[Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

[Skywalker_T-65]

I can't believe I forgot how close it is to election day...I need to get out and vote for Obama now...

[Blayne]

Anyone else here think that the real reason for all the US gov't internet hub hub was so they could manage to cram even more ads in our faces? Thankfully I think its IP locked so I haven't noticed very many from Canada but I hear its been a problem.

538 has Obama at 300+ EV's if it hasn't been mentioned, I think its hovering at 79 to 80% chance to win; I think Sandy may have been the last nail in the Romney-Ryan coffin. Unfortunately this will probably mean 2016 will revert back to the GOP I think based on previous election cycles?... Or maybe not a quick look at Wikipedia shows only a very small sample size for having one party holding office for more than 2 terms under different people. I think Reagon A, B and then George H.W Bush is three terms in a row; so maybe we can get a democrat for one more after that based on this.

Talked with a very ardent 'Republican' the other day on teamspeak, it was kinda sad. He refused to really address my points and just focused on how 'rude' I was (moreso than Biden apparently) despite the fact that I not once insulted him while he insulted me several times. He parroted the "US Navy is smaller than in WWII" line, that Obama is apparently UnAmerican and that 538 is 'biased' because its from the NYT's which are Liberal because NYC is Liberal...

[Crossroads Inc.]

Unfortunately this will probably mean 2016 will revert back to the GOP I think based on previous election cycles?... Or maybe not a quick look at Wikipedia shows only a very small sample size for having one party holding office for more than 2 terms under different people. I think Reagon A, B and then George H.W Bush is three terms in a row; so maybe we can get a democrat for one more after that based on this.

As far as I am concerned the Presidency may be outside of the Republicans hands for quite some time, perhaps another Decade or more.

Changing demographics, Latinos starting to vote more, younger people being less religious and less hung up about Social and religious issues, and of course the GOP itself growing more and more extreme... All of these together will make it very very difficult for the GOP to field a credible candidate to win the general election.
State by state the Right wing may become more entranced in power, but when it comes to the presidential race, the shift is growing more and more in the Democrats favor.

And as I pontificated upon earlier, come 2016, It is a strong bet that Hillary may run for President and with four years of Presidential experience under her belt, She has a good chance of winning.

As of right now, the main problem for the GOP is that the base has grown so crazy and wacko, that any candidate Right enough to win the nomination, is going to be by default TOO right wing to win the general election.

[Blayne]

It is possible that the GOP simply decides that they need to swing back towards being moderate, adjusting the rules if need be so the backroomers have more influence, like a 40-60 split.

Or maybe they could split into a fiscal conservative libertarian economic party and the crazies become the fringe party who knows? Two party system's like the US I would think would highly discourage that as it incentivizes all the different groups to agree to agree to disagree in order to defeat the party that they most disagree with for the party they vaguely agree with due to the vote splitting effect.

[Block]

This isn't surprising at all, but it never ceases to amaze just how low Mitt and his ilk will sink.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... w/1672501/

Just a few days ago, Chrysler reported that it had its best September sales in five years and that its third-quarter profit was up 80 percent over 2011. Since 2009, Chrysler has hired more than 7,000 workers in the United States and is hiring thousands more, starting with adding an additional shift at a plant in Detroit that builds the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

And while Mitt Romney sticks to his false Chrysler narrative, an even more damning story about the dirty dealing of Mitt Romney's investment partners during the 2009 restructuring of GM is beginning to emerge.

Mitt Romney and his partners made a killing on the GM bankruptcy by gaining control of bankrupt parts supplier Delphi, then threatening to withhold components critical to the production of GM vehicles. Romney's business partners were willing to force GM into liquidation and cause a national economic calamity unless they got more money. In the end, the Romney investor group got what it wanted and earned a profit of more than 3,000 percent on its initial investment.

[SirNitram]

It is possible that the GOP simply decides that they need to swing back towards being moderate, adjusting the rules if need be so the backroomers have more influence, like a 40-60 split.

Or maybe they could split into a fiscal conservative libertarian economic party and the crazies become the fringe party who knows? Two party system's like the US I would think would highly discourage that as it incentivizes all the different groups to agree to agree to disagree in order to defeat the party that they most disagree with for the party they vaguely agree with due to the vote splitting effect.

