E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy nearly every indication, the 2012 presidential election is heading toward a photo-finish both in the national popular vote and in the state-by-state Electoral College battle that will ultimately decide the winner.
NBC's John Yang explains why voting in the crucial battleground state of Ohio may end up delaying the presidential election results.
The tightening of the race has both campaigns in county-by-county, hand-to-hand combat to turn out their voters. It’s also put some scenarios in play that could stir the kinds of passions that were on display during the 2000 Florida recount:
- An electoral vote tie at 269 to 269, unlikely, but possible, especially with the current roster of competitive states on the electoral vote map.
- A split between the winner of the national popular vote and the Electoral College vote, which has happened four times in our nation’s history (although some political scientists have concluded that John F. Kennedy may have also lost the popular vote in 1960).
- Potential litigation over ballots that threatens to keep one state’s electoral votes from being counted, something that is conceivable in some key states.
A 269/269 electoral tie could happen in the 2012 presidential election. If it did, how would we determine who would win the election? The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd breaks down the 269 possibilities with the decision app and talks with NBC's Pete Williams about how the U.S. Supreme Court would determine the winner.
But the Constitution, as well as federal and state law, provide specific rules for handling these scenarios. And even in a clearly decided election, the most complex and potentially significant decisions to determine who takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2013, happen after voters cast their ballots.
Here’s a guide to the legal and constitutional steps that must be taken after Election Day:
What happens if the electoral vote ends up in a 269-269 tie?
From a total of 538 electoral votes, at least 270 are needed to win the White House. The current configuration of battleground states with places such as Iowa and Colorado being hotly contested means that in a number of outcomes, Republican candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama could tie at 269. In one tie scenario using the current battleground states, Romney carries Virginia, Florida, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada, but Obama wins Wisconsin, Ohio and New Hampshire.
In this kind of scenario, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution says that if no candidate gets a majority of the electors, then the House of Representatives chooses a president from among the top three vote-getters. This would be done by the newly-elected House, not the current one.
Brendan Smialowski / AFP - Getty Images
Voters use touch screen voting booths to participate in electronic voting during the first day of early voting October 22, 2012 in Washinton, DC. Citizens of the District of Columbia began early voting today for the November 6th elections which will include the 2012 US Presidential election. AFP PHOTO/Brendan SMIALOWSKIBRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
Each state’s delegation in the House would have one vote. So, for example, Ohio’s 16 members of the House would caucus and vote as a bloc. There are almost certain to be more Republican House members from Ohio than Democratic members in the new Congress, so Ohio’s one vote would go to Romney.
In the new Congress which convenes on Jan. 3, it seems likely that there will be 28 or 29 Republican-majority delegations – more than enough to elect Romney. In this situation, the newly-elected Senate chooses the vice president with each senator having one vote. It is unclear which party is likely to control the Senate in the next Congress.
Why doesn’t the nationwide popular vote total determine who the president is?
Because voters don’t vote directly for a presidential candidate; they vote for a party-chosen slate of electors in each state who, in turn, actually chose the president.
Forty-eight states have laws that mandate a winner-take-all system: The candidate with the statewide plurality of the votes gets all the electoral votes from that state.
But in Maine and Nebraska, one elector is awarded to the candidate receiving the most votes in each of the congressional districts, and the remaining two electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes statewide. Obama got one electoral vote from Nebraska in 2008.
What are the significant post-Election Day deadlines which state officials must meet?
Dec. 11 is the “safe harbor” date which means that if a state has chosen its winning slate of electors by that date, the state has a greater assurance this slate will not be challenged when Congress meets to count the electoral votes. Dec. 17 is the date on which the winning slate of electors meets in each state capitol to cast their votes. Jan. 7, 2013 is the date Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes.
In some states there may be recounts and ballot disputes that may threaten to bump up against the “safe harbor” deadline.
In Ohio, for example, the counting of provisional ballots doesn’t begin until 11 days after Election Day and the county boards of elections must certify the vote from their county by Nov. 27.
“When you see really close elections being recounted in Senate races – in Minnesota (in 2008) you saw the recount go on for nine months – (but) we have to finish the presidential election very quickly,” said John Fortier, director of the Democracy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center and editor of a guide called “After the People Vote.”
“There’s a lot of pressure to get it done, but there’s also a lot of pressure from both sides legally to change the rules, change the deadlines.”
Who appoints the electors?
The political parties choose the electors, who are loyalists selected for their reliability. In Michigan in 2008 for example, the Democratic presidential electors included labor union leaders Ron Gettelfinger and James Hoffa.
What would happen if a state, due to litigation and ballot disputes, can’t finish its vote count and therefore can’t choose its electors by the Dec. 11’safe harbor’ date?
It is likely that the legislature of that state would appoint a slate of electors, rather than allowing the state to lose the opportunity to have some voice in the election. Article Two of the Constitution gives the state the power to appoint electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct … .” But if the state legislature is divided between a house controlled by one party, and a state Senate controlled by the opposing party, then the state might not be able to cast any electoral votes.
Can an elector pledged to vote for a candidate cast his or her vote for someone else?
Yes. But since the first election in 1789, only 11 electors have voted for a presidential candidate other than the one to whom they were pledged. In 2004, for example, in what was an apparent error, a Minnesota elector who was pledged to vote for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, instead voted for Kerry’s running mate, John Edwards.
When Congress meets to tally the electoral votes, can a member of Congress try to dispute the election if he or she thinks some fraud was committed?
If at least one member of the House and one member of the Senate object to any electoral votes from a state, then the House and Senate each go into separate sessions to debate and vote on the contested electoral votes. Both the House and the Senate must vote to reject the challenged electoral votes in order for them to be rejected.
How might a disputed election this year be different from the 2000 Bush-Gore disputed election – what’s changed since then?
University of California, Irvine, law professor Richard Hasen, author of the new book “The Voting Wars,” said the most important factors that have changed are “The emergence of election law as a political strategy: a doubling of the amount of election litigation since the pre-2000 period, the rise of partisan election laws (such as voter ID laws), the lack of public confidence in the fairness of the process, and the rise of social media.” As Hasen said in his book, “Twitter and other social media make the heat of the moment even hotter.”
Leave a Comment:
I just listened to an entire segment from Martin BAshier and Crystal ball (is that her real name) and some other chickl. The discussed rape rape rape rape .. Not one of them said "this horrible Violent act" or this "disgusting crime" or even bothered to comdem it.. they just happily chatted why rape is a GREAT reason to vote for Obama.
you people are sick
At this point you need to have a woman raped on air and let the 3 of them discuss why that women will need to vote for Obama .. once its over. I bet your sitting around wishing that thousands of women would get raped tonight so Obama would have more votes. You cannot treat rape as a opportunity for political advancement. you cannot seek to "profit" of a woman being raped!!
YOU PEOPLE ARE SICK !!
joshua w morris
You're clearly ill, or at the very least, mentally incompetent.
There is no place for your ideas on this forum.
Revenge:
Fortunately, Romney is not in alignment with that extreme (two) Republican opinions. He is more of a centrist, even though tacking right to get on the national ticket. Please don't say such sickening comments.
It is better to watch Obama for what he is and focus on his demeanor during this campaign. Rolling Stones just quoted him saying swear words (that a 6 year old would say) and Letterman telling Rachel Maddow that Obama lied about Romney and GM. His friends are seeing his unvarnished behavior.
People vote Romney/Ryan for decent leaders for the "United" States of America
Recount? tie? more illusion on the right...
....there will be a clear winner...
....and the winner is Pres. Barack Obama.
.
We don't trust Mitt the Flip-Flopper.
Pigotry:
Let the voting begin. Romney/Ryan are on a roll. It will be a very tight race.
Romney/Ryan for a "United" non-name calling States of America
Electors only cast a symbolic vote, affirming their state's majority will, giving all their state's electoral votes to the clear winner, except Maine and Nebraska, of course, according to the article.
.
There have been 'Faithless electors' once a while, but have never been a deciding factor in reversing the final result based on an electoral vote count - that is already known to the entire nation.
OHIO!
The Cliff will take us all down!!!!!! You too, seniors, abortion rights folks, brave soldiers, the sick and afflicted, you name it, ALL of us, democrats, independents and republicans.
Romney/Ryan 2012 to right this Listing Ship...we are taking on water that will sink our entire nation!
Tell us Republicans, which Romney do you favor?
This Mitt Romney ---- "The Arizona immigration policy is a good model" – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ---"I didn't really support the Arizona immigration policy" – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ---- “The Massachusetts healthcare plan should be a model for the nation” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ---- “Healthcare reform should be left to the states” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ---- "Let Detroit go bankrupt" -Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ---- "I'll take a lot of credit for saving the auto industry" -Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ---- “I believe Roe v Wade has gone too far.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “Roe v Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.”– Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ---- “I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “I never really called myself pro-choice.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and represent our country there.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “Ronald Reagan is… my hero.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “I think the minimum wage ought to keep pace with inflation.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- "There’s no question raising the minimum wage excessively causes a loss of jobs.”– Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “I did not see it with my own eyes.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “I would like to have campaign spending limits.” – Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney ----- “The American people should be free to advocate for their candidates without burdensome limitations.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “I supported the assault weapon ban.” – Mitt Romney
Or this Mitt Romney ----- "I don’t support any gun control legislation.” – Mitt Romney.
This Mitt Romney ----- “The stimulus that was passed in early 2009 will accelerate the recovery…” –Mitt Romney.
Or this Mitt Romney --- “The stimulus passed in early 2009 has been a failure.” – Mitt Romney.
Charlie,
This was answered earlier today. Move on...
Such wonderful delightful posts!
Charlie,
This was answered earlier today. Move on...
No it wasn't. The fact is Romney is for/against/for/against/against/ for anything, at any place, depending on who he's talking to, what day it is, what time it is, the phase of the moon, the season of the year and several 100 other variables. The guy has no core, no backbone, no principles. Thank God this election is almost over and in less than 2 weeks, we won't have to listen to his endless lying.
Paul Revere rode through the streets saying "The British are coming, the British are coming."
