray's prayer from Wednesday first appeared on the Web site of the Intelligencer/Wheeling News-Register. The newspaper said Murray supplied his text. The Washington Post confirmed its legitimacy with a company spokesman, Gary M. Broadbent.
Here is the full text of the prayer:
"Dear Lord:
The American people have made their choice. They have decided that America must change its course, away from the principals of our Founders. And, away from the idea of individual freedom and individual responsibility. Away from capitalism, economic responsibility, and personal acceptance.
We are a Country in favor of redistribution, national weakness and reduced standard of living and lower and lower levels of personal freedom.
My regret, Lord, is that our young people, including those in my own family, never will know what America was like or might have been. They will pay the price in their reduced standard of living and, most especially, reduced freedom.
The takers outvoted the producers. In response to this, I have turned to my Bible and in II Peter, Chapter 1, verses 4-9 it says, 'To faith we are to add goodness; to goodness, knowledge; to knowledge, self control; to self control, perseverance; to perseverance, godliness; to godliness, kindness; to brotherly kindness, love.'
Lord, please forgive me and anyone with me in Murray Energy Corp. for the decisions that we are now forced to make to preserve the very existence of any of the enterprises that you have helped us build. We ask for your guidance in this drastic time with the drastic decisions that will be made to have any hope of our survival as an American business enterprise.
Amen."
QuoteLord, please forgive me and anyone with me in Murray Energy Corp. for the decisions that we are now forced to make to preserve the very existence of any of the enterprises that you have helped us build.
Didn't know GOD was a shareholder in Murray Energy.
Quote from: merithyn on November 10, 2012, 02:07:10 AM
:lol:
Suddenly, the Republicans are for immigration reform, opening the door for citizenship for all of those illegals they've been bashing for the past decade or so. Amazing how, when the numbers come out, the Republicans can be reasonable. Even Hannity is now saying that he's "evolved" on the subject.
My stance on immigration hasn't changed.
FWIW, they finally called Florida today, Obama 50% to Romney 49.1%.
Florida needs to get they shit together.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 10, 2012, 01:34:34 PM
FWIW, they finally called Florida today, Obama 50% to Romney 49.1%.
The drama if the election had hinged on that result, again...
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 10, 2012, 06:48:12 AM
You guys'll love this.
QuoteCharles Darwin earns 4,000 write-in votes against creationist Ga. congressman
ATHENS, Ga. — Charles Darwin earned almost 4,000 write-in votes against a Georgia congressman who denounced evolution and other scientific theories as "lies straight from the pit of hell."
The symbolic votes in Athens-Clarke County were a small percentage of more than 209,000 votes won by Republican Rep. Paul Broun in his unopposed re-election Tuesday.
The Athens Banner-Herald reports that write-in totals weren't immediately available for the other 24 counties in his district.
Broun gave a speech to a church group on Sept. 27 lambasting evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory. Critics urged voters to write in the 19th-century British naturalist who is considered the father of evolution.
:D
What would happen if Mr. Darwin won?
Quote from: Malthus on November 10, 2012, 05:57:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 10, 2012, 06:48:12 AM
You guys'll love this.
QuoteCharles Darwin earns 4,000 write-in votes against creationist Ga. congressman
ATHENS, Ga. — Charles Darwin earned almost 4,000 write-in votes against a Georgia congressman who denounced evolution and other scientific theories as "lies straight from the pit of hell."
The symbolic votes in Athens-Clarke County were a small percentage of more than 209,000 votes won by Republican Rep. Paul Broun in his unopposed re-election Tuesday.
The Athens Banner-Herald reports that write-in totals weren't immediately available for the other 24 counties in his district.
Broun gave a speech to a church group on Sept. 27 lambasting evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory. Critics urged voters to write in the 19th-century British naturalist who is considered the father of evolution.
:D
What would happen if Mr. Darwin won?
Dig up his corpse and prop up in Congressional chair; will be more productive than half of Congress.