Or, in accordance with all evidence to date, they will become more unhinged, more rightwing, and heighten the purges of the impure. You know, if you want something based on what they keep doing.

[Irbis]

As far as I am concerned the Presidency may be outside of the Republicans hands for quite some time, perhaps another Decade or more.

Changing demographics, Latinos starting to vote more, younger people being less religious and less hung up about Social and religious issues, and of course the GOP itself growing more and more extreme... All of these together will make it very very difficult for the GOP to field a credible candidate to win the general election.
State by state the Right wing may become more entranced in power, but when it comes to the presidential race, the shift is growing more and more in the Democrats favor.

I heard the same thing after 2008. Decade of "uninterrupted Democratic majority". Guess what happened in 2010 elections?

And now, in 2012, we were briefly faced with prospect of Mitt winning, a candidate that isn't really Tea Party one, pushed by his top crone backers. I similarly doubt we will ever see true Tea Party candidate unless they manage to grab party leadership first, and wicked, sociopathic 1% Romney-like types in charge will never go along with it. Tea Party propaganda is opium for masses, rich bosses will never believe in it. It's just contrary to what they are, and they have little reason to let go of reigns of power even if it means going to opposition for a while, IMHO.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Did I ever say anything about Congressional or Senate races?
My prediction apply purely to the Presidential race, if anything state by state, the GOP may get MORE power in the years to come. But (IMHO) the Presidential election is going to be something they are going to be fcked in.

In other news, recently an e-mil sent from Newt Gingrinch personal e-mail address says "Obama will win"

An email message mistakenly sent to Newt Gingrich's list serve this morning told subscribers that President Obama would no doubt win in 2012 and that they should be more worried about Obama's winning in 2016.

That's right, despite the 22nd Amendment, which limits any one person to two presidential terms, the email that went out to Gingrich's supporters suggests President Obama would be running again in 2016, and possibly serve through 2020.

The email, titled "What's really at stake this Tuesday ..." came from Gingrich Marketplace and went out to people who'd given their contact information to the Gingrich campaign when the former speaker of the House was still in the presidential race. Bygone candidates, such as Gingrich and Herman Cain, regularly rent out their email address lists to advertisers.

"The truth is, the next election has already been decided. Obama is going to win. It's nearly impossible to beat an incumbent president," advertiser Porter Stansberry wrote in the email to Gingrich supporters. "What's actually at stake right now is whether or not he will have a third-term."
Conservative news group Human Events manages the Gingrich Marketplace emails, but Gingrich has a say over which advertisers can have their messages go out to the list. And according to Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond, Stansberry & Associates should have been on the blacklist.

"We do not rent to the entity in question," Hammond said, speaking by phone Thursday. "In fact, we go to lengths to vet where we rent."
Human Events Vice President Joe Guerriero said the email was "a mistake."

"It was actually scheduled to run on another of our lists," Guerriero said. His team has been investigating how the Stansberry message went out to the Gingrich group.

Stansberry & Associates is run by Porter Stansberry, who in 2003 was the subject of an SEC lawsuit in which the court found he participated in an online newsletter scheme that defrauded investors out of $1 million. Stansberry was ordered to pay $120,000 in damages.

Here's the catch to the email. To learn how Obama would circumvent the 22nd Amendment, Gingrich subscribers were asked to click on a link to Stanberry's site and watch a video presentation. We won't bore you with those details. We're skeptical, to say the least, of the argument.

Gingrich endorsed Republican rival Mitt Romney when Gingrich left the race last May. At the top and bottom of his emails, there is a disclaimer for readers, in part saying, "the following message reflects the opinions and representations of our advertiser alone."

Keep in mind Gingrinch himself did not actually write the E-mail, his e-mail address was "Rented out" to someone else. The story here such as it is, is a company which was known for Fraud and should have been on his blacklist still got access to the account. It's more an embarrassment then anything else.

In other OTHER news.. Anyone wishing for a "Good Loud Laugh", Two columnists over at a Right Wing website have recently done two hilarious posts on how Romney will not only Win, but clean Obama's clock!
You can read those HERE and HERE
Good stuff for anyone needing a laugh.

[Irbis]

Did I ever say anything about Congressional or Senate races?
My prediction apply purely to the Presidential race, if anything state by state, the GOP may get MORE power in the years to come. But (IMHO) the Presidential election is going to be something they are going to be fcked in.

