Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Early Election Predictions (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Early Election Predictions
edgmatt
Member
Member # 6449

 - posted      Profile for edgmatt   Email edgmatt       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Based on everything I've seen and heard about both President Obama and Mitt Romney over the years, I predict that Mr. Romney will win by a margin of no worse than %60 of the votes.

So: Romney, 60/40 minimum, 66/34 max.

What's your prediction?

Posts: 1428 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I predict that the popular vote isn't relevent because of the electoral college.

I predict that edgematt's vote will be lost in the ether because he lives in New Jersey, which will go for Obama because of the aforesaid electoral college.


I predict that the Republicans are going to give Ron Paul an opportunity to speak at some point in the convention, the Paul supporters are going to start chanting "President Paul!" and the nation will see Republicans booing eachother at their own convention.

Sorry edgematt, the GOP bet on the wrong horse and we're going to pay for it in Novermber.

[ June 13, 2012, 11:29 PM: Message edited by: Viking_Longship ]

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
President Obama wins re-election. The most charismatic candidate usually wins.
Posts: 3104 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
edgmatt, sorry but you should never make predictions about the future, especially when you're in a really happy mood [Wink] because you can only be disappointed when the events actually occur. It will be very close and will depend on how effectively both sides will spend their money, which may come close to $1B for each. As for, you know, actual issues, right now there is no substantive determinant.

Romney will do whatever he can to distort Obama's actual accomplishments and diminish him personally, all of which will shore up the Republicans that should be voting for him already but aren't thrilled with him, and perhaps attract a few Independent votes. Obama will twist Romney's business experience to make him look like a money-grubbing vulture preying on innocent hard-working Americans, and will explain why Romney is a moderate Democrat at heart.

Romney has no real base in the Republican Party (he's a Massachusetts Governor after all), so he needs to steal votes from wherever he can find them. Obama does have a base and a record that he will use to fire them up so they will come out and vote, but his core support is somewhat frustrated and therefore weaker than it was in 2008. It's only June, so it is still a little too early and too close to call. I predict a 2% victory one way or the other. The turnout will be high because of the aforesaid money that is spent, but it will be a dispirited electorate forced to choose between the cult-Christian or socialist Muslim.

[ June 14, 2012, 08:02 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For Romney to get 60% of the votes will require both Obama and Biden to die just days before the election and for Obama to be replaced on the ticket by... Sarah Palin.

I predict 51%-49% as always

Posts: 10295 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The race looks wide open right now: http://www.electoral-vote.com/, which makes me feel that President Obama has a small advantage, but Governor Romney is doing much better than I expected. If Governor Romney can win North Carolina, Ohio, Missouri, and Florida, I think he can pull off a victory.

I'm afraid that the VP pick is going to sink the Governor's campaign. The President's attacks haven't stuck to Romney. Once a VP is picked, I feel like it's going to be open season.

After the VP pick and the ensuing battles, then we'll have a much better idea of where the two candidates sit.

[ June 14, 2012, 08:42 AM: Message edited by: JoshuaD ]

Posts: 3453 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
Romney will do whatever he can to distort Obama's actual accomplishments and diminish him personally, all of which will shore up the Republicans that should be voting for him already but aren't thrilled with him, and perhaps attract a few Independent votes. Obama will twist Romney's business experience to make him look like a money-grubbing vulture preying on innocent hard-working Americans, and will explain why Romney is a moderate Democrat at heart.

Romney has no real base in the Republican Party (he's a Massachusetts Governor after all), so he needs to steal votes from wherever he can find them.

As best I can tell, Romney's base, his strongest supporters, tend to be the political machine people, people who are Republican for non-ideological reasons. He's like Clinton in that respect, but less slick and keeps his fly zipped.

I predict that Romney's going to pound SSM, which avoids the nasty personal stuff that you predicted, while also avoiding discussion of Obama's record.

Only in America would a candidate run for office on promises to take away health care entitlements. Whew. [Roll Eyes]

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Economy is trending in Romney's favor at the moment. At the same time, Romney has been most powerful when he is more of a concept and less of someone specifically participating in debates and responding to the questions of reporters. I expect the polling lead to flip-flop several times over the summer, and then final shifts to occur after the debates. I think the debates will only shift things 3-4%, but that will be decisive enough for a narrow victory.

And more than half the money spent - at least for Romney and possibly for both - will be spent by Super PACs and not by the Presidential candidates themselves.

Posts: 3682 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
edgmatt
Member
Member # 6449

 - posted      Profile for edgmatt   Email edgmatt       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As interesting as all those posts were (with the exception of Al's) no one made any early predictions, except Donald.
Posts: 1428 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uhhhh. I think I made one.

