|
|
On November 07 2012 10:05 Fueled wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 09:58 Deathmanbob wrote:On November 07 2012 09:57 SoulTakerz wrote: Is is safe to say that if Rommey loses Florida he have no chance? yes Going off the CNN Electoral Map, if Obama wins Florida he'll have 266 Electoral votes with NV, CO, IA, WI, OH, VA and NH still up for grabs.
yeah but you know he will win ONE of those
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
some old guy on cbs said seniors falling for romney by 58 to 41. that's a big gain from mccain and it is rather hard to believe. or not hard to believe depends on your opinion of seniors
|
On November 07 2012 10:07 Maxd11 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 10:02 Falling wrote: I like how some states have 0% reporting and CNN has them coloured into their respective candidates. I guess the needle doesn't move too much election to election. Early projections are showing Romney edging out the lead in Texas.
Assuming Republicans dont change how they govern (which they cant because of base) then by 2020 I would say Texas is going to become a democratic leaning state.
|
|
On November 07 2012 10:08 oneofthem wrote: some old guy on cbs said seniors falling for romney by 58 to 41. that's a big gain from mccain and it is rather hard to believe. or not hard to believe depends on your opinion of seniors Seniors overwhelmingly vote Republican all the time. Because seniors are more conservative than the rest of the population naturally.
|
On November 07 2012 10:08 Deathmanbob wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 10:05 Fueled wrote:On November 07 2012 09:58 Deathmanbob wrote:On November 07 2012 09:57 SoulTakerz wrote: Is is safe to say that if Rommey loses Florida he have no chance? yes Going off the CNN Electoral Map, if Obama wins Florida he'll have 266 Electoral votes with NV, CO, IA, WI, OH, VA and NH still up for grabs. yeah but you know he will win ONE of those exactly
|
On November 07 2012 06:52 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 06:26 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 07 2012 02:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On November 07 2012 01:51 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 07 2012 01:38 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On November 06 2012 23:53 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 06 2012 23:50 Signet wrote:On November 06 2012 18:24 paralleluniverse wrote: As for the fiscal cliff, is Signet the only person in this thread who thinks hitting the fiscal cliff is a good idea? Supposing that he is a Republican or at least Republican leaning, then at least he's not a hypocrite on this issue.
Compare this to Romney or other Republicans who believe the fiscal cliff will wreck the economy, while at the same time believing that stimulus is bad and that deficits are bad. Such a belief is self-contradictory and completely hypocritical.
I don't think hitting the cliff is a good idea. I think deficit hawks (which I'm not) should be saddened that neither party is willing to actually go through with it. Yes, I agree. I've asked that question probably ten times in this thread and no one has been able to answer. No Republican here is able to explain their hypocrisy on the fiscal cliff. That's one reason why people shouldn't vote for Romney. Wanting to cut the deficit doesn't necessarily supersede all other considerations. For example if you want to cut your own household budget because you are racking up too much debt you wouldn't want to stop heating your house in the winter. That's not hypocritical - that's smart. Similarly, no-one is happy with the fiscal cliff - both from the standpoint of its composition and its timetable. So the only way someone is being hypocritical is if they have taken the stance of opposing the deficit "by any means necessary" - a stance that is taken by a very minority of people. Everyone wants to cut the deficit eventually. It make sense that some people think that massively reducing the deficit quickly is bad, that we should do it slowly, and that not all cuts are good, which is what you're basically saying. But the logic leading that person to believe that massively cutting the deficit in the short term is bad for the economy, also implies that increasing the deficit in the short term is good for the economy. Therefore, the hypocritical Republican position I'm talking about is believing: 1) Hitting the fiscal cliff is bad because it massively reduces the deficit through spending and tax cuts while the economy is still in a recession. 2) A large increase to the deficit by increasing spending in a recession will stimulate the economy. Simultaneously holding both beliefs makes no sense to me. I can't speak for all Republicans but most aren't anti-stimulus so much anti- Obama's stimulus. The ARRA was the Democrat's legislation and Republican's didn't like its composition and so they opposed it. Since then the message has devolved a bit from criticism over a specific stimulus to criticism of stimulus. But I think that's more of a dumbing down of the rhetoric than a real change in policy. Then why have I've never seen a Republican (excluding him) say that stimulus is good, but not Obama's stimulus? Where's all the Republicans saying they want stimulus, just not Obama's stimulus? Well they passed their own relatively small stimulus back in '08 before things got really bad. Then when the ARRA was being drafted Reps were complaining about not having enough of a say in the matter, which was their main argument at the time for voting against it. They also had a couple alternative (and smaller if I remember right) stimulus plans of their own. The Republican's stimulus?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/27/remembering-the-republicans-stimulus/
Their idea of stimulus were *permanent* tax cuts that were 400% larger than the Obama stimulus. Stimulus is meant to mostly be *temporary* spending increases, not permanent tax cuts.
