Archive

Who will win the 2012 presidentail election?

  • fish82
    Ty Webb;1280873 wrote:You mean the same Rasmussen who had McCain winning by 4 points the Saturday before the Election??
    Must have been a different one, since Rasmussen had Obie up 4-7 points from September on. :rolleyes:
  • Ty Webb
    fish82;1280894 wrote:Must have been a different one, since Rasmussen had Obie up 4-7 points from September on. :rolleyes:
    I was watching him on Fox News the Saturday before and he said they had McCain up 4
  • fish82
    Ty Webb;1280898 wrote:I was watching him on Fox News the Saturday before and he said they had McCain up 4
    You were obviously drunk.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#polls
  • Ty Webb
    Considering I don't drink...no I wasn't.
  • QuakerOats
    Ty Webb;1280904 wrote:Considering I don't drink...no I wasn't.
    He meant Kool Aid
  • fish82
    Ty Webb;1280904 wrote:Considering I don't drink...no I wasn't.
    Then I suggest starting, stat. ;)
  • sleeper
    I think Gary Johnson wins- big.
  • isadore
    FatHobbit;1280830 wrote:
    gosh a ruddie,1948 a democratic president stuck with a do nothing congress and running against a republican stiff backed by big money pulls out a big win by carrying ohio, florida and virginia.
  • Footwedge
    FatHobbit;1280841 wrote:I guess my point is, until they count the votes nothing has been determined. All the polls in the world mean jack shit.
    Romney's chances of winning are about the same as a poker player hitting an outside straight (open on both sides). He's a 4 to 1 underdog according to the bookies.

    Romney blew the election in 2 ways.

    1. The rolling eyeballs claim that 47% of Americans want the government to take care of them.
    2. Alligning himself with all of these neocons that Bush had as comrades that lead to the never ending clusterfuck in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    CNN will call the election before midnight.
  • QuakerOats
    Footwedge;1281102 wrote:CNN will call the election before midnight.

    You're right about that .....and then we can begin sifting through the carnage left by obama and begin to move on. Looking forward to it.
  • fish82
    Footwedge;1281102 wrote:Romney's chances of winning are about the same as a poker player hitting an outside straight (open on both sides). He's a 4 to 1 underdog according to the bookies.

    Romney blew the election in 2 ways.

    1. The rolling eyeballs claim that 47% of Americans want the government to take care of them.
    2. Alligning himself with all of these neocons that Bush had as comrades that lead to the never ending cluster**** in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    CNN will call the election before midnight.
    Rest assured that CNN will try and call the election as soon as humanly possible.

    That said, it will be after midnight.
  • justincredible
    sleeper;1280993 wrote:I think Gary Johnson wins- big.
    This.

    But seriously, I think it's a tossup at this point.
  • Commander of Awesome
    Ty Webb;1280898 wrote:I was watching him on Fox News the Saturday
    lol, talk about a garbage station.
  • gut
    Commander of Awesome;1281404 wrote:lol, talk about a garbage station.
    IDK....better than CNN and MSNBC. Consistently 20%+ higher ratings than those 2 COMBINED, so they must be doing something right.
  • stlouiedipalma
    QuakerOats;1280868 wrote:Ya think. http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/328555/mornings-polls-project-more-heavily-democratic-electorates-2008


    Today's polls by a couple of these outfits pertaining to OH and FL are simply laughable. The oversampling of democrats renders them completely moot.

    The # 1 most accurate poll in '08, Rasmussen, is the only one worthy of watching.
    Spoken like a true disciple of Bill O'Reilly and Karl Rove. I watched Karl's "Tim Russert" impersonation last night on The Factor and you seem to have seen it too. Almost word for word, like a true believer.

