USA Election: TGiO!

[neptronix]

This is a distortion of what I said.

What I actually said was the mere fact that this country could elect someone as distanced from being a Constitutionalist as BO is undeniable proof that a TRUE Constitutionalist wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected.

I might have misinterpreted you somewhere, but you were saying that Mitt Romney at least respects the constitution and that Obama didn't. I said neither will follow it or have the guts to follow it, so why does it matter whether you have the left boot or the right boot stomping on your rights?

You are an absolute fool if you think one party will do it less than the other. They might do it in different ways, and in different areas, but there is still stomping. Look at the voting record of congress and the house. There are 3-4 guys i can think of ( out of thousands ) who refuse to stomp. These guys are outliers in their respective parties.

Romney, while far from an ideal Constitutionalist will be beholden to people that do respect the Constitution and he will be wanting to get re-elected so that fact alone will moderate his positions (for better and worse) in order to win more votes.

Beholden to which people? the republicans who were silent ( and even vehemently approved ) when Bush turned this country into a police state, lied about WMDs to start a war in Iraq, lied to them about being a non-interventionist during his campaign, enacted the TARP ( are bailouts constitutional? ), handed out stimulus checks for $300-$1,200 before he left office ( what part of the constitution tells you to hand out those checks? ), wrote in the auto bailout but timed it so that Obama got the blame, and so forth?

Who held him to the fire when he violated the spirit of the constitution his entire 2 terms? I distinctly remember republicans giving him a second term.

Republicans have historically leaned towards smaller government, but they are not constitutionalists, and we have not seen them do anything other than spend more money and increase the size of government since 2000.

Don't you think that upholding the constitution would be something more like what Ron Paul wanted to do, rather than what Mitt Romney wants to do?

Can we all admit that the 2 party system "interprets" the constitution and that actually following it would be a super radical shift in our country.

Take the red white and blue wool off your eyes. The 2 party system that has dominated our country for hundreds of years will not provide the solutions we need to make our country prosperous again.

 

[StudEbiker]

I agree with just about all your points, but the fact that Ron Paul is going to be watching the returns come in from his living room tonight (just like the rest of us) proves my point that a TRUE Constitutionalist can not get elected in the current environment of this country.

Romney can (and I believe does) respect the Constitution. This does not mean he is going to follow it to the letter. Obama IMO not only doesn't respect the Constitution, he strongly dis-likes it and sees it as an obstacle to what he wants to do to this country.

Yes, it may be the lesser of two evils, but there's a pretty big gap between the two.

 

[neptronix]

I don't see the gap at all. Maybe it comes down to abortion and their stance on big bird. Not hot topics in this household :lol:

Doesn't matter if you like the constitution or not if you're not going to follow it. It's like preferring to be assaulted by someone on your favorite sports team rather than be assaulted by someone who liked the 'other' sports team. You're still getting assaulted. Your face is still bloody afterwards. Eye still puffed up.. missing a front tooth.. know what i'm sayin?

If republicans were really concerned with the constitution, they would have neutralized the democrats by now.

Ron Paul is probably wondering how many thousand write in he's got.. if they are even counted. I was at the Ron Paul rally in Orem, UT a few weeks ago and there were thousands of people there. I could not convince a single one to vote for Gary Johnson because they liked Paul better and were going to vote their conscience. Simply amazed me. I just wish there were more people out there like that in this country.

The republicans made a big mistake by not nominating him, or someone like him. They need a modern Ronald Reagan, not a guy who is almost indistinguishable from a Democrat.

 

[EMF]

As I've mentioned before on here, I can't understand how the US people have stood by and watched the freedoms granted to them under their constitution get eroded as they have. The US government has seemed, from the perspective of an outsider, to be adopting the tactics used by governments that the West usually criticises, by suppressing many of the freedoms that make for a just and fair society. If things continue as they are, then I can see there being greater freedom for an individual living in China than in the US, before too long.