Now.....we have the Progressive running rampart through the streets saying "(1) We need your vote, (2) get out to vote early, (3) we are in trouble."
Number (3) is the best yet, and is amplified by Ms/Mrs Cuttless, the Obama administration spokesperson.
Charlie-1915998....."Thank God this election is almost over and in less than 2 weeks, we won't have to listen to
hisMr. Obama's, Mr. Biden's Mr. Bixelrod's, Ms/Mrs Cuttless', Mr. Ed Schultz's, Mr. Gibby's, and Mr. Canary's endless lying."There, much better.
i like all the mitts...
just not the dim-wit obama
Frstrm -- you have NBC confused with Fox.
'Paul Revere rode through the streets saying "The British are coming, the British are coming."
Paul Revere never said that. The colonist considered themselves British so had he said that it would have no meaning. He said the REGULARS are coming.
I would vote for humpty dumpty if it gets rid of Obama and Obamacare
it's time to reverse 100 years of marxist/stalinist govt that has increasingly taken away our liberties and given the govt totalitarian control over every aspect of our lives.
Paint all the Florida Republican noses with blue paint. The GOP s already starting to play games down there.
I will not be voting for either warmonger.
+1 vote for Gary Johnson.
Say NO to:
Wars
The Patriot Act
NDAA
Ridiculous military spending
Increasing the debt for our children/grandchildren
Tell us Larry -- what freedoms to you NOT have today that you did have on January 19, 2009.
PSALM 2012
Obama is the messiah I do not want.
He leadeth me beside still factories
He restoreth my faith in the Republicans.
He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party’s sake
Yea, though I walk through the valley of free cheese and bread line, I shall fear no
hunger, for his bailouts are with us.
He has anointed my income with more taxes. My expenses runneth over my income.
Surely poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life.
The Democrats and I will forever live in government housing.
But I am glad that I am free.
Amen.
VOTE ROMNEY/RYAN 2012
Obama: "They look at the other guy (Mitt Romney) and say, 'Well, that's a bullsh-ter".
Wow Obama, what a great example you are sending to kids, including your own children. If you don't have any facts to support your argument, just call the other guy a bad name, that solves everything. Obama and Joe Biden are the most immature politicians in history. Obama with his name calling and Biden with his unbelievable idiotic comments like "The Republicans will put you back in chains". How about we vote in some ADULTS into office.
Romney/Ryan 2012.
Fox News says the polls are not right, sorry to say - Romney is losing ground first, it's not looking good for Romney !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU are sick. But, hey!, good job trying to sway a bad thing for republicans into a bad thing for democrats. "GOOD FOR YOU!!!!" you sick bastard.
Where are you going to find an adult in the repugnant party? Your boy's 2ed debate temper tantrum over the word terrorist.
Derek-908696
Unfortunately, nobody is listening. I hope, someday, they will. I am still wondering when we will see the real debates on main stream media.
Well said, Random. I am a volunteer for the Romney campaign out here in Nevada in my spare time. The weekend after the Biden debate, I went out with a campaign partner all day Saturday from door-to-door. Our roster was for INDEPENDENTS and UNDECIDEDS only, and we were sent to a middle class Las Vegas/Summerlin area neighborhood. That day we were able to poll 62 voters. Of those, 58 said that they had made up their mind to vote for Romney! When asked why, of course the first debate was number one. But interestingly, most also said that they were appalled at Biden's "undignified performance" at the debate. For them, it was the final deciding factor. We then asked if they intended to watch the final debate, and they said they might watch it, but that it would have no bearing on their vote. Their minds were made up.
This is what I'm worried about.
Pres. Obama will lose the election, but he will not accept it. He will attempt to get the Ohio votes thrown out by claiming the election was "tainted" by the voting machines. His cronie Eric Holder has already begun the "voting machine offensive." If that doesn't work he'll demand recount after recount in states that he lost by a close margin, likely drawing the post election process out for another month or so (as we have already seen a democrat do once before.) If not that, then I'm sure he has another trick or two up his sleeve that he can pull before finally admitting that the U.S. wants new leadership.
What if he loses and just refuses to leave the White House? And, additionally, what if he has all of his radical revolutionary buddies with AK47s guarding it?
Independant, those are terrible reasons to vote for romney.
Government has lost power over America. The corrupt American corportions are running the show, making record profits and not hiring American workers. And they are paying millions convincing the uninformed American that it's the governments fault while laughing their asses off knowing you bought it!
The original teaparty fought against paying taxes to another Country, taxation without representation, not to their own Country! These rich brat corporations shouldn't be called the teaparty, they should be called the corporate crooks!
Make the Corporations participate in America Ohio, Iowa! Stop corporations from punishing the American worker! Vote against corporate greed!
Vote Obama!
I would love to know where you went to get these "undecided" votes. I call B.S. on your whole story. But, hey, good try! You didn't come close to being believable, but you had a good story!
Is that something like the hanging chad that gave Bush Sr. another go? Really, you have an over active and childish imagination. But hey, if it works for you then go for it.
My republican dad (in AZ) sent in his ballot FOR OBAMA. He did it for his kids and grandkids. I am challenging all women to think long and hard before they vote for a party that wants to take away some very basic and private rights and decisions and put the government in their vaginas. A bunch of stupid old men who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground may be acceptable to the weak and stupidbut I know smart women who want nothing to do with your misogynists like Romney, Ryan, Mourdock, Akin......(the list of rightwing nut idiots goes on and on and on). All of your attempts tell everyone that republicans respect women are crap, we see exactly what they are trying to do. Republicans don't want less government, they want more, and they want to put it right up women's vaginas.
It really doesn't matter what Mitt Romney wants or says. If he should win, it is the tea party that will run the show and Romney will do whatever he is told to do period. The only thing that matters to Mitt Romney is doing away with any form of taxation that prevents his bringing his money home and making the laws retroactive so he and the rest of the corporate thieves get away with not paying the many hundreds of billions in tax dollars they already owe. Such as Sony that owes more than 35 billion in back taxes but under current loopholes, has to pay nothing until the money is brought home. With Romney it is about personal gain, with the teaparty it is about trashing the constitution and doing exactly what their talibanian influence has done and that is make the nation bow to their own religious beliefs and live the way they tell america to live.
This horrifying and evil act - our government murdering a US child who had the misfortune of being related to a US terrorist... This child was murdered TWO WEEKS after his father was hunted down and killed and US citizens don't find out until THIS WEEK???
It isn't enough that we don't have "due process" for our citizens if you are deemed a threat (never mind the Constitution) but a minor child who has NEVER been deemed a threat?
And the Obama admin says "I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children..." This current administration is pure evil.
http: //www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/
DOES ANYONE HERE THAT SCREAMING IN THE BACKGROUND !!!! thats the liberals who thought this election was in the bag and are watching there dear leader going down ..... lol
The desperation is getting louder ,,,threats, to rape and now begging for votes so they don't lose there free cell phones...just read above posts ...begging and pleading, all the mean while the republicans are relaxed and laughing all the way to the whitehouse !!!!!!!!!
Poor obama the detroit news paper has endorsed romney for president, but the did thank him for the auto bailout... its a great article....a must read for ALL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT SCREAMING IS GETTING LOUDER !!!!
http://www.detroitnews.com/
Who knows what Romney really is? How do we know if the "true" Romney is a "centrist", or really the hard-right extremist that he painted himself to be during the primaries? Can we really trust that he won't be a pawn of the American Taliban? Can women take that risk?
Was this article about what happens if the EC ties??? Don't clutter up the discussion with inane blabber about O or R. Discuss getting rid of the stupid EC that disenfranchises voters and may give the election to someone that less than half of the voters choose. How stupid is that?
Typical.....looks like we finally are getting rid of Mr. Big Spender Obama and already his supportors are looking for ways to cry foul... GROW UP!
After reading a lots of posts ... one thing is for sure ... there's not a shortage of fools in this country ...
Hey Random Pennsylvanian... I seem to remember Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld telling multiple people on multiple occasions to "go f themselves" and George Dubya giving people the middle finger and calling a few people a--holes.
If you're a Republican hung up on someone calling a bs'er a bs'er or using adult language I think you should think twice about throwing those stones and grow up a tad bit. Wanker!
Oh! You mean like hanging chads... Like in the Bush election.. Ok, got ya...
I previously attempted to tell them about the Electoral College and 3/4 of those posting here now, started their name calling, doubting, etc. because they did not know squat about the Electoral College (just click on their screen names, and read their uneducated comments.)
And what do you expect NEA (National Education Association) Executive YOUR Teachers don't even teach squat anymore, and don't say I don't know, I used to teach before (2nd Career).
If you don't believe me look at this post:
MrFrost did not even know that the chad crap did not mean anything. That the Electoral College Votes had determined President Bush (43) the President.
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." (U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864,letter to Col. William F. Elkins, in The Lincoln Encyclopedia, by Archer H.Shaw).
"The selfish spirit of commerce... knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain." --Thomas Jefferson to Larkin Smith, 1809. ME 12:272
80 top CEOs tell Obama, Romney to slash social spending
By David Walsh
26 October 2012
The chief executives of 80 large US corporations have issued a “Deficit Manifesto,” calling on the next president to “fix America’s debt” by making substantial “changes in the federal budget.” The statement was published by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday.
Behind the innocuous phrases is the demand by some of the richest individuals in America for the slashing of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and a general offensive against the working class.
The CEOs’ letter, signed by a “Who’s who” of CEOs at giant US banks, financial firms and industrial corporations, calls on politicians to acknowledge “that our growing debt is a serious threat to the economic well-being and security of the United States.” It calls for Washington to adopt “an effective plan [to] stabilize the debt as a share of the economy, and put it on a downward path.”
The plan should be enacted now, “but implemented gradually to protect the fragile economic recovery and to give Americans time to prepare for the changes in the federal budget.” In other words, their proposals would worsen life for wide layers of the population, who need to “prepare” themselves for a drastic decline in their conditions.
Making no reference to the trillions of dollars made available to the banks during the financial bailout nor the trillions more that go toward imperialist war and the global defense of their economic interests, the company heads insist that the target of a plan to “fix America’s debt” should concentrate on the programs that assist tens of millions of working people, the poor and retirees.
