Ron Paul was the only candidate that could have beaten Obama.

Obama has given out favors like candy since he's been in office. The only way to beat him is to have the people who got screwed by him (~50% of the country) rally around someone who would actually help save the country.

Putting a scumbag like romney out there isnt going to rally anyone with half a brain. And Obama already has the nobrain votes.

9/23/2012 1:02:34 AM

^Ron Paul would have done terribly: He's too extreme for most Americans, just not in the way that, say, Virgil Goode is.
Also, as Rick Santorum so eloquently said, the "smart people" are on the side of the Democrats.

WARNING: LOADS OF IMAGES AHEAD

If Obama's general lead over Romney fell by about 3 points, this is what the map might look like; it is created by assigning to Obama all states he has at least a 75.7% chance of winning, and to Romney all other states, creating the slimmest map that Obama could win (here 271-267).


However, at this point, Obama would have a very small advantage in Ohio (currently it's 75.9%, so if the races become uniformly worse, he might be down to a 50.2% shot), so if the race got just a little worse, Romney would win 285-253.


This map, meanwhile, uses a 60% standard; that is, it assigns to Obama only those states that FiveThirtyEight projects him to win, except Tossups (although Florida is close to being considered to Lean Obama), leaving him with a 303-235 victory.


This map is the most likely one, assigning to Obama all states that FiveThirtyEight projects him to win; however, owing to the uncertainty of winning the closer states, the forecast model gives him an expected takeaway of only 310-228, rather than the 332-206 suggested by this map, which is also the most likely individual result of Nate Silver's Monte Carlo method.


Finally, if Obama did quite a bit better, say improving so much that he gets all states currently projected to have at least a 75.7% chance of a Romney victory, he only ends up with one more state (NC) for a 347-191 victory; this is actually the map currently projected by electoral-vote.com in the alternative model that ignores Rassmussen Reports.


Basically, although Obama could have several states to lose if Romney does a bit better, Obama could realistically pick up only one more state, and that's only if he does a lot better.

[Edited on September 23, 2012 at 2:04 AM. Reason : http://imgur.com/a/Hz58S#0

9/23/2012 2:02:17 AM

LOL, Ron Paul is too "extreme" but people are willing to vote for Obama?!

I think you need to re-visit the definition of extreme.

Nearly everyone I know under 40 supports Ron Paul. He just doesn't get exposure from the controlled media sources because he undermines the corporations. That was his problem to overcome.

Obama is the most extreme President we've had in 70 years. What a weird way to phrase things. You guys are so brainwashed.

9/23/2012 8:23:36 AM

^ I am not voting for Obama. The humorous part I always find is when you say, "I'm not voting for Romney" or "I'm not voting for Obama" and people will think you are voting for the other predominate candidate. And, of course, it you are not voting for a "relevant" candidate like Obama or Romney, you are a retard and the person will lecture you for 30 minutes on how your vote is wasted. I was actually called a retard undermining the well being of America by someone I know because I said I refuse to vote for Obama.

9/23/2012 8:50:55 AM

Everyone you know under 40 supports Ron Paul?

Do you work at best buy?

9/23/2012 8:56:54 AM

Finance. obviously, most people in finance and most people in any industry that are under 40 are going to support ron paul because he represents help for the young people who are taking the brunt of Obama's economic policies. The old people are going to resist Ron Paul because they are the selfish generation who believe we should be the ones to pay for them.

Yes, when people tell them you are throwing your vote away i ask them if they had a choice between a murderer or a child molester who would they vote for?


by voting for Obama or Romney you are doing WORSE than throwing your vote away. You are cancelling out someone's vote who actually pays attention to the issues and making everyone who gives a shit ask themselves why they bother voting anyway?

If you haven't figured out how corrupt the two party system is by now then you're honestly probably not intelligent enough to ever figure it out. We have the internet, use it for something other than porn and hulu for five minutes.

[Edited on September 23, 2012 at 9:11 AM. Reason : a]

9/23/2012 9:09:07 AM

the only thing I agree with in that post is that the two party system sucks.

nevertheless, the only way it'll ever change is if we do away with the electoral college, and that's never going to happen.

9/23/2012 10:49:09 AM

I would love to have strong alternatives to the two party system.

However Ron Paul is not going to win. Ever.

[Edited on September 23, 2012 at 11:14 AM. Reason : Hh]

9/23/2012 11:13:17 AM

Is anyone actually undecided in this election? I don't see how anyone could really still not be sure who, out of the top two candidates, they would vote for.

That is what is strange to me about the media coverage, especially when they make a big deal out of things like the 47% comment. That isn't going to make anyone say, oh wow I think I am going to vote for Obama now instead of Romney. I guess they have to talk about something though.

9/23/2012 11:13:17 AM

It may make someone not vote.

