• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

U.S. 2012 Election

On Nov 6 Who Will Win President Obama or Mitt Romney ?

  • President Obama

    Votes: 39 61.9%
  • Mitt Romney

    Votes: 24 38.1%

  • Total voters
    63
  • Poll closed .
Brad Sallows said:
What are the grounds for assuming it is the GOP's failure to reach out instead of the Democrat's successful smear campaign?

There was nothing in the Democrat's smear campaign that wasn't originally fodder in the GOP primaries. Hell, Gingrich created a whole docudrama about Romney's time at Bain.

As for the grounds for the assumption, looking at the breakdown of the voter turnout and exit polls will give you the answer. As well as the comments from the more rational elements of the GOP itself.

Oh, and the fact that the polls in the run-up pretty much matched the election night results.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
The Associated Press, via the Twitterverse says: "AP RACE CALL: Obama wins Florida, topping Romney in final electoral vote tally 332 to 206.

I'm Shocked! I would have thought Romney in a landslide.  :facepalm:
 
I suspect that Romney being a Mormon and a moderate may have been the reason he lost. The former would have been reason enough for southern Baptists.As for being a moderate against Obama I wouldnt think that would have been much of a problem. Onward to 2016. I do hope that the GOP learns a lesson by closing the primaries to Republicans only.
 
>looking at the breakdown of the voter turnout and exit polls will give you the answer

Yes, I know the real answer: the Democratic Party learned to use the EC more efficiently than the GOP (actually, I don't think the GOP has really learned to approach the EC as a pure data crunching exercise yet).  The campaign did its OR and found the weak points; the unions delivered the GOTV at those points.  Result, victory: but not by margins beyond the reach of application of the same techniques by the other side.

The only question is whether this year's GOTV is payback for the GM/Chrysler handout, or a marker which will be called in at some point in the next 4 years.
 
The relatively close popular vote did not translate into a close Electoral College race. The relatively few states Romney won he won by large margins, but Obama won a lot of states by small margins. Efficiency.
 
Brad Sallows said:
The only question is whether this year's GOTV is payback for the GM/Chrysler handout, or a marker which will be called in at some point in the next 4 years.

Both
 
Elections have consequences. One down, 99 rounds to go.....

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/new-yorkers-still-in-the-dark-as-obama-hits-the-links/

New Yorkers Still in the Dark as Obama Hits the Links
Posted by Jammie on Nov 10, 2012 at 2:56 pm

A good chunk of Long Island is still in the dark after 12 days now and nobody seems to care. It’s not like the president needs to show up for a photo op since these poor bastards overwhelmingly vote for him anyway.

He’ll come visit eventually, so hold tight to your candles.

It’s also not clear if power will return to the schools in time, so the town has purchased generators for the schools to run on.  National Grid, which manages the power grid owned by LIPA, said 95 percent of residents that live in non-flood zones, should have power restored by Tuesday, but there is no timeline for those in flood zones, MyFoxNY.com reports..

Local and state officials have asked that the federal government step in, and National Grid said they will welcome all of the help they can get.

Some Long Island residents who had power restored following Sandy were left in the dark again following last week’s nor’easter.

LIPA has said those without power the longest are of the highest priority.

President Obama will meet with affected families and local officials on Thursday to see recovery efforts in the hardest hit areas of New York.

Thursday? What’s holding him up?

President Barack Obama is spending his first Saturday after winning reelection on the golf course. Today’s outing is to the course on Andrews Air Force Base.

“Motorcade arrived at Andrews Air Force Base at 11:01 am after an uneventful ride,” the pool report reads. “President Obama is playing golf with three White House aides: Eugene Kang, Joe Paulson and trip director Marvin Nicholson, according to a White House official. Pool is holding at the Andrews fast food court for the next few hours.”

Imagine the howls if Bush played golf during the post-Katrina cleanup.

Meanwhile, it’s curious he’s showing up next Thursday, just as his brother-in-law’s basketball team is playing in New York. Surely just a coincidence.
 