They argue that a plan must “Reform Medicare and Medicaid, improve efficiency in the overall health care system and limit future cost growth” and “Strengthen Social Security, so that it is solvent and will be there for future beneficiaries.” These are code words for gutting these programs, which the wealthy consider an intolerable drain on resources…
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/oct2012/ceos-o26.shtml
Mike - 2598123.
Detroit News endorsing Romney - Big Deal this is according to Wikipedia:
Editorially, The News is considered to be somewhat more conservative than the Free Press. However, it considers itself to be libertarian. In an editorial statement printed in 1958, The News described itself as consistently conservative on economic issues and consistently liberal on civil liberties issues. It has never endorsed a Democrat for president, and has only failed to endorse a Republican presidential candidate three times—twice during the Franklin D. Roosevelt era and once again in 2004, when it refused to endorse George W. Bush for reelection.[6]
@Random pennsylvanian
So you're offended that Obama used a naughty word that perfectly describes your guy? You should be offended that your guy is a liar who has flip-flopped on so many issues it's impossible to know where he stands on any given day, not that Obama called him on it.
@Prof-1231703
You have the gall to call this administration pure evil, when George Bush invaded the wrong country based on fabricated BS, suggesting that Saddam was behind 911 and Iraq was loaded with WMD, resulting in the absolutely needless death of thousands of brave American servicemen and women, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians? Really??
Yeah! We are getting rid of one big spender in favor of another big spender. I love how these people think by voting Romney/Ryan that they will be trading up. Its more of a lateral move people, really.
Please God, can we just get this election year bull@!$%# over with already..
Amen to that. I'm tired of hearing how we are headed for a toltalitarian police state if the wrong guy wins. I thought you were not allowed to vote if you were insane, or was that own a gun?
The thing this article fails to mention is the possible repeat the Florida 2000 results by massive voting fraud on the Republican's side.
The Republicans are taking the low road by going through the voter roles in heavily Democratic areas and disqualifying as many as possible on any grounds in those areas from having the right to vote. Combine this with the huge purchase of voting machines by the Romney family that will be used in the states of Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and Colorado. In case you don't know these machines are easily programmed to give any result you want, recounts are impossible and the software that runs inside of them can't be inspected for legitimacy by anyone from the government to judicial levels since they claim that would reveal patented information.
The political climate recently seems to be a direct assault on the Constitution and the rights of the many to participate in a fair and free election.
The American people are being slowly disenfranchised of their rights by the elite who feel that their corporate and wealthy interests trump all. The public, to the elite, are mindless pawns best set to squabble against one another while they transform our country into theirs.
Anyone who sanctions actions such as these in order to win an election is fighting against democracy. These despots who despise democracy pose an even greater danger to the American people than any foreign group of combatants allied against the USA; since they are destroying our political-social-economic system from within.
When you have a party desperately trying to undermine the democratic process of voting through voter suppression and fraud the results afterword rate as high as a Lance Armstrong win.
I normally vote for third party candidates but given the nature of this election I will vote straight ticket for the Democratic party to say NO party of NO. A party dedicated to the interests of the wealthiest few over the majority must be destroyed in order for the ideals of liberty and fairness to prevail.
well kc is that any better than your guy who does the same? I remember obama said more transparency then sealed his files, names a few of his cronies as czars who not to many years ago should have been put in prison if you keep up with the facts and not just the msm
If Mitt/Lyin win, Mama's hug your son's tight. They will be in a war so big and so destructive that the draft will be re-instated. Mutt already said he is going after Iran.
Then the companies owned by all of Mitts 1 percent can swoop in a re-stock the military and rebuild the countries we destroy. Sounding reminicent of four years ago.....anybody???
Obama/Biden 2012
That's just psychotic.
WAPO/ABC POLL: INDEPENDENT VOTERS MOVING TO ROMNEY
The latest Washington Post/ABC tracking poll shows voters moving toward Romney since the third debate:
As Romney hits 50, the president stands at 47 percent, his lowest tally in Post-ABC polling since before the national party conventions. A three-point edge gives Romney his first apparent advantage in the national popular vote, but it is not one that is statistically significant with a conventional level of 95 percent confidence.
Results from the tracking poll were first released Monday evening, and had Obama at 49 percent, and Romney at 48. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the results were flipped, with Romney at 49 and the president at 48. All of the results are among likely voters.
Two of the four nights reported here include interviews conducted entirely after Monday's debate in Boca Raton
THE POLL SHOWS ROMNEY WINNING INDEPENDENTS BY 19 PERCENTAGE POINTS!!!
Should that advantage stick, it would be the sharpest tilt among independents in a presidential election since Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide win. (Reagan won independent and other unaffiliated voters 63 to 36 percent, according to the exit poll). Obama won them by eight in 2008.
...
What indication? The Dems have been trying to keep this sinking scow afloat with anything they can find to include bailing twine, silly putty, duct tape, and chewing gum. Hence the call for early voting and the hysterical ranting and screaming of the Leftists on NBC and the other Pop Media outlets. The cats are coming out of the bag faster than free Obama phones in Chicago. Dems hope for a final outcome close to a tie. The deciding factor will be motivated conservatives and independents. From looking at the recent polls it will be closer to a landslide than a tie. We'll have to put every Left Wing Liberal/Progressive Wack Job on suicide watch for the first 6 months to a year after the Big Eared Jug Headed Incompetent Boob gives his concession speech.
To you folks who want to abolish the Electoral College in favor of the popular vote, think about this. With a popular vote system, the large population states will totally dominate Presidential elections. Do you really want California wingnuts picking the President? States like Wyoming with low populations will become totally dis-enfranchised (sort of like a Republican in Illinois now). At least now every state gets some say.
Whatever happens, come Nov. 7th, there will be a HUGE group of p!ssed-off people.
http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/libya-the-real-october-surprise/
Read before you vote...I beg you .please.
One "dream" died on April 4th, 1969. The next "dream' dies at 12 noon on January 20th, 2013.
THANK U GOD!
I couldn't disagree more.
First of all, Wyomingites are every bit as deranged as Californians. Subjectively speaking, any state that voices such strong support for a lying, flip-flopping candidate who openly admits to not care about 47% of the country has to be a madhouse. Objectively speaking, I don't recall having ever read a paper or an article citing scientific consensus on Californians being more mentally not-all-there than the "good-old conservative folks" in Wyoming or Idaho.
Second, the EC system might give every state some say, but it effectively leaves half the population without a say. Do you know how much campaign money has been spent in Utah or Hawaii, as opposed to Ohio or Virginia? Yes, sure, Idaho Republicans and Vermont Democrats DO have their say, I guess, but Idaho Democrats and Vermont Republicans, minorities as they might be, are effectively left without a say whatsoever. Their vote is rendered obsolete.
With a popular-vote system, at least, every vote counts. And no, it isn't true that it gives Californians a bigger say than Wyomingites. It is true that it gives California AS A STATE a bigger say, but that's because, last time I checked, California had more than 50 times the population as Wyoming. The vote of EVERY Wyomingite, no matter his/her political affiliation, would count as much as the vote of EVERY Californian. If the net difference between Republicans and Democrats in Central and Mountain states is enough to offset the net difference between the net difference Between Democrats and Republicans in California, then the Republican candidate will win, no matter how big California is. See, THAT is Democracy. At least candidates will be forced to spend their money evenly, such that they fight for the vote of a Californian or Wyomingite (which they currently don't) as much as they do for an Ohioan or a Virginian.
I want Obama to win and I'm aware that, as it is right now, he is slightly favored by the Electoral College system, which increases his chances of winning significantly. But if I had the choice to abolish the Electoral College today, I would do it in a heartbeat.
Presidential map excluding all Rasmussen polls
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Oct26-noras.html
Note about Rasmussen
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Info/rasmussen.html
Great argument against the popular vote. If the election were held today, Romney wins the popular vote, but Obama wins the EC.
Andres: Very articulate response, thanx. I stand by my California wingnut comment, however.
@AndresTM: With a popular-vote system, at least, every vote counts.
No, a popular vote system means that only cities matter in an election. Don't live in L.A. or any city with an NFL franchise? You don't matter. Candidates will cater to urban issues instead of the states. I for one don't relish living in the United Cities of America.
The whole point of the EC is to make sure that the big states don't completely overwhelm the small states. QED.
Jody numbers
What if he loses and just refuses to leave the White House? And, additionally, what if he has all of his radical revolutionary buddies with AK47s guarding it?
Really? What if you just worry about finding over 50% of the country to believe this and similar nonsense. I retain the faith that the majority of Americans are to smart and informed to vote for Romney.
Pat numbers begs us to read his link; so I did. More right wing drivel as expected.
"One thing is certain, if Obama was in fact fashioned in his father’s anti-colonialist image, aiding Islamists to retake the Maghreb while expunging the region of all Western-influence, might make sense."
Really? Same comment as to Jody numbers. What if you just worry about finding over 50% of the country to believe this and similar nonsense. I retain the faith that the majority of Americans are to smart and informed to vote for Romney.
derek i will be voting for gary johnson as well as all the independents and third party candidates on the ballot. i laugh at all these people fighting over who is better from the democratic and republican parties. wake up people both these parties are evil and are corporate puppets. it is time for the democrat and republican parties to go the way of the dinosaurs. you will never get true change for the better from them. just the same old back and forth failed policies, that have lead america to where it is today.
Not one question asked nor answered by O'bama over the emails concerning the Benghazi incident...not one. Get this @!$%#ing cowered out of our White House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Oh, I'm a good ol rebel
Now thats just what I am
And for this yankee nation
I do not give a damn."
When every vote counts specially in swing States , Democrats are ready to cheat the system and commit fraud.