Ironic that Romney got no more than 47% of the presidential vote. :hmm:
With Florida now in, he got 3.2 million or 2.6% more than Romney:
Obama 61,785,331 50.5%
Romney 58,562,227 47.9%
Other 1,928,524 1.6%
Quote from: mongers on November 10, 2012, 09:50:57 PM
Ironic that Romney got no more than 47% of the presidential vote. :hmm:
With Florida now in, he got 3.2 million or 2.6% more than Romney:
Obama 61,785,331 50.5%
Romney 58,562,227 47.9%
Other 1,928,524 1.6%
Fitting.
Angus King of Maine is holding a press conference now, will be caucusing with the Democrats in the Senate.
Nancy Pelosi announced she's going to run again for her position.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 14, 2012, 09:26:53 AM
Nancy Pelosi announced she's going to run again for her position.
I thought the position of Village Idiot of the House was given based on merit, not something you had to run for.
Quote from: dps on November 14, 2012, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 14, 2012, 09:26:53 AM
Nancy Pelosi announced she's going to run again for her position.
I thought the position of Village Idiot of the House was given based on merit, not something you had to run for.
It's obviously a popularity contest; look at Mitch McConnell, who the GOP would've fired 15 years ago for posting such losses in the Senate.
With Pelosi back and the changes in Obama's cabinet, the Democrats look to be putting a pretty shitty team together. Yay America.
Quote from: Kleves on November 14, 2012, 10:14:11 AM
With Pelosi back and the changes in Obama's cabinet, the Democrats look to be putting a pretty shitty team together. Yay America.
But it worked so well in round 1! :cry:
Quote from: Kleves on November 14, 2012, 10:14:11 AM
With Pelosi back and the changes in Obama's cabinet, the Democrats look to be putting a pretty shitty team together. Yay America.
We knew what we were getting: a second helping of shit sandwich. But when there are only two shitty choices there is only one possible outcome.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 10, 2012, 06:53:10 AM
QuoteDear Lord:
The American people have made their choice. They have decided that America must change its course, away from the principals of our Founders. And, away from the idea of individual freedom and individual responsibility. Away from capitalism, economic responsibility, and personal acceptance.
We are a Country in favor of redistribution, national weakness and reduced standard of living and lower and lower levels of personal freedom.
My regret, Lord, is that our young people, including those in my own family, never will know what America was like or might have been. They will pay the price in their reduced standard of living and, most especially, reduced freedom.
The takers outvoted the producers. In response to this, I have turned to my Bible and in II Peter, Chapter 1, verses 4-9 it says, 'To faith we are to add goodness; to goodness, knowledge; to knowledge, self control; to self control, perseverance; to perseverance, godliness; to godliness, kindness; to brotherly kindness, love.'
Lord, please forgive me and anyone with me in Murray Energy Corp. for the decisions that we are now forced to make to preserve the very existence of any of the enterprises that you have helped us build. We ask for your guidance in this drastic time with the drastic decisions that will be made to have any hope of our survival as an American business enterprise.
Amen."
LOL that is a creative excuse for being a losing company in a losing industry.
Not sure how re-electing everybody is a vote for a change of course but preach on crazy coal guy.
Quote from: Valmy on November 14, 2012, 11:49:00 AM
LOL that is a creative excuse for being a losing company in a losing industry.
No shit, right? Don't try to innovate yourself out of an unpopular and bottoming industry model or anything. Blame the Black Guy.
Romney: Obama won because he bought votes (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-romney-donors-20121115,0,1719033.story)
:lol:
QuoteMitt Romney said Wednesday that his loss to President Obama was due in large part to his rival's strategy of giving "gifts" during his first term to three groups that were pivotal in the results of last week's election: African Americans, Latinos and young voters.
"The Obama campaign was following the old playbook of giving a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped they could get to vote for them and be motivated to go out to the polls, specifically the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people," Romney told hundreds of donors during a telephone town hall Wednesday. "In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups."
Romney's frank analysis echoed his secretly taped comments at a May fundraiser, where he told a small group of donors that 47% of the electorate was unlikely to vote for him because they paid no income taxes and were dependent on government. It followed his running mate Paul D. Ryan's assertion that Obama's win stemmed from turnout among "urban" voters.