If you're view is that stimulus can be good, but then fiscal cliff is bad, then I agree that you're not a hypocrite.
But Republicans generally oppose stimulus because it's to much spending that is added to the debt, despite thinking the fiscal cliff is disastrous. They don't argue that stimulus could be good, they just call stimulus a waste of money that will bad to the debt.
|
On November 07 2012 10:07 soullogik wrote: all i want is to see romney's face after he loses tonight
Likewise for Obama
|
So I read that Romney doesn't have a concession speech.
|
This stats guy on CNN is on speed or something. He is making my head spin
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 07 2012 10:09 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 10:08 oneofthem wrote: some old guy on cbs said seniors falling for romney by 58 to 41. that's a big gain from mccain and it is rather hard to believe. or not hard to believe depends on your opinion of seniors Seniors overwhelmingly vote Republican all the time. Because seniors are more conservative than the rest of the population naturally. depends on how complete that data is, it could be a very significant shift.
before the debates at least, obama had closed the edge on seniors by attacking ryan.
|
There's always the concession speech.
|
United States13896 Posts
On November 07 2012 10:04 sc2superfan101 wrote:I'll say it if no one else will, if Romney loses FL than you can turn off your TV and go to bed, because it's fucking over if we lose FL. I will not panic... I will not panic... + Show Spoiler +ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHGHGGGH FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK!!!!!!!! Yep, the simple fact that things are so close, with Obama having a slight lead in Florida atm, doesn't bode well for Romney.
Elsewhere it looks like Mourdock is going to be soundly defeated in the Indiana senate race. The gap has been steadily widening and we're at around 50% for Donnelly and 45% for Mourdock, approaching 25% of precincts reporting. He can come back, but its not looking good.
|
Obama leads by 69K in FL with 46% reporting...not sure what fraction of Miami has even reported in, stupid CNN says 0.
Edit: Suddenly a panhandle appears! And Romney gets his own 85K lead. 51% in.
|
And the odds for Democrats winning Florida have dropped significantly in the last 3 minutes or so.
Democrats now down to 1.5 and Republicans now out to 2.4. They were both neck and neck at 1.83 each just a few minutes ago.
|
On November 07 2012 10:10 ticklishmusic wrote: So I read that Romney doesn't have a concession speech.
he does, you know you have to tell people you're a bad ass even when you arnt
|
where is XDaunt!?! I need some conservative comfort up in here!!!
if Murdock loses I'm going to scream...
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
broward just reported in all of their red votes it seems. romney got 272k of them in that county whereas mccain had a total of only 237k. this is with an incomplete broward reporting.
in 2008 obama won the county by 492k to 237k. it is a pretty significant shift for romney to gain basically more than 50k votes in that county alone.
|
So Obama's about to get reelected it seems, or at least I want to convince myself to go sleeping now. Still feel somewhat naive when I remember my enthusiasm about him 4 years ago.
|
50% of the votes are in now for Florida. Poll shows 51-49 Romney
|
|
|
|