ARLINGTON, Va., Oct. 24, 2012 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Project Veritas, the group headed by James O'Keefe and known for undercover video operations, has released a new investigation that exposes Representative Jim Moran's Field Director, conspiring to commit election fraud.When approached by an undercover investigator for advice on how to steal the votes of more than 100 people, the Field Director advised falsifying documents to satisfy Virginia's new voter ID law. He said, "Bank statement obviously would be tough, but they can fake a utility bill with ease."The Field Director went on to clarify that, "You'd have to forge it."Announcing the release, James O'Keefe said, "This is the most damning evidence to date of the scope of voter fraud in this country."If anyone should be opposed to voter fraud it's him. Yet he actively encouraged our investigator to forge documents and pose as a pollster to disenfranchise registered voters in Virginia, Washington, D.C. and Maryland."
Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/10/24/4362044/project-veritas-rep-jim-morans.html#storylink=cpy
This is why is so important for Democrats to oppose Voter ID because suppress the voters. I work in Peru a third world country, families make an average of $ 200 a month , however every citizen have their photo ID , there is no excuse that in a country like ours people complaint against photo ID.
there is no excuse that in a country like ours people do not have access to affordable health care.
there is no excuse that in a country like ours a woman should be told by a grey faced male with a $2 haircut what the definition of rape is and what she can and cannot do with her body.
JohnDoe: What do you mean "Romney NEVER said "Let Detroit go bankrupt"?" It was the TITLE OF HIS ARTICLE! He not only said it, he titled his entire piece that very quote. And when asked if he said it, he said "absolutely I said it!" It is NOT a lie Obama has been telling.
AndresTM,
There is a very good reason our Founding Fathers created a Representative Democratic Republic. Read the Federalists Papers No. 10. If you want pure Democracy go on ahead and have the Constitution rescinded and reconvene a Constitutional convention and create a new one.
Because comment like yours , that don't make sense Obama is losing among woman. Woman are not stupid , you have people like Clinton who disrespect woman and the Oval Office. The grey faced male with $ 2 hair cut has more respect to woman than the Democrat member of Congress Anthony Wiener , beloved for people like you.
@1.32 lib50 -- I too am a Republican in AZ who is crossing party lines this election. I am disgusted that all the moderates have been driven out of my party, and that many in my party are more concerned with a woman's vagina or with making war than with helping businesses grow our economy and create jobs, or with taxes, deficits, the sprialing costs of health care and the unaffordability of college for millions of young Americans.
Romney's tell-this-group-of-people-whatever-they-want-to-hear approach to campaigning has left me with no real idea of what he stands for, what policies he will pursue or what kind of president he would be.
Like that idiot Nancy Pelosi, who said about the health care bill "we need to pass it to see what's in it", Romney wants us to just elect him first, so we can find out what he stands for and what he plans to do as president. He said he has a 5 point plan, but nobody knows what any of the 5 points are!
I will take Romney's more recent comments during the debates at face value and assume he wasn't lying. He said he will not allow the automatic defense spending cuts to happen, which means he will keep government spending at a higher level than Obama would.
That sounds like bad news for deficits, but Romney says he will not raise deficits, but instead will "close loopholes" and "cap deductions" in the tax code. Those are euphemisms for raising taxes! But on who? Businesses? The wealthiest individuals? The middle class? Nobody knows.
He has also made aggressive comments about how we should deal with Iran and that we should be more involved in the civil war in Syria. No wonder he wants to keep our defense spending at a level greater than the next 10 countries combined -- it sounds like maybe he has big plans for our men & women in uniform!
I am a lifelong right of center Republican ever since the Reagan years and I only once crossed party lines -- I admit it, I once voted for Clinton. I am not fond of some of the policies Obama has pursued, but during his time in office, taxes have been cut -- both by the renewal of the Bush tax cuts and by the payroll tax holiday -- and he has pursued greater efficiencies in government and has a credible plan for spending cuts and modest tax increases on those who can most afford it.
During Obama's term, we succeeded in eliminating the majority of the Al Qaeda leadership and in supporting democratic uprisings in the Arab world without putting our troops in those countries, and he successfully achieved a health insurance reform plan that was originally a Republican plan and which offers some hope in containing out of control health care costs.
Obama retained Bush's Federal Reserve chairman -- Bernanke -- whose stimulative monetary policies most likely saved our financial system for total collapse and avoided another Great Depression. Bernanke has been immensely creative in applying that monetary stimulus and has the knowledge and skill to unwind that stimulus when the time comes, when economic growth is stronger. Romney has said Bernanke has got to go.
Obama isn't my first choice, but he's a known entity -- a president who would be described as a moderate Republican back in the days when such creatures still existed.
I don't know who or what Romney is, but from some of his recent comments, he seems more likely than Obama to give us even bigger deficits and even higher taxes, at least for some Americans, but we don't know who. He also seems inept and reckless on foreign policy.
Romney has simply not made a convincing case that he would be a better president than Obama.
republicansforobama dot org
Make no mistake, the Neo-Cons are planning to steal this election...just as they did in 2000. If they are successful, get ready for two more wars...this I guarantee.
What a coincidence, I'm a Democrat crossing lines because the far left is taking over the party, there is no more Blue Dog Coalition of moderates in congress anymore, we have a President that we all know what is his background, who never cross party lines and always blame the other party for not get into an agreement, because actually he was the problem. I'm sick and tire that transparency is not an issue anymore, the government is corrupt and the media bias their allies. I do not trust this government anymore in the way how handle the economy ,how increase the debt , I'm upset how ythis administration has divided the country between , black, Hispanic, white, rich, poor, gay , straight in order to get political support, we are not one nation anymore, I'm dissatisfied because during this regime our values, our religion are in attack, to the point we can dress a shirt with the American flag in Cinco de Mayo. This government start with the war on woman to divert the focus from the media from the economy , because is a disaster. This is not the democrat party anymore , this is the socialist party. Romney is an example working with both sides of the isle an his criticized health care law in Massachusetts is a great example. Like it or not. We need someone that make this country move, not someone full of excuses for his failure to bring the country together.
If you are realy a moderate Republican you will vote for Romney,
Democrat for Romney.
With National Popular Vote, big cities would not get all of candidates’ attention, much less control the outcome.
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States. Suburbs and exurbs often vote Republican.
Any candidate who ignored, for example, the 16% of Americans who live in rural areas in favor of a “big city” approach would not likely win the national popular vote.
If big cities controlled the outcome of elections, the governors and U.S. Senators would be Democratic in virtually every state with a significant city.
A nationwide presidential campaign, with every vote equal, would be run the way presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods. The big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami do not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida.
The itineraries of presidential candidates in battleground states (and their allocation of other campaign resources in battleground states) reflect the political reality that every gubernatorial or senatorial candidate knows. When and where every vote is equal, a campaign must be run everywhere.
With National Popular Vote, when every vote is equal, everywhere, it makes sense for presidential candidates to try and elevate their votes where they are and aren't so well liked. But, under the state-by-state winner-take-all laws, it makes no sense for a Democrat to try and do that in Vermont or Wyoming, or for a Republican to try it in Wyoming or Vermont.
Even in California state-wide elections, candidates for governor or U.S. Senate don't campaign just in Los Angeles and San Francisco, and those places don't control the outcome (otherwise California wouldn't have recently had Republican governors Reagan, Dukemejian, Wilson, and Schwarzenegger). A vote in rural Alpine county is just an important as a vote in Los Angeles. If Los Angeles cannot control statewide elections in California, it can hardly control a nationwide election.
In fact, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland together cannot control a statewide election in California.
Similarly, Republicans dominate Texas politics without carrying big cities such as Dallas and Houston.
There are numerous other examples of Republicans who won races for governor and U.S. Senator in other states that have big cities (e.g., New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) without ever carrying the big cities of their respective states.
Candidates would need to build a winning coalition across demographics. Any candidate who ignored, for example, the 16% of Americans who live in rural areas in favor of a “big city” approach would not likely win the national popular vote. Candidates would have to appeal to a broad range of demographics, and perhaps even more so, because the election wouldn’t be capable of coming down to just one demographic, such as Wal-mart mom voters in Ohio.
With National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Wining states would not be the goal. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in the current handful of swing states.
With the current state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes, winning a bare plurality of the popular vote in the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population, could win the Presidency with a mere 26% of the nation's votes!
But the political reality is that the 11 largest states rarely agree on any political question. In terms of recent presidential elections, the 11 largest states include five "red states (Texas, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, and Georgia) and six "blue" states (California, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and New Jersey). The fact is that the big states are just about as closely divided as the rest of the country. For example, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.
Among the 11 most populous states in 2004, the highest levels of popular support, hardly overwhelming, were found in the following seven non-battleground states:
* Texas (62% Republican),
* New York (59% Democratic),
* Georgia (58% Republican),
* North Carolina (56% Republican),
* Illinois (55% Democratic),
* California (55% Democratic), and
* New Jersey (53% Democratic).
In addition, the margins generated by the nation's largest states are hardly overwhelming in relation to the 122,000,000 votes cast nationally. Among the 11 most populous states, the highest margins were the following seven non-battleground states:
* Texas -- 1,691,267 Republican
* New York -- 1,192,436 Democratic
* Georgia -- 544,634 Republican
* North Carolina -- 426,778 Republican
* Illinois -- 513,342 Democratic
* California -- 1,023,560 Democratic
* New Jersey -- 211,826 Democratic
To put these numbers in perspective, Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 455,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004 -- larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes). Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004. 8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).
The National Popular Vote bill would change existing state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), to a system guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.
The bill preserves the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections. It ensures that every vote is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.
Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ electoral votes from the enacting states. That majority of electoral votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC wins the presidency.
National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in each state. Now their votes are counted only for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they don't matter to their candidate.
And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state are wasted and don't matter to candidates. Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004. 8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).
With National Popular Vote, elections wouldn't be about winning states. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. Every vote, everywhere would be counted equally for, and directly assist, the candidate for whom it was cast.
The presidential election system that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founding Fathers but, instead, is the product of decades of evolutionary change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in recent closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.
The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 states. The bill has been enacted by 9 jurisdictions possessing 132 electoral votes - 49% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.
NationalPopularVote
Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc
Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states. The political reality would be that when every vote is equal, the campaign must be run in every part of the country.
Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution-- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . ." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."