Both were at odds with the election results — Obama won several key states without large cities or minority populations. And he did so in part by asserting that it was Romney who was planning to disburse gifts — by virtue of a budget plan that included tax breaks heavily skewed toward the wealthy.
The Los Angeles Times listened in to the Wednesday call, but Romney did not appear to be aware of the presence of reporters.
Young voters, Romney said, were motivated by the administration's plan for partial forgiveness of college loan interest, the extension of health coverage for students up to age 26 on their parents' insurance plans and free contraception coverage under Obama's healthcare plan, which he credited with ushering greater numbers of college-age women into Obama's coalition.
The extended insurance coverage, in particular, was "a big gift to young people," he said, noting that they turned out as a "larger share in this election even than in 2008."
Romney said the Obama healthcare plan's promise of coverage "in perpetuity" was behind the intensity of support for the president among African American voters making $25,000 to $35,000, as well as Hispanic voters:
"With regards to African American voters, 'Obamacare' was a huge plus — and was highly motivational to African American voters. You can imagine for somebody making $25—, or $30—, or $35,000 a year, being told you're now going to get free healthcare — particularly if you don't have it, getting free healthcare worth, what, $10,000 a family, in perpetuity, I mean this is huge. Likewise with Hispanic voters, free healthcare was a big plus."
Pivoting to immigration, Romney said the Obama campaign's efforts to paint him as "anti-immigrant" had been effective and that the administration's promise to offer what he called "amnesty" to the children of undocumented immigrants had helped turn out Latino voters in record numbers.
"With regards to Hispanic voters, the amnesty for the children of illegals — the so-called Dream Act kids — was a huge plus for that voting group," he said. "On the negative side, of course, they always characterized us as being anti-immigrant, being tough on illegal immigration, and so forth, so that was very effective with that group."
"The president's campaign," he said, "focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars."
Romney's analysis that voters had essentially been persuaded by financial benefit to vote for Obama pushed aside criticisms of his own campaign. Analysts who have studied the vote, for example, have given credit to Obama's massive get-out-the-vote effort, which dwarfed its Republican counterpart.
Polls and interviews also suggested that, in part, those voters were driven to Obama by the Republican's conservative positions on issues like immigration, abortion and the role of government. Among African American voters, pride in the nation's first black president was also a key element.
The Romney call came on the same day that Obama told questioners at a news conference in Washington that he hoped to talk to his Republican opponent before the end of the year about ways they could work together.
"There are certain aspects of Gov. Romney's record and his ideas that I think could be very helpful," Obama said, citing as possibilities eliminating government waste and increasing efficiency, a "skill set" he said Romney had as a result of his tenure leading the Salt Lake City Olympic Games.
The Wednesday donor call was organized by Romney's finance team and included a final rundown of fundraising efforts as well as an analysis by Romney pollster Neil Newhouse, who has been criticized by some Republicans for misleading the candidate about his chances.
"I am very sorry that we didn't win," Romney told the donors. "I know that you expected to win. We expected to win.... It was very close, but close doesn't count in this business."
Romney reflected on the trajectory that led to last week's loss, acknowledging that he had "gotten beat up pretty bad" by Obama and his allies after the primaries, but noting his rebound after the first fall debate.
The Republican nominee avoided any recriminations about his team or a second-guessing of their efforts, calling the organization "a very solid team that got along."
Romney added that there was "no drama in the campaign — not that everybody was perfect; everybody has flat sides, but we learned how to accommodate each other's strengths and weaknesses, to build on the strengths."
"The organization did not get in the way," he said.
In words of thanks for his donors, Romney said he never expected the campaign to raise more than $500 million. The Romney team ultimately raised more than $900 million, according to finance chairman Spencer Zwick, who reviewed some of the final tallies during the call.
Romney said he and his team were discussing how to keep the campaign's donor group connected — perhaps with annual meetings or a monthly newsletter — "so we can stay informed and have influence on the direction of the party, and perhaps the selection of a future nominee."
"Which, by the way," he added with a chuckle, "will not be me."