    I will agree with you on the inaccuracies of ALL of the polls, with the exception of Nate Silver and his 538 blog. Nate's track record speaks for itself.
  • QuakerOats
    stlouiedipalma;1281530 wrote:Spoken like a true disciple of Bill O'Reilly and Karl Rove. I watched Karl's "Tim Russert" impersonation last night on The Factor and you seem to have seen it too. Almost word for word, like a true believer.
    Missed it ....... don't need them, or any others, when one has common sense. The Ohio poll was so badly skewed (had 48% of the votes coming from dems --- LAUGHABLE --- they only had 40% in '08 when bammer was flying high) that anyone with half a brain can figure it out. Romney is up 20 points in the 6th district; it is over for obama.
  • gut
    QuakerOats;1281535 wrote:Missed it ....... don't need them, or any others, when one has common sense. The Ohio poll was so badly skewed (had 48% of the votes coming from dems --- LAUGHABLE --- they only had 40% in '08 when bammer was flying high) that anyone with half a brain can figure it out. Romney is up 20 points in the 6th district; it is over for obama.
    It's a lot closer than the liberal media would have us believe or Obama would not be blowing off his presidential duties (more than usual) to hit the campaign trail HARD.
  • stlouiedipalma
    QuakerOats;1281535 wrote:Missed it ....... don't need them, or any others, when one has common sense. The Ohio poll was so badly skewed (had 48% of the votes coming from dems --- LAUGHABLE --- they only had 40% in '08 when bammer was flying high) that anyone with half a brain can figure it out. Romney is up 20 points in the 6th district; it is over for obama.
    Well, you go on believing what you want. Just let me be the first one to offer you a heaping plateful of crow on November 7th. As much fun as it was to hear the conservatives' excuses four years ago, it will be really hilarious to hear the loud sound of whining and tears this time.
  • fish82
    gut;1281536 wrote:It's a lot closer than the liberal media would have us believe or Obama would not be blowing off his presidential duties (more than usual) to hit the campaign trail HARD.
    This. If the margin was as comfortable as we're being led to believe, he wouldn't have been such a ghost in NYC this past week.
  • believer
    gut;1281536 wrote:It's a lot closer than the liberal media would have us believe or Obama would not be blowing off his presidential duties (more than usual) to hit the campaign trail HARD.
    Exactly.

    This whole scenario is very much like what we saw in 1980. Most of the polls and the media were predicting a Carter victory over Reagan by a comfortable margin. And we all know what happened on election day.

    No way I think Romney wins by a landslide, but it's absolutely absurd to think Obama already has a lock on his re-election bid.
  • wkfan
    gut;1281536 wrote:It's a lot closer than the liberal media would have us believe or Obama would not be blowing off his presidential duties (more than usual) to hit the campaign trail HARD.
    Even the ultra-liberal reporter on the Today show this morning said "Secretary of State Hilliary Clinton met with President Benjamin Netanyahu as President Barach Obama was too busy on the campaign trail to meet with him regarding the nuclear situation in Iran".

    Seriously...too busy campaigning??
  • wkfan
    stlouiedipalma;1281537 wrote:Well, you go on believing what you want. Just let me be the first one to offer you a heaping plateful of crow on November 7th. As much fun as it was to hear the conservatives' excuses four years ago, it will be really hilarious to hear the loud sound of whining and tears this time.
    I think that the election will be close and that BHO is not a lock at this point.

    The tears will be from those who value the Constitution of the United States of America and fear, as I do, what 4 more years of a lame-duck President Obama will bring to our country. Should he win another term, what our country looks like on January 20, 2017 will bear no resemblence to anything that this country has been about for the last 241 years.
  • BoatShoes
    fish82;1281545 wrote:This. If the margin was as comfortable as we're being led to believe, he wouldn't have been such a ghost in NYC this past week.
    You may be right. But maybe it's just that these Chicago dems know how to go for throat unlike dems of the past eh?
  • BoatShoes
    believer;1281644 wrote:Exactly.

    This whole scenario is very much like what we saw in 1980. Most of the polls and the media were predicting a Carter victory over Reagan by a comfortable margin. And we all know what happened on election day.

    No way I think Romney wins by a landslide, but it's absolutely absurd to think Obama already has a lock on his re-election bid.
    It is nothing like 1980. There were way more swing states back then, there's no moderate republican to take away votes from frustrated Obama supporters (i.e. John Anderson); there was no brutal challenge to Obama from within his own party; the economy is on the upswing (albeit slowly) and despite their trying, conservatives aren't going to be able to turn the unfortunate events in Libya into the Iran hostage crisis.
  • QuakerOats
    BoatShoes;1282168 wrote:conservatives aren't going to be able to turn the unfortunate events in Libya into the Iran hostage crisis.
    You've got to be kidding me. "Unfortunate events" ?????? ....... exactly what liberal appeasers like to re-label assassinations and terrorist attacks. INCREDIBLE.

    Our ambassadors are getting assassinated by terrorists, the president is LYING about it, the media is covering it up for him, and you and your liberal elite friends in high places call it an unfortunate event.

    Pis$ off.