The National Popular Vote bill preserves the Electoral College and state control of elections. It changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College.
Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ electoral votes from the enacting states. That majority of electoral votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC wins the presidency.
The Republic is not in any danger from National Popular Vote.
National Popular Vote has NOTHING TO DO with pure democracy. Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly. With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a republic, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes by states, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.
I believe the founding fathers would also have something to say about the role of electronic voting machines that are easy to manipulate in favor of any candidate or party in order to generate a win.
A pathological liar who flip flops on nearly every issue wouldn't stand a chance in obtaining the highest political office in the country, especially after his 47 % remark out of smarmy mouth.
We, as a people, need to control the destiny of country by electing politicians who seek to create a better standard of living for all Americans and not turn this country into a mirror of a third world country with pockets of great wealth surrounded by people living in poverty.
If any of the founding fathers could be brought back they would most likely label Mitt Romney with his corruptible electronic voting machines and his party of voting suppressors as traitors.
Yeah, probably starting with, "Oh, my God, what the hell is that thing!!!"
;-)
RevengeofPodus, write your own article about it. That's way off-topic. Try the msnbc TV site - there might be something there on that segment.
Don't call for rape. That's incredibly detrimental to discussion.
You're suspended for a week for violating #4 and #5 of the Code of Honor.
...
Jefferson, yes; Hamilton, no, pj-965429, that comment stunk, but keep it about the comment, not the commenter.
You're each suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
lib50: you're safe--no one wants in your vagina.
It's amazing to know that the issue you care about the most is vaginas; not unemployment, taxes, trillion dollar deficits, Israel, a nuclear Iran --but vaginas.
Of course if you are really a 16-year old boy, then I can understand the fascination with vaginas.
CB750-668139. then you know NOTHING about freedom. That does not surprise me at all.
Pass the preserves
Romney is toast
Obama Biden 2012
Thomas:
The trend is heading his way. Good thing for YOU and I!
Romney/Ryan for "Preservation" of a nation
The trend is heading his way.
Where?? Sure he gaining in Florida, Virginia and North Carolina but even if Romney wins all three, he's still short. He's toast in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Nevada. That's 271 votes. Toss in Colorado and Iowa for some gravy. And -- if the Republican Party doesn't come up with a better candidate in 2016, we just may have another President Clinton.
still sniffing glue I see Charlie-
Romney will take Colorado and Iowa (thanks to the homosexual marriage decision and Obama's support of perverts), He will probably take Ohio, and could take Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. He's also likely to take New Hampshire
Romney will be a clear winner reminiscent of 1980
What are you smoking Larry?? Romney is trailing in Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Even Rasmussen has him being in every one of those states except Ohio -- and they have him tied there. Romney can win in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia and New Hampshire and Obama still wins.
Larry --- I would think and world famous, international businessman, defense expert, NASA consultant, politician, historian, minister and all around expert on everything like you would be a little better at basic arithmetic.
Charlie, you are a plague on these sites. You are alway off topic. Always stuffing the same boiler plate stuff, like you are desperately trying to stuff a ballot box. I don't think you are even a real person. Probably just some political committee member, hired to stir things up in the community. If me being highly annoyed with your dribble counts, then you have won. Now, go away. I have already voted. You are really (and I mean really) wasting your time.
Barry will win the popular vote.....
Barry is leading by double digits.....
Barry still leading by single digits......
Barry still leading in swing states......
Barry is holding on to the lead......
Romney is ahead.......
The Electoral College will actually decide the outcome......
Wonder what the headlines will say when Romney wins by a landslide?
Romney Tsunami
"If me being highly annoyed with your dribble counts, then you have won. Now, go away. I have already voted. You are really (and I mean really) wasting your time."
Hey -- if you don't like what I say --- DON'T READ IT. But remember -- Obama is going to win this election and like you -- I've already voted
Steve, the President is more and more likely to win according to the polls every time I look at them. 538 has him at over 73% likely to win the electoral college to Romney's 26.9%. And that's been increasing lately.
As for the headlines, they would probably say "The President and VP were killed in AF 1 crash."
You need to look at the pollsters that were correct the last several elections......not those in bed with MSNBC. And those pollsters show the Obamao in big trouble.
If Romney wins, Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers will have bought themselves a $ billion plus tax break for only a few hundred million dollars. Of course, that's besides whatever they paid to Ryan, McConnell, and the rest of the kabal that got together on inauguration day 2008 to conspire to sabotage the economy to prevent Obama's reelection. That was treason, pure and simple.
And -- if the Republican Party doesn't come up with a better candidate in 2016, we just may have another President Clinton.
Amen Charlie, but I would correct just one thing EVEN if the Republican Party comes up with a better candidate in 2016, we will have another President Clinton.
I haven't voted yet, so don't give away the ending.
Obama's DOE investment grants in alt energy has a better win/loss record than Mitt's win/loss record picking companies to invest with at Bain Capital.
It's amusing how two weeks ago, Republicans were all screaming about how biased the polls were, but now....it's the trend!
"Paint all the Florida Republican noses with blue paint. The GOP s already starting to play games down there."
Yeh, and the game is called overthrow the guy in the empty suit.. Happy??
mormon cult theocracy coming
type into BING, follow the trail, or not.
Based on Romney's last debate arguments and the TV spots his campaign is currently running in this particular "swing state" it would appear that either
1. Romney is leaning Obama himself
2. Romney is trying to embody a 2008 Obama
I know it's close to halloween and all, but really... WTF?!
In 2016 they should simply give up the rouse, remove the masks, and run the election like everything else in this capitalistic empire. Offer to pay the voter directly for their vote! Much better use of Super PAC funds in my opinion...
What a nutty and clumsy system we have. Let the popular vote decide the election. OR, if you prefer to keep the Electoral College for the sake of constitutionality and tradition do it this way:
Each State, regardless of size, get 10 electors. It takes 251 electors to win the election. The electors will be awarded proportionately based on the popular vote in each state. If Obama gets 60% and Romney gets 40% in Oklahoma, six electors go to Obama and 4 go to Romney.
Since it is most likely that the numbers will not be WHOLE numbers like the above example, let's say the proportion was Obama 57% and Romney 43%...then the number six or higher is rounded up and the number five or lower is rounded down to the ten. So again, we have a 60/40 result and a 6/4 split of electors.
It is more representational and fairer than the system we have now. It gives an equal stake in the election to each state, regardless of size and ensures a fair distribution of the electors.
I don't have a good solution in the event of a tie. There is no "fair" way to decide it. Maybe they should arm wrestle or something. But a tie seems pretty unlikely.
Obama/Biden 2012
Of the 10 swing states
I'll give Romney Florida and North Carolina
Obama gets the rest, woman will push Obama over the line in IA, CO, and VA. Obama will even get 1 electoral out of Nebraska because he will win Omaha, AGAIN! That puts Obama at 305.
Landslide win for Romney and Ryan. Buy your beer now, because you'll be crying in it.
It's great to see the atheists start to use this to scare Christians (which I predicted five months ago). The Democrats must be pretty scared.
Charlie
The polls you are looking at are polling based on more democrats voting than in 2008 and less republicans voting in 2008. 2008 was a major increase of Democrats voting and decrease in Republican voting. Polls showed that the democrats were much more motivated to vote than Republicans
This year the polls consistently show that Republicans are much more motivated than democrats. Republicans in states with early voting are voting between 4 & 8 points higher in both absentee ballot requests than in 2008. Those same states are experienceing a 2 - 7% DECREASE in Democrat voters.
This suggests that the actual turnout Mix is going to be between 2004 & & 2008. That makes Romney actually ahead in all the swing states and several states considered to be at least weak Democrat are now entering the toss-up range.
This election has all the same pattern as 1980 when the so called "Carter effect" occured.
This article is irrelevant as Romney will win in a near landslide according to an electoral model done by The University of Colorado and the Political Science Professors. The model was first put out during the elections of 1980 and has been 100% correct in picking the winning President in every election since 1980 and has never been wrong. The electoral college model has Mitt Romney winning this election in a near landslide. Also, in almost every poll of likely voters this week Romney is ahead in most of the polls and Obama is a t best tie in some others, no sitting President has ever one re-election with those poll numbers this close to the election. Also, this election has nothing to do with green energy and abortion, it is all bout the economy and jobs, and that is why Mitt Romney will win the election.
Thank heavens, Americans have woke up to the fact that Mr.Obama's Hope and Change has turned into we Hope we Change this President this election before he bankrupts us all and this country. Mr. Obamas Hope and Change, Spread the Wealth and all the other hot air he spewed in all those speeches last election will never happen even if Obama was president for the next 10 years, it was all a lie to get elected. Obama spent his first 2 years on Obama Care we didn't need, while millions were out of work and the economy stagnated. Then Obama spends the next 2 years doing nothing at all ( vacationing, golfing, campaigning and talk shows) for fear if he does something wrong it may hurt his re-election chances, while many Americans were still out of work and struggling to put gas in the car and food on the table.
Mitt Romney has a list a mile long of completed successes in business and as Governor, Mitt has balanced budgets in business and as Governor and Mitt has created jobs in business and as Governor. Obama did none of these things before he became President and still hasn't after 4 years as President. Mitt Romeny has my vote for sure.
big Dogg
only 538 & 270 to win give Virginia to Obama Outrightly. RCP, EP, give Virginia to Romney. TPM, Dave Leip, and electoral-vote.com Call it a toss-up. Looking at the polling trends, it is Romney's.
Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire is in romney's camp right now.
Colorado and Iowa appear to be Romney. The only thing keeping them in Obama's column is polls that are now polling 7 points more Democrats than in 2008!
Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey appear to be Obama's but support for Obama has been eroding away rapidly.
Based on absentee & early voting hear in Ohio, the polls are using too many democrats and too few Republicans keeping Obama with the state.
This is the reality, deal with it.
Tim,
Romney is winning despite the democrat padded and republicans slimmed polls. That is why the republicans quit belly aching and have started talking landslide.
Akron,
Obama has 201 according to the right leaning RCP.
Obama can add:
PA 20
MI 16
That gives him 237 he needs 33.