I don't recall being asked what I thought. Anytime folks get together to bitch about the status quo- they are called "nutjobs" or whatever. Only when you go with the flow are you considered putting "Democracy into action" When we are asked they just do WTF they want to do anyway, illegally or otherwise. Example 70% of US polled were dead set against bailing out the banks. But, the shills went in and got the job done anyway.

We are no longer heard.... Corporations are people was the final blow to the public I think.

 

[StudEbiker]

Doesn't matter if you like the constitution or not if you're not going to follow it. It's like preferring to be assaulted by someone on your favorite sports team rather than be assaulted by someone who liked the 'other' sports team. You're still getting assaulted. Your face is still bloody afterwards. Eye still puffed up.. missing a front tooth.. know what i'm sayin?

The difference is (and it's a big one) one of those teams will pull some punches when they know no one is looking..... the other will hit you harder.

 

[neptronix]

I think they do it equally, they just hit different spots that might hurt an individual more or less. You are more sensitive to the kidney punch Obama likes to pull and prefer a strike to the head

I say this abuse is not normal, we only think it is because we grew accustomed to it and anything else

Find me a person over the age of say 30 who isn't completely jaded with politics. By that time, they have voted at least a few times, and might have realized by now that they haven't got what they voted for or what they were promised.

[youtube]F9SOVzMV2bc[/youtube]

Here is the guy that presented himself as a humble non-interventionist who wanted peace and strength for our country. ( Nevermind the fact that we planned to invade Afghanistan in 2001 because they wouldn't build the oil pipeline we wanted and the Al Qaeda was threatening an attack on 9/11 if we continued on our plans. If you don't believe me, read this: http://www.historycommons.org/timel...ete_911_timeline&before_9/11=pipelinePolitics )
Instead we got huge expensive wars that have continued for over a decade, the shredding of your liberty, new enemies, and a financial collapse.

You deserve better than someone who will deal you blows. Tell me that you, at the very least, looked into Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Virgil Goode.

 

[Kingfish]

The results are trickling in...

In Guam, 'Non-Binding Straw Poll' Gives Obama A Commanding Win

The polls in Guam have closed and the results are in.

President Obama managed a big victory, garnering 72 percent of the votes. That's about 23,067 votes compared to 8,443 votes for Gov. Mitt Romney.

Now for the disclaimers: Guam, 6,000 miles and 18 times zones away from California, is a territory of the United States, so their votes don't count. The presidential part of the vote is considered a "non-binding straw poll." But if you believe in bellweathers, listen up.

Here's what R. Todd Thompson of NPR member station KPRG in Guam told us:

• "Since 1984, Guam has been conducting a non-binding presidential 'straw poll' on the same date as the presidential election. And each time since 1984, the Guam Straw Poll has correctly predicted who will be the next president.
  
  "Because Guam votes so early and has a perfect track record in picking the winner, Guam is the new bellwether in presidential politics. Traditionally, those seeking an early indication of things to come on Election Day have looked to Dixville Notch, and a couple other tiny New Hampshire towns which vote just past midnight on Election Day and then proceed to count a handful of ballots. However, these early returns have had little predictive value historically.
  
  "Guam, on the other hand, has predicted the presidential winner every time. In fact, the only time Guam arguably got it wrong it still predicted the ultimate winner. In 2000, Guam narrowly favored Bush over Gore. Of course, Bush lost the popular vote nationwide in 2000, but he still managed to become president."

I just thought you-all in the Romney camp would enjoy a bit of humor before reaching for the Kool-Aid.

80 minutes before the first poll is to close (Virginia) and 110 minutes before Ohio closes.

Anyone check out the line at Las Vegas? Just curious that no one has mentioned the odds. On a lark...

2012 United States Presidential Election Betting Odds
2012 Presidential Election Betting Odds
US Presidential Election Winner Betting Odds
U.S. presidential election odds: Obama made a 2/9 favorite to defeat Romney

Not sure how to read these - cos I actually do not bet! Although I'm not too bad a Keno. I just thought it would be fun to guess/place our virtual bets as we wait here with empty glass, deciding on which of us has been drinking too much hallucinogenic Kool-Aid. If the time comes and my candidate has lost... I'll take mine with a healthy slice of Psilocybin mushroom on the side cos I'm certainly going to be needing it.