I don't know. All these videos of Grey how it is possible to grab the President office with 20% of popular vote or pick president in Congress/Senate in case no one has 50% EV majority (quite possible if any third party arises) which you said might be taken by Republican types doesn't sound optimistic.

If, say, Republican party splits into Tea Party and "Centrists" that, no longer encumbered by Tea Insanity, will capture some independents/undecided, Democrats being now largest party might not be enough. Poland is similar to USA in many respects during voting, and two largest parties here are both right-wing. One just split from the insane right-wingers and is now pretending it's "centrist" while really still having mix of insane religious right and uncaring pro-business cronies behind the wheel in secret. Same with our presidential elections, thanks to the two large party backing it's mostly choice between insane conspiracy theorist and "merely" XIXth century guy known from his hunting obsession, ridiculing women and gay equal rights and favouring 'traditional family values' - he only appears normal next to the other one.

[Blayne]

It is possible that the GOP simply decides that they need to swing back towards being moderate, adjusting the rules if need be so the backroomers have more influence, like a 40-60 split.

Or maybe they could split into a fiscal conservative libertarian economic party and the crazies become the fringe party who knows? Two party system's like the US I would think would highly discourage that as it incentivizes all the different groups to agree to agree to disagree in order to defeat the party that they most disagree with for the party they vaguely agree with due to the vote splitting effect.

Or, in accordance with all evidence to date, they will become more unhinged, more rightwing, and heighten the purges of the impure. You know, if you want something based on what they keep doing.

My thoughts is that I find it unlikely that a national party like the GOP would knowingly continue to follow a strategy that denies them the presidency and that eventually something has to give. Either they split or become more moderate, as there's just too many career politicians and 'reasonably' intelligent people within the GOP for them to keep going as they are, without either losing defections to the Democrats or my personal ideal splitting into two right wing parties allowing the Democrats to shift leftwards again.

When O'Reilly comes across as more reasonable than the majority of the GOP talking heads something is deeply wrong, I might even take his comment of " There's going to be three parties soon." Might even be a hint.

[Crossroads Inc.]

My thoughts is that I find it unlikely that a national party like the GOP would knowingly continue to follow a strategy that denies them the presidency and that eventually something has to give. Either they split or become more moderate, as there's just too many career politicians and 'reasonably' intelligent people within the GOP for them to keep going as they are, without either losing defections to the Democrats or my personal ideal splitting into two right wing parties allowing the Democrats to shift leftwards again.

When O'Reilly comes across as more reasonable than the majority of the GOP talking heads something is deeply wrong, I might even take his comment of " There's going to be three parties soon." Might even be a hint.

This IS The Republican party we are talking about. Thisis the art that sacrificed dozens of moderates for more radical Tea Party members, and then saw many of them go down in flames to more moderate Democratic canidates. "Logic' is not a big hallmark of the party...

The GOP is reaping the end product of close to 40 years of rampant indoctrination, echo chambers and fears and lies. The only way they could keep people under their power was to feed them ever increasing lies and distortions of Liberals in America. Turning them from people they just disagree with, to people who are out to activly destroy America and cackle with evil glee at the though of the downful of Good Christian Values.

The problem is the Republican base is so rampantly mad and crazy, they just don't CARE anymore. No matter how many electiosn they loose, or how bad they do, their solution to every problem is "Get MORE conservative!" I consider it impossible for the party to change, REALLY change for maybe another 30 years or so when the current elite start to die off from old age and younger more moderate peole grow up.

Until that happens, IF it ever happens, the right will grow more crazed. And as far as third party goes... Third parties have be shown over and over again to just Not work in America. Teddy Roosevelt was one of the most popular Presidents ever, and even HE couldn't win as a third party. As crazy as Republicans are I cannot seem the physically splitting into a new third party.

But if. IF they did It would not be some new rebirth that we would have to fear, instead it would utterly and totally cripple them for years to come. In every 'battleground' state, anywhere where elections are close, Democrats would start winning constantly as Republican votes are split. It would be a total disastor for them.

No matter how you look at it, the future of the Republican party is one of increasing crazy and nutcases.
Now do not mistake this for saying they are not dangerous, if anything it will give them even more conviction, and we will have to fight them that much more.