9/23/2012 11:16:27 AM

I'm "undecided" in a sense.

Through the ages where I could vote, history has shown us some particularly dangerous Republican candidates. My preference is to cast my vote to the libertarian candidate. If the differential between the R and D seems great enough, I'll vote for one of them. I'm resentful when I do that. I understand that voting for the L when I would otherwise vote for the D is taking a vote away from the D. But I don't want this system.

9/23/2012 11:39:38 AM

Quote :

"Is anyone actually undecided in this election? I don't see how anyone could really still not be sure who, out of the top two candidates, they would vote for."

SNL did a pretty funny skit about the undecided voter last night

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/undecided-voter/1418227

9/23/2012 1:40:58 PM

Fault Lines : Conventions 2012: The Price of the Party

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfy2sHNZUXQ&feature=plcp

9/24/2012 12:50:51 AM

al-Jazeera is awesome.

9/24/2012 10:36:59 AM

Don't forget to take into account how badly romney is going to crush obama in the debates.

Obama will stand behind his same hollow words and the only people uneducated enough (or too educated if you consider ivy league ivory tower thinkers just misinformed pseudo intellects instead of uneducated) to fall for his ridiculous economic falsehoods are already obama voters.

For those who actually make up the middle class and work jobs and pay taxes the majority will obviously vote for romney. Right now romney holds a firm lead amongst middle class voters and that will only grow after the debates.

Obama can try to pan to his "you know ya cousin, he ain't registered" base, but that's not going to be as successful this time around.

Everyone made the mistake of ordering burger kings old French fries once, but how many people fell for it again?

9/24/2012 10:41:53 AM

^classic face trolling

9/24/2012 10:55:57 AM

Is it trolling if he's stupid enough to believe what he says?

9/24/2012 11:03:03 AM

i don't see how any rational person paying attention could seriously say "romney will badly crush obama in the debates".

9/24/2012 11:06:29 AM

more like, romney will get his shit pushed in badly.

9/24/2012 11:26:11 AM

^ If you go by MSM polls, yes it seems that way.

But from some other sources it seems that these polls are poorly put together. I am not sure of the validity of this, but here is a resource: http://www.unskewedpolls.com/index.cfm

9/24/2012 11:50:28 AM

General rule of thumb, if you have to start nit picking poll results and saying things like "statistical dead heat", your candidate is in deep shit.

9/24/2012 12:10:30 PM

^^ hilarious hack website is hilarious and hacky

9/24/2012 12:20:18 PM

^^^ what is a MSM poll? I mean the methodologies are all out there and most reputable aggregators tell you which polls are included. There are some that lean left and some that lean right of the aggregate consensus but that doesn't make them MS/non-MS..

^ holy hell that website is awesome. Romney is way ahead in every "unskewed poll" it seems. Cancel the election!

[Edited on September 24, 2012 at 12:25 PM. Reason : X]

9/24/2012 12:22:52 PM

i wasn't even talking about the polls or the actual election, i was talking about the debates. i don't see how anyone could think that romney will destroy obama in the debates.

9/24/2012 12:33:16 PM

how anyone could take a site like that seriously is beyond me

it's actually kind of sad

9/24/2012 12:50:41 PM

^ seriously it looks like they made that site using Angelfire and also look at the network.

Quote :

" QStar Network: QStarNews RightNewsNow Dean2112.com MittRomney2112 GOP2112.com QStarCredit.com "

9/24/2012 12:58:41 PM

Guys, Romney doesn't have a plan because he is gonna cure his constant flip-flopping by not putting anything out there to backtrack.

[Edited on September 24, 2012 at 1:38 PM. Reason : s]

9/24/2012 1:38:11 PM

Serious question. Was that polls site mentioned on Glenn Beck or Rush today?? Because I've seen it posted on 538 and Real Clear Politics in the comments section and have never seen that before

Figure the ideological leaders must be praising it.

Hahahahah, Rick Perry tweeted that site too. Talking points memo must have been circulated. I put my money on 538 being more accurate personally.

[Edited on September 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM. Reason : X]

9/24/2012 2:34:43 PM

there isn't even a debate about 538 being more accurate

9/24/2012 2:49:47 PM

This site is spreading like wildfire all over twitter. It's hilarious..

9/24/2012 4:55:54 PM

I'll be waiting for it to show-up in my inbox (from mom)

9/24/2012 5:02:56 PM

In most nations election day is a national holiday where everyone has off work so they can vote.

In America it is not a national holiday, which obviously favors the Democrats since most of them don't have to take off work in order to vote.

9/24/2012 6:11:32 PM

As I Democrat I am 3000% behind the idea of making voting day a national holiday, or at the very least not a weekday.