The former Massachusetts governor said he was trying to turn his thoughts to what he would do going forward.
"But frankly," he said, "we're still so troubled by the past, it's hard to put together our plans for the future."
One of these days, the GOP will figure it out.
Oh and Romney was not going to take care of his people? He was planning big gifts to the defense industry and outright admitted it in multiple speeches.
If he is speaking frankly here, he is delusional (it was very close? Please.) and unself-aware to the extent I am glad he lost. I mean we were screwed either way but Romney clearly has no grasp for reality.
Quote from: merithyn on November 14, 2012, 11:52:53 PM
Romney: Obama won because he bought votes (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-romney-donors-20121115,0,1719033.story)
:lol:
QuoteMitt Romney said Wednesday that his loss to President Obama was due in large part to his rival's strategy of giving "gifts" during his first term to three groups that were pivotal in the results of last week's election: African Americans, Latinos and young voters.
"The Obama campaign was following the old playbook of giving a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped they could get to vote for them and be motivated to go out to the polls, specifically the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people," Romney told hundreds of donors during a telephone town hall Wednesday. "In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups."
Romney's frank analysis echoed his secretly taped comments at a May fundraiser, where he told a small group of donors that 47% of the electorate was unlikely to vote for him because they paid no income taxes and were dependent on government. It followed his running mate Paul D. Ryan's assertion that Obama's win stemmed from turnout among "urban" voters.
........
"But frankly," he said, "we're still so troubled by the past, it's hard to put together our plans for the future."
Wow, nice bit of self-delusion going on there.
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Why do you have to be a spoilsport?
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 10:29:30 AM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Why do you have to be a spoilsport?
It's what I do. -_-
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 08:50:28 AM
If he is speaking frankly here, he is delusional (it was very close? Please.) and unself-aware to the extent I am glad he lost. I mean we were screwed either way but Romney clearly has no grasp for reality.
50-48 is relatively close. The electoral college makes it look worse than it was.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 15, 2012, 10:35:41 AM
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 08:50:28 AM
If he is speaking frankly here, he is delusional (it was very close? Please.) and unself-aware to the extent I am glad he lost. I mean we were screwed either way but Romney clearly has no grasp for reality.
50-48 is relatively close. The electoral college makes it look worse than it was.
Except that one isn't campaigning for the popular vote. One's strategy should be tailored to get the electoral math to work out.
Only a man who drinks no wine could grow his grapes that sour.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 10:51:46 AM
Only a man who drinks no wine could grow his grapes that sour.
:D
Also WTF is he talking about?
What exactly did Obama "give" to African-Americans specifically? Hispanics?
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 10:41:37 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 15, 2012, 10:35:41 AM
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 08:50:28 AM
If he is speaking frankly here, he is delusional (it was very close? Please.) and unself-aware to the extent I am glad he lost. I mean we were screwed either way but Romney clearly has no grasp for reality.
50-48 is relatively close. The electoral college makes it look worse than it was.
Except that one isn't campaigning for the popular vote. One's strategy should be tailored to get the electoral math to work out.
I don't think it really works like that. I don't think he can just increase in the swing states. If he does better or worse, that will be reflected nation wide.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 10:56:16 AM
Also WTF is he talking about?
What exactly did Obama "give" to African-Americans specifically? Hispanics?
Maybe you should see BB's post. :hug:
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 11:55:05 AM
Maybe you should see BB's post. :hug:
That's not an excuse for making comments like that. Pandering to closeted (and not-so-closeted) racists for dollars is unedifying.
I don't see why a has-been politician would care about that.
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 12:59:40 PM
I don't see why a has-been politician would care about that.
Then why did you direct us to BB post?
Quote from: Razgovory on November 15, 2012, 01:10:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 12:59:40 PM
I don't see why a has-been politician would care about that.
Then why did you direct us to BB post?
I'm not sure what you mean.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 10:56:16 AM
Also WTF is he talking about?
What exactly did Obama "give" to African-Americans specifically? Hispanics?