If he gets OH 18, WI 10 all he needs is either NV or IA both at 6.
Beyond that he gets CO 9, VA 13 and NH 4. He will add 1 from Nebraska for good measure. That gives him 304
Mike...I agree. The willful sandbagging of the economy that the Neo-Cons have conspired to execute is treason, and should face the hardest punishment...up to and including forfeiture of all assets and the gallows.
That study is based largely on the economy, written in the middle of last summer, before the recent positive news about the economy and rise in popular sentiment about the health of the economy. It's also an outlier as mentioned above.
Romney complains about the government investing $90 billion in Green jobs, saying that half of those investments failed when in fact it was only 8%, while Bain Capital's failure rate was 22%. He balanced the budget in Massachusetts by tripling fees charged on every possible state transaction, purely so he could claim he didn't raise taxes. But the true test of Romney's success as Governor of Massachusetts is the simple fact that he will not even come close to carrying the state in this election.
Charlie: remember that you are a Democrat, so you still get to vote a few more times! It's in the DNC Handbook.
NBC planting the seed for everyone to complain if their guy loses by a hair.
I don't think it will be that close, but I guarantee that when Obama wins the GOP will become unglued.
You are so correct. We are hearing the race card played every day by the "reorters" on MSNBC. They will now start with voter fraud, suppression and whatever other lame excuses they can come up with.
dogs-
How can you deny that voter suppression is taking place? The Secretary of State of Pennsylvania said in so many words that their voter id law had been passed with the sole intent of winning the state for Romney. Same thing in Missouri. The SecState of Ohio tried to close early voting down in selected districts that just happened to have a high percentage of democrat and minority citizens. That's not a lame excuse, it's fact.
And as for the race card, at least 20% (and I think it's much higher) of registered republicans aren't going to vote for Obama only because he's black. They don't even look at any other factor. And you don't hear it "every day" on MSNBC. You do hear in more on MSNBC than you do on Faux News, but that's because everyone on Fox is a racist, so they don't need to mention it. (And, btw, not that it matters, but MSNBC doesn't try to pass their people off as "reporters" like Faux News does, they label them clearly as commentators. Not that you're probably capable of grasping the distinction.)
What about the letters sent out in Florida telling people they could not vote because their eligibility was being questioned? Sent mostly to Republicans, oh and a few Democrats just to make it look good. If this is not a ploy by the Demacrats than what is?
Who gets elected will not matter in respects to the down spin of this country as a whole nation. The tea-party fanatics should have been the clear sign that this country is headed straight into civil conflict. Everyone should be far more concerned with the rise in random pyschotic (seeming) murders cropping up in nearly every state in this country and these so called political divisions you people seem to need for your power growth in random thread communities should be viewed as another sign. I myself have not seen so many communist/socialist label attacks thrown around since the middle of the cold war era, are you people seriously going to let a hand full of people elect themselves as the chosen people.
My Impulse, I agree 100% with your comment.. You'll have a hard time in here.. This Liberal Rag of a message board wouldn't hear of it.. The Government could find proof that it was a Democratic group and libs would "chalk it up" as an "individual extremist".. That's politics..
Lore & Wisdom, Where have you been under a rock.. The Country is already in civil conflict.. The reason murders are happening is because public safety funds were cut so that more money would go into education and other "human resources" funding.. It's ALL Politics.. Bad politics if you ask me..
I wish the major News Networks did investigative reporting. They are all in fear of losing their jobs.. it seems their theory is let the news come to you. I will give FOX News credit on reporting lies and repeating it 24/7 until you believe them.
Mormons Are (Different) Christians, Not Cultists.....FOX NEWS .. Glenn Beck is Mormon.. sinking in yet ?
News flash, you can have different denominations, but not (different) Christians... Mormons are Cultists.. just a heads up guy's & gal's... have a blessed day.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/joe-biden-to-father-of-former-navy-seal-killed-in-benghazi-did-your-son-always-have-balls-the-size-of-cue-balls/
I will gladly vote for a Mormon and when you read this you may also.
Mike from AZ.
Let's see; the Democrat Secretary of State from PA said the voter ID law in his state was to ensure a victory for Romney. No bias there I'm sure.
And what exactly is wrong with voter I.D.? Try getting on an airplane, or into a government building, or cashing a check without photo I.D.--it wont happen. Hell, even illegals know how to get a photo I.D.
Updated as of 4:55pm EST on Thursday, October 25:
Real Clear Politics (RCP) is consistently cited by both FOXNEWS and NBCNEWS as a current source for reliable averaged polling data at every level of American politics.
RCP this afternoon returned North Carolina (NC) to the status of toss-up state, and in so doing, has reduced Romney's likely electoral vote tally from 206 to 191. However, Romney still holds a commanding lead of 5% in NC and he remains the overwhelming favorite to capture that state in the upcoming election.
In any event, RCP now considers the following eleven states, listed in descending order of electoral votes, as "toss-up": Florida (FL), Pennsylvania (PA), Ohio (OH), Michigan (MI), North Carolina (NC),Virginia (VA), Colorado (CO), Wisconsin (WI), Iowa IO), Nevada (NV) and New Hampshire (NH). With only 12 days left in the 2012 presidential campaign, Obama leads in seven of the toss-ups and Romney leads in four.
In descending order of 'percentage of lead' in favor of Obama, followed in ascending order of 'percentage of lead' in favor of Romney, here are the published averaged polling numbers from RCP as of 4:55pm EST on Thursday, October 25:
In PA, with 20 electoral votes, Obama's lead has fallen to 4.8%, down from a longstanding lead of 5.0%.
In MI, with 16 electoral votes, Obama's lead has fallen to 4.0%, down from 5.0% for most of the past four weeks.
In NV, with 6 electoral votes, Obama's lead has fallen to 2.7%, down from 2.8% yesterday.
In WI, with 10 electoral votes, Obama's lead is holding at 2.7%.
In OH, with 18 electoral votes, Obama's lead has risen to 2.1%, up from 1.7% yesterday.
In IO, with 6 electoral votes, Obama's lead has fallen to 2.0%, down from 2.4% yesterday.
In NH, with 4 electoral votes, Obama's lead has fallen to 0.8%, down from 1.4% yesterday.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In CO, with 9 electoral votes, Romney's lead is holding at 0.2%.
In VA, with 13 electoral votes, Romney's lead is 1.4%, up from a longstanding tie.
In FL, with 29 electoral votes, Romney's lead has fallen to 1.7%, down from 1.8% yesterday.
In NC, with 15 electoral votes, Romney's lead has fallen to 5.0% and accounts for this state being returned today to the status of toss-up.
So…
For Obama to win re-election, the easiest route still appears to be through maintaining his existing lead in the five toss-up states where his current margins are widest: PA, MI, NV, WI, and OH. Doing so would bring his electoral vote total on Election Day to 271.
However, should Obama lose the critically important and highly-contested state of OH, the loss could effectively be neutralized by combined victories in IO and NH while stealing CO where Romney currently leads by 0.2%, resulting in an electoral vote tally of 272. However, there is some question as to the accuracy of the RCP polling numbers for NH, which does include in their average an 'outlier' finding from UNH which has Obama leading by an overwhelming 9.0%.
For Romney to unseat Obama, he not only would have to hold the four states in which he presently leads, FL, NC, VA, and CO, bringing his electoral vote total to 257, but also steal a victory in OH where Obama's lead rose today to is 2.1%. By so doing, Romney's electoral vote total reaches 275.
Should Romney fail to take OH, he could overcome this shortfall by stealing WI and either IO or NH, resulting respectively in an electoral vote total of 273 or 271.
With only twelve days of campaigning left, this one may come down to the wire…. and to the October jobs report.
Let's hope that Election Day is free of both voter fraud and voter intimidation and that eligible voters who have registered in good faith over the past six months are in fact able to vote on November 6; let's also hope that vote tabulation itself is performed honestly and accurately by both the election commissions and private corporations to whom this essential role is being entrusted.
In any case, it will be interesting to watch as election night unfolds.
Good post Jefferson!
O & Joe 2012
U.N. will be going to Chicago......good luck on that one.
It does sound as if MSNBC is beginning the discussion for the 'Al Gore' defense, or is it the offense? But you're right there frstrm33, the seed is planted.
But I do hope that the DNC and the Obama campaign keep Jen Rene on their team. She's doing well in her assignment to the president. Jen is so snarky that her attitude keeps the smirk on Obama whenever he's on the screen listening to someone with a vision.
Obama does nothing but use schoolyard talk against his opponent to keep the focus from his failed programs.
Keep up the good work there Jen!
Obama does nothing but use schoolyard talk against his opponent to keep the focus from his failed programs.
I think you have him confused with lying Romney. The only answers Romney has are tax cuts, deregulation and increased military spending --- Bush all over. Voting for a Republican to strengthen this economy would be like smoking to cure lung cancer.
Even Letterman is seeing Obama as he is... Did you say lies?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/10/24/letterman-upset-and-discouraged-obama-lied-about-romney-wanting-detro
Independent,
Letterman HATES Romney. The contempt is palpable.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/joe-biden-to-father-of-former-navy-seal-killed-in-benghazi-did-your-son-always-have-balls-the-size-of-cue-balls/
If it gets to the point of congress picking...god help us,,,,it will be a new civil war like never seen before. The country is anghray nitter abd divided....light a match like an elctoral tie and ....BOOOOMMM! Instant civil unrest. The new Civil War in America is about to begin.
If Obama wins, I suspect another Civil War is not far behind.
No representation without taxation.
If Obama wins, I suspect a Civil War is not far behind.
Charlie,
Even though Obama channels Clinton, he is much more a fringe element than Clinton was on his worst day. Clinton was great with both parties, a mannerism Obama hasn't mastered.