Did I get blackballed at some point? I noticed I'm not getting any responses anymore.

[ June 14, 2012, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: Grant ]

Posts: 3104 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"As interesting as all those posts were (with the exception of Al's) no one made any early predictions, except Donald."

If I parse that comment correctly, you're saying that my longish response to your gambit was not interesting? In what way was it not interesting? You may not have read it, since you credit Donald with making the only prediction and his was exactly the same as mine. I'm deeply, deeply unoffended. C'mon Grant, let's go make predictions somewhere else where they'll be interesting.

Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
At least somebody appreciates this new dress. Let's dance, Al.
Posts: 3104 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You do look good, you know. How's my combover?
Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Smashing, darling.
Posts: 3104 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by edgmatt:
As interesting as all those posts were (with the exception of Al's) no one made any early predictions, except Donald.

The following look like early predictions to me:

quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
I'm afraid that the VP pick is going to sink the Governor's campaign.

quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
Romney will do whatever he can to distort Obama's actual accomplishments and diminish him personally, all of which will shore up the Republicans that should be voting for him already but aren't thrilled with him, and perhaps attract a few Independent votes. Obama will twist Romney's business experience to make him look like a money-grubbing vulture preying on innocent hard-working Americans, and will explain why Romney is a moderate Democrat at heart.

quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
I predict that Romney's going to pound SSM

quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
I predict that the popular vote isn't relevent because of the electoral college.

I predict that edgematt's vote will be lost in the ether because he lives in New Jersey, which will go for Obama because of the aforesaid electoral college.


I predict that the Republicans are going to give Ron Paul an opportunity to speak at some point in the convention, the Paul supporters are going to start chanting "President Paul!" and the nation will see Republicans booing eachother at their own convention.

...we're going to pay for it in November

quote:
Originally posted by Greg Davidson:
I expect the polling lead to flip-flop several times over the summer, and then final shifts to occur after the debates. I think the debates will only shift things 3-4%, but that will be decisive enough for a narrow victory.

And more than half the money spent - at least for Romney and possibly for both - will be spent by Super PACs and not by the Presidential candidates themselves.



[ June 14, 2012, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete, that wasn't prediction, that was fact. My prediction was 2% either way.
Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Any prediction outside of a 2-4% gap, either way, is ludicrous.

Predicting the winner is somewhat arbitrary at this point; its a statistical dead heat, with most of the drama yet to come. Kinda like betting on a coin toss.

Here's a useful prediction: the success or failure of the Florida voter purge will determine who wins that state. The close stakes of recent presidential contest have led to some very high stakes brinksmanship around the country, which are growing kind of pathetic. Birthers trying to get Obama off the ballot in Arizona, and now this Florida debacle. Sadly, we are developing a new political phenomenon that is even uglier than negative campaigning: disenfranchisement strategies. Its going to get to the point that winning elections is akin to winning nuclear wars; so much damage done to accomplish it that the victory itself becomes absurd.

Posts: 4600 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
Pete, that wasn't prediction, that was fact.

How can a mortal being living in three dimensions assert that a statement in future tense is fact? [Confused]
Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's the constitutional process for splitting a state into two states? We need to split Florida before it turns yet another presidential election into a third world farce.

1876: the First Florida Recount Frenzy results in a compromise where Republicans agreed to sell African American civil rights down the river in exchange for the presidency.

The 2000 Gore Recount until we win strategy

If we can't split Florida, the 49 states should secede from it.

[ June 14, 2012, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just going to split Miami-Dade off? That's an interesting idea. Don't know why the Florida democrats havn't thought of that. Maybe they need all that rural tax money. Or maybe it's the opposite. Maybe it's the rurals who need Miami-Dade's money.
Posts: 3104 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If they can't keep the same time zone, they shouldn't be a state.
Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete, we don't live in only three dimensions... [Wink]
Posts: 10295 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
edgmatt
Member
Member # 6449

 - posted      Profile for edgmatt   Email edgmatt       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Eh, I was looking for vote count, the way I posted mine (60-40). But not many of you want to play along.
Posts: 1428 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by edgmatt:
Eh, I was looking for vote count, the way I posted mine (60-40). But not many of you want to play along.