[Blayne]

Isn't the tea party candidates losing to democrats in purple states a result of the Tea party candidate primary'ing out the more moderate Republican? As I'm Canadian I'm not 100% sure on this but aren't candidates chosen through primaries and not by the 'GOP' as a whole? So I'm not entirely sure if "sacrificed" is entirely accurate. Additionally aren't the GOP 'base' that vote in primaries only a relatively small % of the total population and relatively small share of the GOP party as a whole? I could see the GOP leadership/old guard simply changing the rules around to marginalize the more radial fringe until the base shifts over to a more moderate pool of party goers.

This is why I feel that a split might be possible, the social conservative and fiscal conservative pseudo libertarian wings may not have nearly as much overlap as they used to and that is where the fault line may run, especially as the party gets younger members who care less about social issues. I see enough newspaper stories of some Bush or Reagon era Republican extolling how terrible their party has become or even supporting Obama to suspect this isn't isolated but a trend.

[Luke Skywalker]

Breaking news: Mitt Romney gets a new billionaire sponsor.

[Dalton]

Obama up slightly in the 538 forecast to 303.4/81.1% but down very slightly in the popular vote by .1%.

Edit: old data. 303.7/81.4%/50.5%.

[Skywalker_T-65]

So it is looking more and more like Obama is going to win.

Good...and very good for my Mom. She works with a VERY Republican boss, and in an insurance company. Thus, lots of cranky old Republicans. She's already planning on celebrating and putting stuff up in her office should Obama win

[Dalton]

Is she in a Right to Work state?

[Skywalker_T-65]

If Missouri is one, yes. I don't know though.

[Skywalker_T-65]

Either way though, she just wants to prank her boss

(they're really good friends, politics aside)

[Dalton]

Updated again. 304.8/82.7%/50.5%

[Crossroads Inc.]

Florida is also down to 54% to Romney, down from over 60% less then a week ago... Things are looking very good indeed as we get to the end of this circus.

[Skywalker_T-65]

My family was having bad feelings about this (we support Obama) until I started to inform them of the things I watch leaning heavily in his direction. Now they are hopeful, just like I am.

EDIT: It should also be a sign of the times in that this is the first election I'm old enough to vote in (already voted Obama), and I am more well-informed about this than my family. This is a good sign in my book, since the more people there are like me (at my age) the better.

[LadyTevar]

The Ed Show, Rachel Maddow, and The Last Word all focused some of their shows on what's going on in Florida.

The level of GOP asshattery is mind-blowing. A ballot 10pages long. Lines three blocks long to vote, but the Governor not only refusing to open polls longer, but cutting early voting hours. Voters being removed from voting lists without review or notice. Computerized voting machines breaking. Ballots misprinted, or made the wrong size to fit in the machines (forcing poll workers to COPY THE BALLOTS OVER), and finally, absentee ballots missing or never delivered to the voters.

In Ohio, its' even worse. Voters registrations lost, computers erasing current voters, True The Vote "poll watchers" vowing to challenge Questionable Voters. And the misinformation being handed out about changed polling places/dates/times....

No wonder International Watchers are coming in to make sure the vote is ran fairly. All evidence so far points to NO it's NOT.

[Dalton]

The GOP cannot win fairly so they are sending out their goon squads to the two most hotly contended swing states. Fortunately Obama can still win without them.

[Slacker]

Equally importantly, Obama could well win one of those two states *despite* those efforts.

I don't think he's going to win Florida. I do think he's going to take Ohio.

[UnderAGreySky]

NYT interactive Battleground State Math calculator

Obama has 431 ways to win, Romney 76. Five ways to tie.

Using that - and it's bloody good - shows me that
1) Obama wins Florida: Romney has literally one way to win: win ALL other states (Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire)
2) Obama loses Florida: Obama still has 176 ways to win, Romney has 75. Let's say NC goes to Romney too (likely right now), it's 66 to 58. Sounds close, but it actually means that now Romney needs to win Ohio to be a little more safe, else win a LOT of other states (min 4 others, most involve Virginia).
3) Obama wins Ohio (with Florida undecided): 244 v/s 11. Those 11 are incredibly improbable.
4) Obama loses Ohio (with Florida undecided): still 187/65. And if Romney doesn't take Florida, he has to win EVERYTHING else.

Play around with it, I know I will