9/24/2012 6:17:05 PM

Our democracy is a farce as it is. It would make more sense for us to move to a system where a panel of scientists, mathematicians and philosophers choose leaders, rather than giving the people too much of a say.

The constitution never called for election of the president anyway.

9/24/2012 6:20:56 PM

Quote :

"In most nations election day is a national holiday where everyone has off work so they can vote. In America it is not a national holiday, which obviously favors the Democrats since most of them don't have to take off work in order to vote."

Do you work 18 hours shifts at Foxxcon? What company keeps their employees there from 6am to 8pm (or whatever poll hours are) without a lunch or a voting exception.

Anyway, that website is still cracking me up. It is seriously the biggest thing on twitter right now. Is it just desperation? No educated person can seriously believe that the methodology of every single major poll is part of some huge liberal conspiracy, can they? I mean this would include Fox News polls as well as Rasmussen/Gallop. Craziness.

9/24/2012 9:53:15 PM

Nate Silver RT'd this earlier:

Quote :

"@BuzzFeedAndrew: Unskewed polling has Cain up in the popular vote."

9/24/2012 10:21:56 PM

^ what is that about?

9/24/2012 10:56:12 PM

^

Quote :

"^ If you go by MSM polls, yes it seems that way. But from some other sources it seems that these polls are poorly put together. I am not sure of the validity of this, but here is a resource: http://www.unskewedpolls.com/index.cfm"

9/24/2012 11:06:02 PM

wow, what a sad website.

Why would someone insist believing in their own fabricated reality just for the sake of Mitt Romney??

They're trying to correct for sampling errors that they haven't proven actually exist. And putting all theirs eggs in a single poll's basket (from 2010).

9/24/2012 11:36:26 PM

Hilarious.

If you got go to theblaze, hotair, or breitbart they're all abuzz with "news stories" about how the polls are inaccurate. It's pretty sad (but humorous at the same time) really.

9/25/2012 4:05:28 PM

http://www.businessinsider.com/unskewedpolls-2012-9

THere's a good site talking about how hilariously bad the Unskewed Poll guy's methods are.

9/25/2012 4:11:51 PM

So i'm watching The Daily Show where they show the clip of Romney on 60 Minutes, where they ask him about healthcare, and his response is completely idiotic, but it seems due to the fact that he can't say anything out of step with the GOP, because they showed other clips of him giving the "right" answer.

So maybe Mitt isn't out of touch as he seems, he just can't say what he actually believes because of the broader Republican base??

9/26/2012 12:10:28 AM

I really wonder who it is that is in control over there.

9/26/2012 12:46:29 AM

^^ of course he isn't that out of touch. If MA governor Mitt Romney was running against 2012 president Obama I would seriously be considering voting for Romney. You simply don't get elected in the Northeast as a governor being so far to the right. That's why when I say I'm a right leaning moderate no one in NC can believe I'm voting for Obama likely.

Republcians where I'm from are actually probably closer to where Obama is ideologically to be honest. Problem is the religious and gun base in the South/southern Midwest is so large that in a national race they can't risk losing any portion of that.

[Edited on September 26, 2012 at 7:52 AM. Reason : X]

9/26/2012 7:51:16 AM

Lose them to who exactly?

9/26/2012 11:36:56 AM

apathy

9/26/2012 11:48:46 AM

Quote :

"That's why when I say I'm a right leaning moderate no one in NC can believe I'm voting for Obama likely."

Well considering that Obama is a right leaning moderate himself, that makes sense. Which is why I, a left of center librul won't be voting for him.

9/26/2012 11:55:07 AM

According to NBC News (MSNBC):

*** The impact of 47%: Want to know the impact that the video of Mitt Romney’s comments on the “47%” have had in this presidential contest? We have two fresh pieces of evidence. The first are brand-new New York Times/CBS/Quinnipiac surveys -- conducted right after the release of the video -- showing Obama leading Romney by nine points among likely voters in Florida (53%-44%), 10 points in Ohio (53%-43%), and 12 in Pennsylvania (54%-42%). These are margins we haven’t seen before.

If there is any truth to those numbers it is looking very rough for Romney at best.

9/26/2012 12:57:31 PM

9/26/2012 2:08:56 PM

^^ I would say most polls, even Rasmussen, have started converging to the same conclusion at this point... and that is that Obama is gaining in the polls in both the election and approval. If Rasmussen has a virtual tie then that is very good news for Obama.

There are still 40-45 days or so left for that to change and lots can happen but I would say that after the first debate, and no relative uptick, Romney's campaign will definitively be in "panic mode."

Quote :

"Lose them to who exactly?"

Yes, apathy. It's far more important to have a motivated religious wing than any other sect because they aren't afraid to make their voice known and dissuade others through any means.

[Edited on September 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM. Reason : x]

9/26/2012 6:54:36 PM