Healthcare. BUT WE ALREADY HAVE EMERGENCY ROOMS AND AMBULANCES AND EVERYTHING
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 15, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 10:56:16 AM
Also WTF is he talking about?
What exactly did Obama "give" to African-Americans specifically? Hispanics?
Healthcare. BUT WE ALREADY HAVE EMERGENCY ROOMS AND AMBULANCES AND EVERYTHING
White guys don't get sick?
Please.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 15, 2012, 10:35:41 AM
50-48 is relatively close. The electoral college makes it look worse than it was.
Since the electoral college is the only thing that matters at all you have this completely backwards.
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Ah ok. Still that was pretty creepy stuff. His Donors must be morons.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 02:26:15 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 15, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 15, 2012, 10:56:16 AM
Also WTF is he talking about?
What exactly did Obama "give" to African-Americans specifically? Hispanics?
Healthcare. BUT WE ALREADY HAVE EMERGENCY ROOMS AND AMBULANCES AND EVERYTHING
White guys don't get sick?
Please.
Yeah, but when they get sick and are poor and have government insurance, that's not the same thing as "entitlements". That's just until they get back on their feet, donchaknow. Those brown pipples, though, that's a permanent problem with them. :yes:
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Ah ok. Still that was pretty creepy stuff. His Donors must be morons.
Romney's been straight out of Rich Guy Central Casting all this time, why step out of character now?
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
I'm well-aware of where he was. Doesn't change the content of the words, nor does it show him to be anything less than a sore loser. I doubt he'd be calling himself a loser, but really? Buying brown pipple? Surely he could have come up with something better than that.
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Ah ok. Still that was pretty creepy stuff. His Donors must be morons.
Not really that creepy. Not surprising that there are idiots out there that will donate money if given speeches like that.
Quote from: merithyn on November 15, 2012, 02:41:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
I'm well-aware of where he was. Doesn't change the content of the words, nor does it show him to be anything less than a sore loser. I doubt he'd be calling himself a loser, but really? Buying brown pipple? Surely he could have come up with something better than that.
If it is what your audience wants to hear, seems like you'd be remiss in telling them something else.
Quote from: Valmy on November 15, 2012, 02:31:48 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 15, 2012, 10:35:41 AM
50-48 is relatively close. The electoral college makes it look worse than it was.
Since the electoral college is the only thing that matters at all you have this completely backwards.
The electoral college follows the popular vote. Though I also disagree with Tim, both results are pretty close. Bush's wins were essentially ties in both popular and electoral vote, 330 EVs is not a commanding victory or even an overly comfortable one. EV margins are greater by design, remember that Reagan won less than 60% of the vote in 1984.
Speaking of entitlements, did Yi ever pay Dguller and Ide?
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 02:42:27 PM
Quote from: merithyn on November 15, 2012, 02:41:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
I'm well-aware of where he was. Doesn't change the content of the words, nor does it show him to be anything less than a sore loser. I doubt he'd be calling himself a loser, but really? Buying brown pipple? Surely he could have come up with something better than that.
If it is what your audience wants to hear, seems like you'd be remiss in telling them something else.
Well I'm not quite THAT cynical. There's quite a bit of leadership shown when a leader tells an audience something they don't want to hear. Romney never showed that kind of leadership.
So pandering to donors might be disappointing, but it's sadly entirely routine for both parties.
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 01:20:47 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 15, 2012, 01:10:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 12:59:40 PM
I don't see why a has-been politician would care about that.
Then why did you direct us to BB post?
I'm not sure what you mean.
Why would a has-been politician (Romney), care about fund raising for the future?
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Yeah, he couldnt exacty say "Obama won because I screwed by making comments I should never have made which alienated those three groups and flip flopping on important issue. Also it didnt help much that I had to make a bunch of idiotic statements to appeal to you teabaggers out there. On top of all that someone should have muzzled all the idiots on the abortion issue - that stuff really didnt help me with the woman vote. In short if I wanted become President I should have waited for the Democratic spot to open up if four years because frankly you guys are a bunch of morons."