<reaching for the Grateful Dead vinyl...>
In vivid color man. KF

 

[Joseph C.]

Find me a person over the age of say 30 who isn't completely jaded with politics. By that time, they have voted at least a few times, and might have realized by now that they haven't got what they voted for or what they were promised.

Yes and no, the problem for the U.S. is that your voting system is designed for two parties. You will never have a true choice unless you have proportional representation and the college electoral system makes matters worse too.

Your second biggest problem is having a static constitution that is essentially a glorified historical document. If the public can't vote in a referendum to make amendments having a constitution is worthless. That only makes sense to true conservatives - the Amish.

Get those two systems in order and you will at least have the opportunity to choose what type of country you wish to live in.

Edit: Did you vote to legalise cannabis?

 

[TylerDurden]

From WashPo:

Pundit accountability: The official 2012 election prediction thread
Posted by Brad Plumer on November 5, 2012 at 6:00 pm

There are a lot of predictions floating around out there about who will win the presidential election on Tuesday. So why not round them all up in one place?

Place your bets, folks.

Here are the electoral vote predictions from various modelers, political scientists and pundits from around the Internet. All predictions are as of Monday evening. And yes, this will be a fun thread to revisit the day after the election:

• Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight: Obama 332, Romney 203. This appears to be the most likely scenario in Silver’s model, which now gives Obama a 91 percent chance of winning and shows Florida as basically a tossup. “In order for Mr. Romney to win the Electoral College, a large number of polls, across these states and others, would have to be in error, perhaps because they overestimated Democratic turnout.,” Silver writes.
  
  Intrade: Obama 303, Romney 235. The betting markets also give Obama a 70 percent chance of winning as of Tuesday morning. The main difference from Silver’s model is that Intrade gives Romney a fairly strong chance (65 percent) of winning Florida.
  
  Washington Post’s Outlook contest: There are a slew of different predictions here. Chris Cillizza of the Fix predicts a narrow 277-261 Obama win. Andrew Beyer, our horse-racing columnist, predicts a 284-254 Romney win. And Jason Samenow of the excellent Capital Weather Gang predicts a 281-257 Obama victory.
  
  Sam Wang, Princeton Election Consortium: Obama 303, Romney 235. “In terms of EV or the Meta-margin, [Obama has] made up just about half the ground he ceded to Romney after Debate #1.”
  
  Drew Linzer, Emory University: Obama 326, Romney 212. “The accuracy of my election forecasts depend on the accuracy of the presidential polls,” Linzer writes. ”As such, a major concern heading into Election Day is the possibility that polling firms, out of fear of being wrong, are looking at the results of other published surveys and weighting or adjusting their own results to match.”
  
  Michael Barone, The Examiner: Romney 315, Obama 223. “Both national and target state polls show that independents, voters who don’t identify themselves as Democrats or Republicans, break for Romney.”
  
  Ezra Klein, The Washington Post: Obama 290, Romney 248. “I have a simple rule when predicting presidential elections: The polls, taken together, are typically pretty accurate. Systemic problems, while possible, aren’t likely.”
  
  Larry Sabato, UVA Center for Politics: Obama 290, Romney 248. “Who could have imagined that a Frankenstorm would act as a circuit-breaker on the Republican’s campaign, blowing Romney off center stage for three critical days in the campaign’s last week, while enabling Obama to dominate as presidential comforter-in-chief, assisted by his new bipartisan best friend, Gov. Chris Christie (R)?”
  
  Josh Putnam, Davidson College: Obama 332, Romney 206. ”Everything above is based on a graduated weighted average of polls in each state conducted in 2012,” Putnam wrote in explaining his methodology. “The weighting is based on how old a poll is. The older the poll is the more it is discounted. The most recent poll is given full weight.”
  
