2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Going to go ahead and start a new thread to discuss this, instead of continuing to use the 'first debate' thread.

Also a good visual aide:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/...ctoral-map#map

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Let's see some predictions before the results start coming in later tonight.

I will keep 289-249, Romney.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

I'll go

Obama: 309
Romney: 229

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

281 Obama
257 Romney

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

This is not cool. RCP is releasing numbers before polls close across the country. This is the type of crap that can influence voting.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

That seems realistic. I'll throw in a wrinkle. Romney wins the popular vote.

Another wrinkle: In the aftermath of a FUBAR election, America hate-fucks itself to death. But I'm an optimist... :D

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Ha, your dreaming here. No chance.

Im not going to make any predictions except for Obama will win, and its not as close as everyone is thinking.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Lol I'm on the same page as you.

If Romney wins I'm gonna be shocked.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Florida is sooooo close. If Obama takes it, it's definitely over though.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

He's barely winning, but as I said yesterday I think he'll win there.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

So much for PA being in play. I knew it was a last minute desperate strategy for Romney. McCain tried the same thing.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Not looking good for Romney right now.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Florida might as well be over with Miami county only coming in with 54% of the votes currently. You know those remaining votes will be primairly Obama.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Ohio! Hahaha!!! That's it!

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

That's all she wrote. I still think Obama will get 300, but we'll see lol

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Somewhere Clint Eastwood is shooting a chair full of .44s

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

So Obama broke 300 before even getting florida lol. Also won the popular vote.

Anyone who paid attention to the polls saw this coming. It's sad that the media's spin on things made it seem like it would be so much closer. Heck even last night CBS and Fox were quick to say "Obama lost the popular vote" like it was already over. I think this election more then any other before shows the conspiracy by the media to get more people worked up about the election to help ratings.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

In end end, nothing has changed. Republican controlled Congress, a Dem controlled Senate, and a Pres. re-elected without the mandate he needed to put Republican lawmakers on their heels. I hope everyone liked the last two years, because we're about to get more of the same.

Congrats?:unsure:

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

I'll take more of the same over certainly worse.

http://isnatesilverawitch.com/

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

In the end I think it was less Nate Silver's brilliance, and more turn out and Sandy ending Romney's momentum and the optics bringing the undecided vote to Pres. Obama.

There is one thing Nate's models can't predict, that is turn out, and if this election proves anything it is that young people are fully engaged and eager to vote. 2008 was not an anomaly. If Republicans want to be able to compete in the future, they are going to have to move towards Bond and I, offering visions of economic AND SOCIAL freedom, and not simply economic freedom. The single woman and Latino vote killed them this year, while social conservatives are a base on the verge of election irrelevancy. Somehow I think they're try and tack farther right, though... definition of insanity and all...

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Same here. I mean, I don't want change for the sake of change. I want change I agree with.

It is sad that no progressive policies are going to go through and we are still going to be at the whim of reactionaries, though.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

1) You got the change you agreed with in 2008

2) He passed exactly what he wanted for 2 years when he controlled government.

You have received what you asked for. But as I've often said when it comes progressive policy, the overriding reaction to failure tends to be "We just need to do it HARDER!"

At the very least we should get gridlock, and gridlock is much better than another Dodd-Frank or other interventionist policies that have frozen growth.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

I'm not displeased with what I got the first four years, which is why I voted for him again.

I do think more could have been done, and more could be done that won't be done.

And I don't think he passed everything he wanted during those two years. Dems compromised on things they really didn't have to.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Time for republicans to change their strategy and get out of that radical far right wing mentality. If we get more of the same, it's just going to hurt the republicans more come next election.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Also I think Germanator won the prediction contest.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Sandy did not end Romney's "Romentum". It had already ended. Romney peaked with the week following the Denver debate and was still losing. It was a lot closer at that point, but Obama made back whatever he lost in the three weeks following. Sandy was politically helpful for Obama as callous as it sounds, but the cake was already in the oven.

And I guess I was too conservative in my predictions...I thought Romney might flip more than just NC and Indiana.

On another note: It's pretty awesome news that Maine, Maryland, and Washington state voted on pro-gay marriage referendums. Makes me feel better about things. Also that both Aiken and Mourdock lost after their ridiculous rape comments...

Also: I don't smoke marijuana, but congrats to Colorado and Washington for passing laws for recreational use. We'll see what the Federal government does, but I feel like that's a step in the right direction.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Not when you look at trends from RCP polling aggregates prior to the election. The last week saw an incredible spike for the Pres. along with Romney going flat when previously he had slowed, but steady, polling growth. If you look back at my posts you'll see I had a considerable shift in election opinion once Sandy hit.