Romney/Ryan 2012
I get the feeling Independent that you are looking for violence after the Preaident is reelected and will be disappointed if it doesn't happen. The "fringe element" you speak of is NOT among Democrats, it's among Republicans -- the birthers, the tea party fools, a few right wing so called preachers, the Glen Becks of the world -- people like that.
there is NOTHING "fringe" or extreme about President Obama. President Obama is pragmatic and if his policies are any indicatation, he is really more 70s moderate REPUBLICAN than Democrat. Hardly the extreme, "socialist/marxist/communist" as the fringe right has tried to paint him. How very Rove-ian of the extreme right wing to keep trying to hang that label on our President.
Here's how I see it. On the eve of President Obama's inauguration, 15 of our elected representatives (including our own Dan Lungren) met in seclusion to plot and scheme on how to block EVERYTHING our President tried to do for our country. They forged a "scorched earth policy" in order to discredit or de-legitimize our duly elected President.
From my point of view, what they did is treasonous and they should be voted OUT and never NEVER be allowed to hold public office again.
I don't believe either party has the interests of the American people at heart, but I sure as HELL will not reward the Republican party for their disgraceful, anti-american and shameless tactics since this President took office.
Perhaps it's time for a new party? One who's only focus is on the America citizens, and perhaps an ammendment to our Constitution? "Congress shall make NO LAW from which they themselves are exempt"
Ohh really? Ive seen quite a few comments from liberal viners, going into detail that if theres any voter fraud, they will revolt and then say the only way Romney can win, is through voter fraud. It seems to me that they already have their minds made up and knowing liberals they are probably crazy enough to do it..
Yay Jt, a new party that will serve the people not the plutocracts!
Right on JT! Love it when someone gets to the root. Precisely WHY ANY republican will ever get my vote and precisely why democrats will win big, they have NO honor. Threw it out the window DAY ONE of this administration. Polarized idiots from top to bottom. Completely insecure lemmings riding McConnell's wagon of shameful, unhonorable and phony political theatrics.
We look in the mirror and ask, how can such a large section of our populace be so misinformed, polarized and dysfunctional? All it took was McConnells agenda (one term). Republicans are the epitomy of unhonorable. Win or lose, republicans are not what this country wants for the future. This simple truth will be even more evident at the mid elections 2 yrs from now.
At this stage of the game the only thing left for the GOP is fear mongering.
7 deleted, 2-Lane Gypsy beginning a thread by flaming another user:
You're suspended for a week for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Second suspension this month.
For Obama to win re-election, the easiest route still appears to be through maintaining his existing lead in the five toss-up states where his current margins are widest: PA, MI, NV, WI, and OH. Doing so would bring his electoral vote total on Election Day to 271.
Take a look at Real Clear Politics. President Obama is leading on every one of those states as well as in Colorado and Iowa. According to Real Clear Politics, President Obama has 201 votes in the bag now. The states you mentioned take his total to 271 -- enough to win. Colorado and Iowa take him to 286. Romney just may win the popular vote but he's a long shot --- a very long shot to win the election. If that happens-- Romney winning the popular vote but not the election -- I can hear the screeching, screaming, whining and crying boiling over from Limbaugh and the rest of the right wing noise machine.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
Charlie,
Actually, RCP just now raised Romney's lead in Colorado from 0.2% to 0.5%, so I'm not quite sure where you found Obama leading in Colorado on the RCP site.
Charlie,
I've also noticed that in a few of your comments you begin by quoting another poster with whom you disagree, but because you neglect to wrap that quote in proper punctuation (quotation marks), we're led to believe that it is actually your own belief.
Just a heads up....
Good advise Jefferson -- thanks.
Charlie,
My guess is that Republicans have no choice but to bang the drum to abandon the Electoral College in the coming years.
By many accounts, Texas is turning more and more Blue as the years pass, perhaps crossing over from Red to Blue by 2024, and NO Republican candidate could ever overcome an Electoral College deficit which included California, Texas, New York, Illinois and Pennsylvania from the get-go.
If not abandoning the Electoral College altogether, Republicans would likely seek to garner support for the wholesale apportionment of Electors, especially in targeted states of considerable size (California, New York, Illinois, etc.) much like Maine and Nebraska are doing again this cycle.
Jeff, yes, the GOP would want to go to a proportional electoral college, as the minority population grows. But, then why keep the EC at ALL?!?
Bad news for the democrat-communist party, aka Obama slugs. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, 2 Americans, will win the 2012 election. Electoral votes, Romney 326, Hussein 212. It is over for the communists in America.
Where did you get those numbers from Joe?
He pulled them out of his butt, Charlie. The paid trolls are trying to dissuade voters by any means necessary in hopes that they can persuade a few voters that their candidate winning is a forgone conclusion. Every trick they can use, they will.
I strongly suspect President Obama will be reelected, and the election will be called by 10:00pm. Immediately following, the right wing talking heads will be claiming FRAUD.
JT -- I think it may be called a little later than 10:00 pm but not much after. Not only will President Obama be reelected, the Democrats will pick up a few seats in the Senate. And you are absolutely correct -- Republicans will be screaming, screeching, whining and crying about voter fraud -- probably even before the election is called.
Which party needed to post bat-armed men at voting locations in 2008?
obama has been such a horrible president,that when he loses in nov....his libriary weill be full of books blaming bush....and all the silverware they stole from the whitehouse....lol
dont mess,
I'm curious as to your opinion as to whether Texas will have gone Blue by 2024. The demographics are changing at lightning speed in the Lone Star State, and it appears there is little which Republicans can do to limit the damage save for courting the Hispanic vote in a way they have failed to do in this cycle.
"his libriary weill be full of books blaming bush....and all the silverware they stole from the whitehouse....lol"
You Republicans have a very short memory. From 1976 to 1992 you whined and cried, moan and groaned and complained and complained more and bitched, carried on and on and blamed President Carter of everything wrong in the entire universe. Then from 1992 to 2008 you whined and cried, moan and groaned and complained and complained more and bitched, carried on and on and blamed President Clinton for everything that was wrong in the entire universe. So – using the standard you set – the left has another 29 years to blame Bush for everything just to pull even with you.
Charlie;
You do know, the mature president Clinton, had his staff remove all the "W" keys from every computer in the White House as Bush was sworn in.
Dude you need to go back to school and learn how to spell!!
dont mess with texsas
obama has been such a horrible president,that when he loses in nov....his libriary weill be full of books blaming bush....and all the silverware they stole from the whitehouse....lol
Speaking of Clinton. How about this?
Bill Clinton was suspended from practicing law in
Arkansas and paid a $250,000 fine as a result of the Monica Lewinski incident.
He also paid a $850,000 settlement over the Paula
Jones incident.
He was also disbarred from practicing law in front
of the Supreme Court.
So Bill Clinton, a disbarred lawyer, a President
who was impeached for lying under oath, is asking the American people to
believe him when he says the best thing for the country is four more years of
Obama.
What else can you say?
You do know, the mature president Clinton, had his staff remove all the "W" keys from every computer in the White House as Bush was sworn in.
You do know that story was total BS. Even Fox was forced to admit it. But -- if Bill Clinton could run again, he would win in a landslide. If George W. Bush could run again, he would have a hard time winning in Texas.
jdbird, that never happened, it's an urban legend. The amount of damage was the same as it is whenever old tenants move out and was not any more so than when when GHWB left office in early 1993.
The reality is that when Clinton's team tried to go through the normal transition process with bush's incoming people, they were snubbed and ignored. Total disprespect.
About the other nonsense- Clinton wasn't disbarred, his license was suspended for a few months. The Paula Jones settlement was to get her to go away, not an admission of anything. The impeachment was a totally partisan ploy by Adolf Gingrich and his henchmen, who were eating sour grapes after spending tens of millions of dollars investigating the Clintons and coming up with absolutely nothing other than a blowjob.
I'd vote for Clinton again in a minute. I had actually voted for bush for governor of Texas, but after discovering him for the liar he turned out to be, that would never happen again.
Clinton was a pot smoking womanizer but we had 8 years of peace and ended with a balanced budget. I'd vote for him again. I could care less where he puts his cigars.
Congress led by Gingrich spend more money investigating Bill Clinton than they did on Investigating 911.
Either their priorities are screwed up or they knew who it would lead to and decided not to expose....Themselves!
Larry, Nixon was impeached not for the break-in, rather it was for the cover up, much the same as Clinton. As for the budget, many people would agree with you; the reality is that a budget is passed by Congress, which at that time was controlled by Republicans, which really leads to the question of how did we get to a balanced budget.
@Kevin-Milw: How did Gingrich decide how much to spend investigating 9/11 when he left office in January 1999?
.
JRL: You get to a balanced budget by not having a president implementing tax cuts where lost revenue isn't made up. Implementing unpaid for drug plans and wars off budgets. You claim a president doesn't create a balanced budget but can't deny that he can insure one is unreachable. Look at Bush's 8 years to see how we went from a balanced budget to a train wreck and it's all Bush. Romney wants to cut taxes greater than Bush did, expand the military and take a tougher line on Iran. Deja Vue.
Larry, I don't disagree with much of what you have said. Bush did create a big problem. The fact remains that we are now into the 4th year of Pres. Obama's term and I believe it is time that we can stop blaming everything on Bush. The fact remains that Pres. Obama followed Bush's lead with the stimulus, but it is also a fact that Pres. Obama decided to use all the political power from the beginning to ram through a social program that did not do anything about the economic problems we all face. Do I think that something has to be done with health care, absolutely; but is this the time to introduce a change like this, with such far reaching economic effects and have the speaker of the house say 'we'll have to pass it to see what's in it.' I think not.
I would suggest that Romney wants to cut tax rates along with removing tax deductions for upper income people. We have a tax code that when stacked, is taller than you or I, and that is because of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress scratching their backers pockets.