Thanks for the clarification; I didn't realize you meant %. I have no such predictions. I certainly would not have predicted that a Republican would campaign on "change." [Big Grin]
Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JWatts
Member
Member # 6523

 - posted      Profile for JWatts   Email JWatts   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's very early in the race and the race is likely to be tight, but I'll WAG with:

Romney 50 (range: 48-52)
Obama 49 (range: 47-51)
Other 1

(+/-2%)

Posts: 4700 | Registered: Oct 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But what use is the vote count when the candidate can win the popular vote but lose the election? [Wink]
Posts: 8083 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My prediction: whoever wins, things will remain largely unchanged and the vast majority of those in power, about 90% of them, will remain in power.

panem et circenses

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Pete:] "How can a mortal being living in three dimensions assert that a statement in future tense is fact?"

Using the classic strategy of trying to imagine what a person smarter than I am would think and then thinking that. Besides, in this day and age something can be a fact and not be true. We know from this election cycle that if Obama says "Person X said "Y"" that Romney will say "Can you believe this guy? He said "Y"!?!?!" That would be a fact, and it would not be true.

[WS:] "But what use is the vote count when the candidate can win the popular vote but lose the election?"

Let's just say that it's been a good correlation over 90% of the time so far.

Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G3:
My prediction: whoever wins, things will remain largely unchanged and the vast majority of those in power, about 90% of them, will remain in power.

panem et circenses

Hey we agree on something. Will miracles never cease?
Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nate Silver has been setting up his computer model for predicting the outcome this year, but says too many things can still change for any predictions to mean much. I cannot even understand his model, but agree with that conclusion.

For the moment Obama holds a slight lead, as pretty much everyone agrees. That is most likely to increase as an incumbent president is in a position to do things to give a temporary boost to the economy, he has a lot more campaign workers already on the ground in key states, and he can use the bully pulpit to decide what the headlines say at key moments. That showed when his announcement on same sex marriage took attention away from Republican determination to focus on the economy. There is no point in Obama doing such things this early, but expect him to grab headlines with hot button issues starting after Labor Day.

Expect Obama to win a slim victory by two or three percent unless something spectacular happens in the next five months - like nuclear war between India and Pakistan for instance. That in particular is very unlikely to happen, but SOMETHING unlikely will almost certainly occur. That could let Romney eke out a victory, or make voters support Obama rather than "change horses in the middle of the stream."

[ June 14, 2012, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: hobsen ]

Posts: 4375 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Let's just say that it's been a good correlation over 90% of the time so far.
Actually 98 percent of the time, since there were [ulr=http://www.infoplease.com/spot/prestrivia1.html]four elections where the popular-vote winner did not get the office[/url]: Jackson vs Adams, Tilden vs Hayes, Cleveland vs Harrison, and, of course, Gore vs Bush. [Smile]
Posts: 8083 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hobsen, you're right. The incumbent not only has a record and his challenger doesn't, but the incumbent creates more of it continuously. So, Obama could do whatever he needs in October to sweeten the pot for the necessary additional Independent votes, but Romney can only intensify his attacks (his positive positions are already all out there) and hope that something horrible happens that the electorate will pin (with his help) on Obama. He also pulled one string too early in the last day or so saying that the economy is ENTIRELY Obama's fault. I doubt that one will stick, though.
Posts: 7158 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
starLisa
Member
Member # 2543

 - posted      Profile for starLisa   Email starLisa   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by edgmatt:
Based on everything I've seen and heard about both President Obama and Mitt Romney over the years, I predict that Mr. Romney will win by a margin of no worse than %60 of the votes.

So: Romney, 60/40 minimum, 66/34 max.

What's your prediction?

A margin of 60% would mean 80/20.
Posts: 2066 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I object to this particular bit of revisionism:

"The 2000 Gore Recount until we win strategy"

Neither Gore nor Bush reacted very admirably to the Florida situation, but must everyone ignore the fact that Gore *actually did* get more votes in Florida, and that his wishy-washy strategy was hardly as egregious as Team Bush's bussed in "protests" and aggressive legal onslaught?

Posts: 4600 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
starLisa
Member
Member # 2543

 - posted      Profile for starLisa   Email starLisa   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
What's the constitutional process for splitting a state into two states? We need to split Florida before it turns yet another presidential election into a third world farce.

1876: the First Florida Recount Frenzy results in a compromise where Republicans agreed to sell African American civil rights down the river in exchange for the presidency.

The 2000 Gore Recount until we win strategy

If we can't split Florida, the 49 states should secede from it.

Florida? What about Illinois? I want to make Chicago its own state and let the rest of Illinois merge with Indiana. They could call it Farmville.
Posts: 2066 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
I object to this particular bit of revisionism:

"The 2000 Gore Recount until we win strategy"

That's revisionism?

Are you seriously arguing that Gore would have asked for a recount if the previous counts had favored him?