He has to make up stuff to explain why he lost since he cant say why he really lost. I suppose this fiction is as good as any.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 15, 2012, 03:17:59 PM
Speaking of entitlements, did Yi ever pay Dguller and Ide?
:hmm: That's a good question.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 15, 2012, 03:40:36 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 10:24:57 AM
Guys, it's during a telephone call to donors. The sole point of which is to try and make sure they give even more money in the next election.
Yeah, he couldnt exacty say "Obama won because I screwed by making comments I should never have made which alienated those three groups and flip flopping on important issue. Also it didnt help much that I had to make a bunch of idiotic statements to appeal to you teabaggers out there. On top of all that someone should have muzzled all the idiots on the abortion issue - that stuff really didnt help me with the woman vote. In short if I wanted become President I should have waited for the Democratic spot to open up if four years because frankly you guys are a bunch of morons."
He has to make up stuff to explain why he lost since he cant say why he really lost. I suppose this fiction is as good as any.
I've been reading - in almost all states Romney got more votes than other Republicans who were running for senator or governor. Romney's defeat appears to have ahd little to do with Romney himself.
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 03:56:25 PM
I've been reading - in almost all states Romney got more votes than other Republicans who were running for senator or governor. Romney's defeat appears to have ahd little to do with Romney himself.
Not here. We still have "none of the above" as a voting option. Obama won the state but our GOP Senator was re-elected. The Dem challenger was a very poor candidate with lots of issues, so it means lots of Obama voters were also voting none of the above in that race.
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 03:56:25 PM
I've been reading - in almost all states Romney got more votes than other Republicans who were running for senator or governor. Romney's defeat appears to have ahd little to do with Romney himself.
You are not considering that those other candidates may have been even worse than Romney.
Further, the Presidential election is very much a comparison between the two candidates and in recent election cycles has become very personal. I am not sure how one could ever make the argument that the Presidential race had "little to do" with one of the candidates.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 15, 2012, 04:21:17 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 03:56:25 PM
I've been reading - in almost all states Romney got more votes than other Republicans who were running for senator or governor. Romney's defeat appears to have ahd little to do with Romney himself.
You are not considering that those other candidates may have been even worse than Romney.
Further, the Presidential election is very much a comparison between the two candidates and in recent election cycles has become very personal. I am not sure how one could ever make the argument that the Presidential race had "little to do" with one of the candidates.
It wasn't just the Akin's of the world who he polled better than.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/08/the-republican-partys-candidate-problem-in-two-charts/
Quote from: Razgovory on November 15, 2012, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 01:20:47 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 15, 2012, 01:10:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 15, 2012, 12:59:40 PM
I don't see why a has-been politician would care about that.
Then why did you direct us to BB post?
I'm not sure what you mean.
Why would a has-been politician (Romney), care about fund raising for the future?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-romney-donors-20121115,0,1719033.story
QuoteRomney said he and his team were discussing how to keep the campaign's donor group connected — perhaps with annual meetings or a monthly newsletter — "so we can stay informed and have influence on the direction of the party, and perhaps the selection of a future nominee."
"Which, by the way," he added with a chuckle, "will not be me."
Well, you were the one who didn't see why a has been politician would care about that.
Joan said such behavior from a politician wasn't edifying. I said that I didn't think a has-been politician would care about edification.
I've kinda stopped caring.
Yeah, I think that's the second time today, after commenting to Joan that I had to beat you back.
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 04:35:23 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 15, 2012, 04:21:17 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 15, 2012, 03:56:25 PM
I've been reading - in almost all states Romney got more votes than other Republicans who were running for senator or governor. Romney's defeat appears to have ahd little to do with Romney himself.
You are not considering that those other candidates may have been even worse than Romney.
Further, the Presidential election is very much a comparison between the two candidates and in recent election cycles has become very personal. I am not sure how one could ever make the argument that the Presidential race had "little to do" with one of the candidates.
It wasn't just the Akin's of the world who he polled better than.
What does that have to do with his one on one competition with Obama? This isnt like Canadian politics. They get to vote for both the President and their local house representative and their Senator.
So tell me again how Romney's loss had little to do with him?