A lot of things are said on the campaign trail and have to be taken with a grain of salt. If you remember, it was Pres. Obama that said he was going to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, honestly, I would have been happy if it just hadn't grown the way it has. Do you hold him accountable for the massive debt increase?
romney has social media advertising fox news and himself to convince americans. obama has social media , advertising , nbc, cbs, abc, cnn, pbs, cnbc, msnbc, hip hop artists, that athiest bill maher, the reverend wright, bill ayers, all those people he paid off to hide his college records, all those people he paid off to hide his college entry forms, the muslum brotherhood, 97 percent of the black vote [ if they decide to actually show up this time] , the majority of the hispanic vote [ legal and illegal], hillery clinton ; if she can get back from hiding out in chile so she doesn't have to answer for bengazi], every overpaid under delivering union worker , jay leno and david letterman [ god do people actually watch these shows. ] , multimillionaire bidbird, all communists, extreme liberals, hippie wanna bes, and generaly all clueless people and ITS THIS FREEKING CLOSE. if half the msm was on romneys side it would be a whooping. don't forget to read obama's plan for the next four years [ the one he came out with two weeks before the election] and it will look like they just filled the pages with edited stuff from the three debates [ i mean two debates and one ass whooping]. i have the english version but i'm sure there has to be a spanish, arabic, or russian version. not a hebrew version , no no way. please vote for romney so my neighbor can finially get a job. i think he's given up cause he plays his freeking drumbs all day.
/
Wow. If you believe half of the crap you wrote, you've got to be the most gullible sap in the universe.
If we'd have had more democratic presidents over the last few decades, perhaps you'd have received a decent education and would have learned to spell.
Taking all the silverware with him when he leaves? Now that's funny, but didn't Bill and Hill do that AND take the dishes too?
Obama has become so comfortable in Air Force 1 that he may take that too!
This was a very informative article and I'm glad to be reminded of the little nuances that can affect the outcome of an election.
Wouldn't you think we'd have standardized and streamlined our election process by now, though? Too much margin for error when things are this haphazard, and don't get me started on the COSTS involved.
You're right United. But the problem is this antiquated, slavery-based notion of "States' Rights". That's where it all comes from. The backwards hill people in one state have it one way, the religious extremists in another state have it another way, the elitist city dwellers insisting on yet another way.
The electoral college was established because the founders didn't actually trust the common people (in spite of all the rhetoric to the contrary), and wanted to establish some way to ensure that the "right" people would ge elected.
Chuck Todd has been saying a tie for about four weeks now, I'am not so sure. Where I live, during the last election I saw McCain signs every where, this election I've seen about eight rumney signs, and most of them are on vacant lots, and this is a red state, I find that strange. So a tie??? I don't think so.
I was pondering this, Tony, because people were saying the same thing in another thread about Obama signs. Honestly, I think that the political and social atmosphere is so volatile right now that people are hesitant to show public support for either candidate. That's why I don't do political bumper stickers; I don't want my car keyed by some nutjob who disagrees with me.
If you look at the polling data you get a much better picture trending for Romney than for Obama
Colorado- all but one poll shows Romney now ahead- the PPD poll puts Obama ahead but their poll is weighted 60/40 to liberal/moderate Democrats
Iowa- other than the NBC/WSJ poll- all other polls show Iowa trending to Romney
New Hampshire-shows the race to be a statistical tie with movement clearly trending Romney
Michigan- October has seen Michigan trend to a statistical tie where it had been a clear Blue state, Real Clear has moved it to toss up
Larry --- Obama can lose Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida, Virginia and North Carolina and he still wins. Your comment about Michigan is pie in the sky. Rasmussen -- the most rightward leaning polling organization in the nation has Obama up by 7% in Michigan. Romney gave away Michigan with his stand on the auto bailout.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/mi/michigan_romney_vs_obama-1811.html
Not really.
The media and the pollsters need to keep this thing going, or pray that the World Series goes seven games. I now believe that CNN will call the election a powerful win for President Obama by 11:00 PM EDST on November 6th. I was in Ohio today and a Romney Campaign Staffer told me that they need a miracle to win. I asked what sort of miracle they were hoping for, and he said "Maybe an earthquake could destroy Ohio".
"Trending" is still losing.
Larry lives in ga ga land.
I mean look at his haircut, he is stuck in the 50's.
I find that rumney is a few points behind.
Just when the Indians are about to overrun the entire wagon train. The Calvary rides in to the rescue. Just in the nick of time they are saved.
Just when the Nazis are bombing England into submission in preparation for their invasion, here comes those valiant few Spitfire and Hurricane pilots who turned the tide, and sent the evil Nazis packing.
Now, here we are in 2012. America has lost her way. We are spiraling deeper and deeper into debt, and despair. When, miraculously, a hero, Mitt Romney, comes to the rescue. He rides in to vanquish the evil Chicagoan back to the cesspool he emerged from.
Whenever things look their darkest, a white knight saves the day. Just like in the fairy tales.
November 6th will go down in history as the day America finally came to it's senses, and flushed Obama down the Democratic toilet.
WOW! A hero? You have just been nominated for most delusional comment of the day.
Romney = businessman as ambulance chaser = lawyer
Rumney is going around saying he's gonna win kinda remind me of bagdagh bob" pay no attention to that tank behind me, it's not really there" I guess he don't know that in order for him to win, he got to get more votes, and in about two new swing state polls the President is up by 5 points, and that's not in Ohio. In Ohio the President is up by three points. Rumney had a little momentum after the first debate, but he has been frozen every sense. so whatever rumney picked up, he loosing....big time. The election is not about motivation, this is about determination, we are determined to not let rumney get to Washington. rumney out sourced jobs to A Communist Country, China, that alone is enough Vote for the President
Tony,
Why don't you take a couple of remedial writing and spelling classes so you don't come across as just another stupid liberal??
Joseph E. Parent;
Tony may very well be a "tenured" union teacher.
Tony: Which President/Party signed NAFTA which allowed people like Romney to send jobs outside of the country?
Neither party is innocent in this mess.
Romney saying he's going to win reminds me of GWB when he said it.
The fix is in.
Tina gets it right again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLICHdAKAzM
I've been writing about the abolition of electoral voting for several years. It is as antique as the wig powder the Founding Fathers used on their hair. They enfranchised only White Male Property Owners. This 18th century electoral voting gimmick has failed in 1876 (involving Florida), 1888 and again in 2000.
I don't want anyone to get "Gored" in this election, but the way things look, our next president could win only 21 states, lose the popular vote -- only to win in the electoral voting! This is downright un-American.
Electoral voting needs to go the way of wig powder.
Dixie Swanson
Actually the EC is very American.
Click on link: What's Wrong with the National Popular Vote?
Mike Oregon is mostly a "red" state except the I5 coridor which is a very small portion of the state but with more populace than the rest. Tell me how it is fair that Oregon is blue when only a small part of the whole entire state is? My vote truly does not count! Popular Vote is the way to go...every vote counts!
Democracy is not American as you seem to believe, we are a republic.
@JoeandKarissa Jardine: Do you live in Portland?
If not, why would a candidate care at all about your vote? 57% of Oregon lives in the Portland metro area. (So: Eugene? Salem? The rest of the state? Who cares?)
A popular vote system turns the country into an NFL-ocracy.
Liberals are getting ready to whine and gnash teeth I see if Obama loses.
And the opposite is what? "Conservatives" will whine and gnash teeth? And why? There are more similarities between Obama and Romney than there are differences. If a miracle happens and neither are elected, then my teeth are safe, otherwise I will be gnashing.
I'd vote for Romney if he wasn't a cultist, warmonger, liar, won't show 10 years of tax returns, plus hidden off shore accounts, and if Eddie Munster wasn't his running mate.. yeah maybe I'd think about it. I live in a custom cave that is 100% off the grid, I know I can tough it out if Romney is elected, the rest of the World, not so sure..look at the War record of the last two Republicans. Dictator Georgios our last appointed Emperor and master of the universe Dick of Chaney proved you can pretty much use the Constitution as toilet paper to start wars for any made up reason.
Benghazi lasted over 7 hours. A drone was sending back live video to the White house. Who in that house so white decided to let our guys die?
We had military assets that could of had boots on the ground within 1 hour.
The last email sent sent from the Safe house was 6 hours after the fight started.
Who in that house so white decided tio let our guys die?
That is the question I ask all Americans.
Democrat or Republican someone in that house so white let our boys die and watched it on live video.
You are totally clueless, and your post makes you look very foolish.
FOX News, I'm surprised the human society hasn't filed charges against them for beating dead horse's. Auntie Anna, Dictator Georgios had reports on his desk warning of 9/11.. if only he had read them. Did you know it is a proven fact Dictator Georgios Bush-Maximus left papers on his desk for days without reading them, he didin't like to.. his words.
I've been writing for several years about simple changes in our nation's governance that could make it easier for us to solve our problems. #1 on my hit parade is the abolition of electoral voting.
The Founding Fathers crafted a beautiful 18th century document in the Constitution. However, these men (who powdered their hair with wig powder) gave the vote only to White Male Property Owners as well as creating the electoral voting process to prevent big states like Pennsylvania from dominating little states like Delaware.
This is the 21st Century. We have abandoned slavery, extended the vote to all persons over the age of eighteen. The electoral voting process has already failed three times: in 1876, 1888 and famously in 2000.
It may well fail again. I don't want anyone to "get Gored."
This time, the person who wins could do so while winning a) less than the popular vote and b)as well as taking as few as 21 states.
Electoral voting is as antique as wig powder. It has to go.
Dixie Swanson
antiquated election system, by design it is so because it can be manipulated, Republicans know how to work it and the best part get away with it while blaming Democrats.
@Boromir: Yeah... it is so obvious! The GOP has it totally rigged since there's no need to show ID in most states!
Yes, that's sarcasm.
The EC has been around since before there were political parties, let alone the GOP.
Wait a minute Dixie,
I always powder my wig.
I hope Romney wins - and I hope it's by a large margin so that this won't even be a discussion.
Joe, I am glad you powder your wig. Do you use the lavender scented powder or the orange scent. You can make it last longer if you stretch it with white flour.
Really, guys, check out my website for NON-PARTISAN suggestions on how to improve our governance. We need some serious rule changes, and abolition of electoral voting is just one. Anyone remember the Line Item Veto? There are several more on the website.
Dixie
The Left wing Liberals would love to do away with the electoral College to give them an edge in the elections for President. Our founders put article II in the Constitution to prevent the more populace states from controlling the elections. How would you like to live in a country that was controlled by states like New York and California. We would already be bankrupt