Oh, and Chris Matthews agrees with me:



Classy guy, that one.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

I felt like if anything, the storm took away one of Romney's key talking points that Obama couldn't work across the aisle when he worked alongside one of the most prominent Republican governors for the relief effort.

Also, nothing to do with anything, but I think Donald Trump has completely checked out

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

It will be interesting to see the policy stance shift in the next four years regarding war with Iran. Predictions are that under Obama, there will be a further focus on the Southeast Asian region, whereas Romney with his lobbyist (Netanyahu) support would have been much more likely to engage Iran.

"However, he showed a lack of moral character when he let American generals intensify the use of killing drones in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, thus killing thousands of people, many of them innocent civilians. He has surprisingly demonstrated a lack of respect for civil liberties, going as far as claiming for his administration the right to target even American citizens for extrajudicial assassinations." --Professor Dr Rodrigue Tremblay
This should be of concern to anyone who thinks in terms of inalienable rights. For Obama to codify into law extra judicial killings of American citizens(and by proxy its allied nations' citizens) is something that Bush wouldn't have been able to get away with. Democrat peace chanties were way too silent on this issue.

Well, the $45+ million that Dupont, Dow Chemical, Monsanto, CocaCola (and brands like Kashi cereals huh) worked in dissuading voters in California to reject proposition 37. Hard to imagine that it actually got voted down since most people (9 in 10) want GMO labeling. Hopefully, like the Colorado decriminalization both movements will generate further referendums in other states. Dr. Mercola donated 1.5$ million to the Yes on Prop 37. Quite an amazing amount.
Anyone who has a family and loved ones should find out more about the health consequences of consuming gmo foods.


Denver = New Amsterdamn?? Apparently Washington state just legalized recreational use as well..

Most likely the DEA will be given the same green light to enforce federal law. Legal response by the federal government will be quick.
Not that I smoke it either, but this could be very important in terms of public health. Juicing the raw plant material and bud (not dried) doesn't have ANY psychoactive affects and produces a neurotransmitter "echo" response that initiates healing on all sorts of levels. Cannabinoids work with the natural endo recepters (it's in mother's breast milk!) and now the black market growers that have been breeding high THC content are now interested in the prospect of breeding in a higher ratio of non-THC cannabinoids back into the strains. This is important, and a good reason to decriminalize but not legalize. Federally supervised growing will wreck this medicinal potential.

Anyway, it's a big issue since you can literally 'cure' crohns disease in a matter of a month or two. Not much is known about the raw-healing qualities of cannabis since it requires large crop yields in order to supply appropriate dosage.
Also, Rick Simpson has brought public awareness to the healing qualities of cannabis oil(not hemp seed oil). He uses different solvents but any high grade alcohol will work. You can treat skin cancer topically with it and see regression literally overnight.

You probably don't know this, but Harper is ready to ratify a free trade agreement with China that would contract our country for 25 years. It stipulates that China can "discreetly sue" the Canadian taxpayers if we as a nation attempt to protect our environment from resource extraction attempts by Chinese companies. The lawsuit would have a publication ban and would be arbitrated by a private third party.
http://elizabethmaymp.ca/news/public...tion-deadline/

Just like NAFTA it would have a net negative effect on Canada's trade. Freaky shit. Our PM has prorogued parliament twice. It's lunacy and unfortunately the Liberal Party will probably have its savior in the form of Justin Trudeau. My country's boned if this is the alternative. "The horror! The horror!"

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Not sure where else to put this.
But the end of Obama's 'fuck you, I won, motherfucker' (I just like to imagine that's what he referred to it as in his own mind) speech was probably one of the best bits of Presidential Speeching I've seen. He was so legitimately passionate about what he was saying, and it completely showed. Hopefully the almost half of people who didn't vote for him watched that, and saw what was clearly there.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Would you like to swap Presidents/Prime Ministers?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Well, I was wrong. No shame in making a prediction (hopefully). I was anticipating a +2-3 D advantage, but it appears as though it was indeed the +6 D advantage as predicted by Nate Silver and Obama's campaign manager (I forget his name).

I'm surprised. But it looks as though the Obama ground game was extremely effective at courting minorities (garnering ~72% of the Hispanic vote and ~91% of the black vote) and young people. Those figures are difficult to overcome when minorities encompass 28% of the electorate. I'd argue this is why the Republican party needs to liberalize its immigration and social platform to widen the tent, but I'll digress.

Anyway, I thought I saw a comment about my prediction being crazy, but I can't find it anymore. Like I said in the first paragraph, it was based on my idea of the electorate composition and not any partisan feeling.