  Jay Cost, Weekly Standard: Romney victory. “For two reasons,” Cost writes. “(1) Romney leads among voters on trust to get the economy going again. (2) Romney leads among independents.”
  
  Philip Klein, The Examiner: Obama 277, Romney 261. “I’ve given Romney the states that are essentially tied, in which he’s led in at least some recent polls. But in states where Romney has trailed in nearly all polls, and in some cases by a comfortable margin, I’m giving them to Obama.”
  
  Ross Douthat, New York Times: Obama 271, Romney 267. ” In general, I think that the political class tends to overestimate the power of the Hispanic bloc, whose influence is growing more slowly than many pundits and strategists acknowledge. In general, I think that the political class tends to overestimate swing voters’ sympathy for strident social liberalism, and to imagine a lockstep support for legal abortion among female voters that doesn’t actually exist.”
  
  Simon Jackman, Stanford University: Obama 332, Romney 206. “The model uses poll data (and house effect corrections) to generate estimates of Obama and Romney levels of support in the states (and at the national level). The modeling is done simultaneously: if you will, there are up to 52 latent quantities (e.g., Obama support in 50 states, the District of Columbia, plus the national level) moving over time, with polls giving us (noisy) snapshots as to where the latent targets might be on any given day.”
  
  Dave Weigel, Slate: Romney 276, Obama 262. He originally had Romney winning Ohio. But, as he explained yesterday, he’s not so confident about that anymore: “That was 48 hours ago. Since then, I’ve grown more bearish on the Republicans in Ohio, as the final reliable newspaper and college polls arrive. And since then I’ve spent lots of time with different Ohio voter groups, and been surprised by the power of the Ds. So, if you like, you can unskew the prediction.”
  
  Kenneth Bickers, University of Colorado and Kevin Berry, CU-Denver: Romney 330, Obama 208. “While many election forecast models are based on the popular vote, the model developed by Bickers and Berry is based on the Electoral College and is the only one of its type to include more than one state-level measure of economic conditions.” (This model was last updated in October.)
  
  Jamelle Bouie, The American Prospect: Obama 303, Romney 235. “f Obama wins on Tuesday, the political science on debates will have won out; they can shift the short-term situation, but they don’t fundamentally change the direction of an election.”
  
  George Will, The Washington Post: Romney 321, Obama 217. “ I guess the wild card in what I’ve projected is I’m projecting Minnesota to go for Romney. Now, that’s the only state in the union, because Mondale held it — native son Mondale held it when Romney was — when Reagan was getting 49 states — the only state that’s voted Democratic in nine consecutive elections. But this year, there’s a marriage amendment on the ballot that will bring out the evangelicals and I think could make the difference.”
  
  Ben Domenech, The Transom: Romney 278, Obama 260. “In sum, I see the bottom slipping out from under Obama’s feet, and a campaign hoping to hold on just long enough to salvage a slim victory, one where he is almost certain to lose the popular vote. He is underperforming among whites and independents, and particularly among those likeliest to vote. I have never believed in running the prevent defense, and Obama has been running it for months.”
  
  Markos Moulitsas: Obama 332, Romney 206. “Currently, national polling assumes a big dropoff from registered voters to likely voters. I don’t believe that’ll be the case, and we’re certainly not seeing it in the early vote—Democratic turnout is up. And the RV models have been more accurate historically.”
  
  Karl Rove: Romney 285, Obama 253. He’s got Romney winning Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, Colorado, and Florida.
  
  Xu Cheng, Moodys’ Analytics: Obama 303, Romney 235. Note that this prediction was made back in February: “This prediction is tied to the
  
  Moody’s Analytics current baseline forecast for U.S. growth, which assumes that most states will continue to recover at slow to moderate speeds.”
  
  James Pethokoukis: Romney 301, Obama 227. “Many pollsters are not catching the stratospheric GOP enthusiasm, particularly among voters of faith, in voting for Romney and Paul Ryan — not just against Obama and Joe Biden. In this way, the Bush-Kerry parallel from 2004 does not hold up”
  
  Joe Trippi, Democratic consultant, Obama 303, Romney 235. Trippi sent in his by e-mail–he’s going with these states.
  