They would do a count, then change the rules of what was counted (first hanging, then dimpled chads, then making guesses as to the "true intent of the voter" based on other candidates that the voter was voting for ...) and then re-count again. I said at the time that it seemed they wanted to re-count until Gore won, and I have not revised my opinion. The ANC in South Africa used a similar tactic.

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Are you seriously arguing that Gore would have asked for a recount if the previous counts had favored him?
Of course not. Bush would have asked for a recount then. (After all, he--or his supporters--tried to prevent the first recount. You know, the one automatically required by Florida law because the count was so close. [Smile] )

quote:
They would do a count, then change the rules of what was counted (first hanging, then dimpled chads, then making guesses as to the "true intent of the voter" based on other candidates that the voter was voting for ...) and then re-count again. I said at the time that it seemed they wanted to re-count until Gore won, and I have not revised my opinion.
Well, they could have asked all they wanted, but the Florida Supreme Court would have ruled which counting scheme was the one to be used. That is, until the state court's power was ursurped by the Supreme Court. [Frown]
Posts: 8083 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Son:
quote:
Are you seriously arguing that Gore would have asked for a recount if the previous counts had favored him?
Of course not. Bush would have asked for a recount then. (After all, he--or his supporters--tried to prevent the first recount. You know, the one automatically required by Florida law because the count was so close. [Smile] )

Yes I do know. And I did not object to *that* recount. But they got a third count, and then pressed for a fourth. And kept changing the rules.


quote:
Well, they could have asked all they wanted, but the Florida Supreme Court would have ruled which counting scheme was the one to be used.
Um, they did so rule, and ruled that the only legal standard was "the clear intent of the voter." Which meant that the two Democrats on every 3-man committee said that a ballot without a punched chad "clearly" meant a vote for Gore, while the one Republican on the committee would say that it was a non-vote.

I do agree with Dems that having parts of the states using punch cards while other parts of the states used more advanced systems was constitutionally repugnant. And the time difference likewise ended up causing some Republican-dominated parts of the state to close the polls an hour earlier than voters anticipated.

Probably the best thing we could do would be to annex the Florida panhandle to Alabama.

[ June 14, 2012, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
I object to this particular bit of revisionism:

"The 2000 Gore Recount until we win strategy"

That's revisionism?


As a summary of the 2000 election? Absolutely that's revisionism.

quote:
Are you seriously arguing that Gore would have asked for a recount if the previous counts had favored him?


No, but who cares? Or rather, shouldn't what actually happened matter? Were the roles reversed, the candidates likely would have been doing exactly what the other guy did, but there is still a difference between asking for recounts in an undisputedly flawed vote tally, and using the courts to prevent such a recount.

quote:
They would do a count, then change the rules of what was counted (first hanging, then dimpled chads, then making guesses as to the "true intent of the voter" based on other candidates that the voter was voting for ...) and then re-count again. I said at the time that it seemed they wanted to re-count until Gore won, and I have not revised my opinion. The ANC in South Africa used a similar tactic.
Who is the "they" you are referring to? Florida's governor? Florida's Secretary of State? It "seeming" to be a statewide conspiracy for Gore is absurd when you look at who actually had control over the legal processes there. Maybe its time to reconsider that impression.

Of course, thats all still a distraction from the real issue of voter intent and fair elections. Neither candidate should have been given standing to file any kind of suit. It was the public whose rights were in question, and who should have been petitioning for recounts and fair and transparent accounting of votes (many were, actually, but its still always framed as a Bush versus Gore issue, the most dangerous of all the competing revisions, one that was framed as the action unfolded).

Posts: 4600 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:

I predict that Romney's going to pound SSM, which avoids the nasty personal stuff that you predicted, while also avoiding discussion of Obama's record.

Obama's numbers with African-Americans have slid continually since he came out on SSM

" Obama received 95 percent of the support from African-Americans in North Carolina in the 2008 election, compared with just 5 percent for Republican nominee John McCain.

n PPP's May poll, Obama received 87 percent of the African-American vote to Romney's 11 percent.

All of Obama's numbers with African-Americans are sliding. His approval rating is down from 86 percent to 77 percent. Romney's favorability, meanwhile, has doubled from 9 percent to 18 percent."

That 9% difference in African American voters translates to a 2% win for Romney in NC if the election were held today.

NC is a critical swing state.

"The decline in African-American support for Obama follows the general trend of voters in North Carolina. A month ago, Obama led Romney by a point. Two months ago, Obama led by 5 points. Romney has also swung the important Independent vote to his side — turning a 13-point deficit in April into a one-point lead in June."

My prediction is that SSM is going to swing a number of key states for Romney. I'd bet a 4+% swing from this issue alone.

Posts: 40923 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1