Truth be told, Republicans like Prof and I are in the minority in the GOP these days (arguably the extreme minority). The party needs to promote its fiscal conservatism and silence its social conservatism. I think most Americans remain fiscally conservative and socially liberal -- it's time to pivot to them.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Fuck no.
30 million people and our dollar is on par if not half-of-a-half-of-a cent above yours.
I hate how conservatively conservative that guy his, but I'll stick with Harper, thanks - illusion of a "strong" economy or not. :lol:
He might not know how or when to convey tone in his speeches, and he might have the emotional range of Keanu Reeves doped up on pills, and he may have a Lego-man haircut - but damnit, the guy can run (half of) a country pretty well. ;)

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

He is even more left of Barrack. All of the mainstream political parties in Canada are.

Aside from the joking, I think Americans are seeing the social benefits of moderation and voted as such. It seems that there is a fragmentation developing in the conservative camps, and hopefully this will make them take more liberal stances on things like immigration. On another note, Those Teas Party whack jobs give me the willies.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Yea, that was me. Its earlier in this thread.

Anyways, I somewhat disagree with the notion that the republicans will be as "blocking" if you will of the democrats plans. I feel if they are as bi-partisan as they were the last 4 years it will really come back and backfire on them.

The way I see it, the country has again CLEARLY spoken and said "this is the person we want to lead our country, and we want him and his ideas to be continued." Obama will be much more agressive this time around because he dosent have another election to win. Republicans will be the ones who end up looking stupid, not democrats, if this bi partisanship continues.

In my person opinion without some DRASTIC changes in the Republican party's point of views, they will have a very hard time ever winning another election EVER again. This country is becoming more and more minority and poorer and this obviously is bad for the Republicans. Republicans are dying off, younger democrats are not. More and more minorities reaching legal voting age. I realise this is a huge generalization, but look how much the younger vote, especially minorities, sways democrat.

And for good reason. I can kinda see why a rich person might like Romneys views, but pretty much everyone else? Who knows. Personally I dont get why a median income or poor person would ever vote republican inless they change drastically, but thats just me.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

From my point of view, all of those middle or lower class people who vote for the kind of republican you're talking about have a few things going on in there head:

1. They're voting because they view the Republican party as the Christian party, mostly due to the gay marriage issue.

2. They support giving benefits to the wealthy because they like the idea of the American dream, and they think they could be that wealthy one day.

3. They hate "entitlement" programs. They feel that giving a "handout" to someone is pretty much the most evil thing you can do.

edit:

Also, in my area, and in West Virginia and other south-east states, coal is a huge issue. People blame Obama for coal's decline. They see coal as a lifestyle because it's something their family has been doing for a long time.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

A lot of Christians I know would never vote for the right because of exactly what you just outlined Vampyr.
Social issues take precedent over domestic observances. Maybe it's a Canadian thing and binaries don't rule the day quite as much?

Here, people vote for Harper because we are a resource economy and on a provincial level, the feds have vowed not to mess with regional profit holdings. Mercer makes it funny.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Back to the Hurricane Sandy vs Nate Silver argument: Hurricane Sandy hit on the 29th and 30th. Looking at the chart below, it correlates almost to the day that political fortunes switched. Switch the chart to 30 or 14 days to see the trend.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1171.html

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Yeah, but you're using RCP's averaging numbers, which obviously weren't as correct as Silver's...and I mean that they don't necessarily explain all of it...538 actually has a few more words that go into the details of the polls. I can't take time to find it right now, but if you go to the 538 archives, you can see Silver talking about Romney's momentum ending weeks ago. I'm not sure why you'd keep citing RCP when they weren't as accurate as The Princeton Election Consortium, 538, or this blog http://votamatic.org/election-day-fo...32-romney-206/



I guess here's an example from Sam Wang's site. Basically after the 2nd debate, all the momentum is in Obama's favor. That's well before Sandy.

EDIT: Here is Silver's post regarding Mitt Romney's momentum, dated 10/24.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...-have-stopped/

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
 

Obviously incorrect? How so? Did RCP's aggregate polling estimate that Romney would be the winner? No, if you look at the trends you would guess Pres. Obama would have won re-election. All of these models, if you can call RCP a model since it doesn't make predictions, are based on whether or not they were correct. Both 538, and RCP's polling aggregates, showed strong signs Pres. Obama would win. They both proved correct.

If you look at the trends, and at the movement of undecided voters to Pres. Obama after Sandy, it's very difficult for me to understand how people can say the storm had no effect on voting. Also, please keep in mind I don't think Sandy was the only reason. Youth turnout was huge, and Silver had that nailed, along with single females and minority voting. But Sandy made it an easier victory for Pres. Obama, IMO.