  Dick Morris, FoxNews: Romney 325, Obama 213. ”It will be the biggest surprise in recent American political history,” Morris said. “It will rekindle the whole question on why the media played this race as a nailbiter where in fact Romney’s going to win by quite a bit.”
  
  Jim Cramer, CNBC: Obama 440, Romney 98. Here’s a tweet from Cramer: “No one is going to recall the guy who picks Obama by 10 electorals if it turns out to be 150 margin. Believe me.”
  
  Dean Chambers, UnskewedPolls.com: Romney 275, Obama 263. “Many others in the media project very favorable maps and projections for Obama but those doing so fail to realize or accept how heavily-skewed polls distort any average or analysis that relies on them.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/05/pundit-accountability-the-official-2012-election-prediction-thread/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein
(updated periodically as more pundits' forcasts are contributed)

 

[Joseph C.]

Agree with caveat:

It was a US president that dragged us into wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was US financial deregulation that begat the GFC.

"Jubilation" might be a fair term to describe the global response to the result of the 2008 US presidential election, for good reason. And, if not jubilation, at least a collective sigh of relief, akin to learning one is free of terminal cancer.

Fully agree with those two points. Although deregulation was an almost world-wide phenomenon - the U.S. started the blaze.

I seem to remember watching France 24 and Euronews as well as the Irish television stations and the 'jubilation/relief' very much appeared to be a world-wide phenomenon, certainly in Europe and North Africa at any rate.

Also for what it is worth it appears that most nations, the U.K. and the antipodeans included, take a keen attentiveness in U.S. politics for obvious reasons.

Jeremy is being somewhat disingenuous in comments regarding people's interest. But don't take my word for it...

http://www.irishtimes.com/
http://www.lefigaro.fr/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
http://www.scotsman.com/
http://www.spiegel.de/international/
http://www.repubblica.it/
http://elpais.com/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

 

[neptronix]

So, who's surprised that Obama won?

I'm glad that Colorado and Washington advanced towards legal marijuana. At least 2 states will be better able to forget the state of the country today

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/marijuana-legalization-results_n_2074168.html

 

[TylerDurden]

Meanwhile.... back in the real world....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Kingfish]

You guys beat me to it! I’ve been chortling Cock a doodle doo for the past hour!

I’ve put away The Dead and the Electric Kool-Aid; no need to dose myself into a false reality… or consider changing my residency to Canada… when my State has become the first in the Union to legalize POT! Wow! Time for the rose-colored glasses and some Stones baby! Shoot, maybe I ought to resurrect that ol’ ganja-beer recipe from my Dr. Feelgood daze. Whoo hoo! 8)

[youtube]1IOL-VT-WnE[/youtube]

And for those that can’t rooster, well – I’ve made up a special plate...




It feels good to be swimming in the mainstream. KF

 

[Dauntless]

So, who's surprised that Obama won?

Surely not H.L. Mencken:

No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

Absolutely foretold of the coming of Obama. (Not that those who voted AGAINST Obama deserves it.) Oh wait, wait, he talked about the next 4 years:

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

The man was an Oracle.

I'm glad that Colorado and Washington advanced towards legal marijuana. At least 2 states will be better able to forget the state of the country today

What about Israel? You glad about THAT?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57466114-10391704/israeli-scientists-create-medical-marijuana-strain-that-wont-get-patients-high/

Do you live in a medical marijuana state? If so, how many dealers do you know whose source is the pot dispensary? How many convicted felons do you know with pot cards? How many classes are offered in your community to teach people HOW to get a marijuana prescription? How many NO votes will this Israel breakthrough get from medical marijuana enthusiasts? (Dang, Tino's mom would be furious if she read this. She's a convicted felon with a medical marijuana card selling her pot.)

Wish I could find the clip of Steve Martin talking about his FAVORITE drug: "PLACEBO!"

 

[StudEbiker]

Meanwhile.... back in the real world....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm sure that gave you a big sense of satisfaction.

