2012 Presidential Election Thread

[Fox 6]

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

[TheGame]

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.

[Professor S]

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?

[Teuthida]

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

http://isnatesilverawitch.com/

[Professor S]

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...

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

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

http://isnatesilverawitch.com/

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.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

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.

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.

[Vampyr]

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.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Professor S

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?

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.

[Vampyr]

Also I think Germanator won the prediction contest.

[The Germanator]

Originally Posted by Professor S

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...

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.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by The Germanator

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.

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.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Professor S

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.

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

[Seth]

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!"

[Typhoid]

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.