Enjoy it.

 

[Chalo]

Meanwhile.... back in the real world....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm sure that gave you a big sense of satisfaction.

Enjoy it.

[youtube]MDtSf9pseOw[/youtube]

 

[StudEbiker]

That's good Chalo.

I see the resemblance too. :lol:

 

[Chalo]

For what it's worth, the only satisfaction I derived from tonight's entertainment was that no more than about 20% of my fellow Americans are stupid/corrupt/twisted enough to actually vote for a robber baron and kwazy Mormoon to be their supreme leader. It took plenty of beer and whiskey to dull the edges of the other implications, though.

And, of course, it was amusing to watch Studly put away his shovel unused.

You know you could use that thing to help dispose of all the bullshit you've been piling up around here lately!

 

[StudEbiker]

Of course....

I do think this would be a good time to remind you of the kind of voter that you guys have aligned yourself with in order to win this election.

Birds of a feather eh??

[youtube]tpAOwJvTOio[/youtube]

Enjoy it.

 

[StudEbiker]

For what it's worth, the only satisfaction I derived from tonight's entertainment was that no more than about 20% of my fellow Americans are stupid/corrupt/twisted enough to actually vote for a robber baron and kwazy Mormoon to be their supreme leader.

How are you coming up with that 20% number??

Looks like it was split pretty evenly in the popular vote to me.

 

[Chalo]

Less than half of 40-something percent (the people who decided to make the choice between a kick in the balls and a kick in the teeth) is near 20%.

I heard enough firsthand accounts from folks I know about active voter suppression in NYC, and vote flipping in TX, for me to believe that the actual number is even lower than that.

 

[Evoforce]

Whoooohooooo!

 

[EMF]

Forward! Just watch out for that pesky fiscal cliff thingy.

 

[etriker]

For what it's worth, the only satisfaction I derived from tonight's entertainment was that no more than about 20% of my fellow Americans are stupid/corrupt/twisted enough to actually vote for a robber baron and kwazy Mormoon to be their supreme leader.

How are you coming up with that 20% number??

Looks like it was split pretty evenly in the popular vote to me.

The average of all the different polls was real close.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map

I watched on Fox when they called Ohio for Obama and Carl R. was in denial.

The reps wanted to believe other polls but how could an average of all the polls be very wrong ?

The reps did not want to believe the polls and kept giving money to Mitt so he could stuff my mailbox with junk mail, call my house at least 10 times a day and put one ad right after the other on my tv.

The reps can ignore reality, but they can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality ?

Now Fox can get back to their main goal and that is to scare people in to buying gold coins ?

 

[neptronix]

What about Israel? You glad about THAT?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57466114-10391704/israeli-scientists-create-medical-marijuana-strain-that-wont-get-patients-high/

Do you live in a medical marijuana state? If so, how many dealers do you know whose source is the pot dispensary? How many convicted felons do you know with pot cards? How many classes are offered in your community to teach people HOW to get a marijuana prescription? How many NO votes will this Israel breakthrough get from medical marijuana enthusiasts? (Dang, Tino's mom would be furious if she read this. She's a convicted felon with a medical marijuana card selling her pot.)

Wish I could find the clip of Steve Martin talking about his FAVORITE drug: "PLACEBO!"

Okay, that sucks about Israel. People won't smoke that bunk stuff if given the chance. Won't work for psychological problems or pain - two areas in which good ol' mary jane do a fine job with.

I don't smoke pot ( used to back in the day ) but what i am against is prohibition of a substance that is harmless to the user. I think the criminalization of marijuana literally mirrors all the negative effects of alcohol prohibition, which are pretty well known and understood by society. Gee, where did the moonshiners and mafia go?

I live in Utah currently, but spent 7 years in California, Oregon, and Colorado when marijuana had been legal for medical reasons. Since i don't smoke, all i can tell you is that the smokers i know are happier with the situation because it removes the criminal element ( and exposure to the sale and consumption of hard drugs ) of buying/using. Haven't seen society fall apart in any of those states either.