Brad Sallows said:
>looking at the breakdown of the voter turnout and exit polls will give you the answer

Yes, I know the real answer: the Democratic Party learned to use the EC more efficiently than the GOP (actually, I don't think the GOP has really learned to approach the EC as a pure data crunching exercise yet).  The campaign did its OR and found the weak points; the unions delivered the GOTV at those points.  Result, victory: but not by margins beyond the reach of application of the same techniques by the other side.

The only question is whether this year's GOTV is payback for the GM/Chrysler handout, or a marker which will be called in at some point in the next 4 years.

I think realistically you can point to a lot of different reasons that came together.

For instance some are blaming Christie's "endorsement" of Obama after Sandy, and Obama's performance during that period as the reason he pulled it out. But it doesn't explain why people in Colorado supported him.

In the end, I think that they will find that Obama had a better run campaign than Romney. Many within the organization admit there were problems across the board. The batshit crazy primary season where all and sundry went after Romney for Bain, flip flopping, not being conservative enough. Having to run to the right of Perry on immigration and Santorum on abortion and other social issues, but not pivoting back to the center until the debates. Letting the Obama camp define Romney right from the beginning. Not challenging hard on the narrative being put out, both in the primaries and the general election. Changing tact when it came to direct media access to the candidate, first letting him talk freely, then only closely scripted interviews, then finally realizing that Mitt has to be Mitt. The party not having infrastructure in place prior to the start of the campaign. Assuming that the electorate model was the same as 2004, not 2008.

One thing I've learned in my engineering career is that failures rarely occur due to a single cause, but more often than not are a result of several problems that lead to the failure. And had any of them been addressed, would have either prevented or minimized the effects of the failure.
 
Thucydides said:
Imagine the howls if Bush played golf during the post-Katrina cleanup.

Not sure that the Katrina comparison is a good one to be using. Kinda blows the whole point the blogger was were trying to make.
 
Money well spent?

How Much Did Independent Groups Spend Per Vote?

http://projects.propublica.org/pactrack/candidates/votes

 
cupper said:
Not sure that the Katrina comparison is a good one to be using. Kinda blows the whole point the blogger was were trying to make.

It is exactly the point the blogger is making. Katrina is recent enough that you should be able to Google news "reports" from that time even without using the wayback machine; the amount of venom directed at the President and the administration was amazing to behold, especially considering that, at the time, FEMA was only charged to respond in 72 hours of an event, there was pelenty of warning for the Mayor and Governor to have prepared, and the total lack of local responce (in one infamous instance, the Mayor of New Orleans tried to pass the blame for the poor evacuation on the lack of busses, when a photograph was circulated of a parking lot of school busses abandoned in a lot near the Superdome...).

Oh, and BTW, Bresident Bush had actually called the Mayor and Governor and told them to get prepared and suggested forward deployment (not in the mandate at the time) but was rebuffed.

So President George W Bush does everything possible to prepare and help but gets dumped upon, while President Obama goes off and plays golf without comment....Yes, the blogger's point is very clear indeed.
 
TrNuPr8_LUODFLFVgrBLRw2.jpg



It's over folks; let it go.
 
Possibly the best summary of the election and how it ended the way it did:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-12/guest-post-why-president-obama-was-reelected

Guest Post: Why President Obama Was Reelected
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/12/2012 10:52 -0500

Via James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,

It’s a safe assumption to make that the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of the United States Presidency will be talked about for decades to come. In history textbooks, 2012 will be referred as a momentous election year when the nation came together and collectively decided to stick with a president through the thick. Like Franklin Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and other “transformative” presidents before him, Obama will be praised for keeping the country together in the midst of economic difficulty. In sum, he will be called a popular figure who triumphed over America’s old guard and lead the nation into a new era of solidarity and renewed social tolerance.

The lavishing has already begun with prominent voices on the left like Paul Krugman declaring the “new America” has made Obama their champion. It’s being said in major newspapers across the world that this new incarnation of the American experiment is much more attuned to the struggle of minorities and the downtrodden. They went with a President who will use the divine power of the federal government to lift the disenfranchised onto the platform of dignified living.

Like most of what passes for accepted history, this is downright propaganda. The country as a whole wasn’t frightened over sudden change by throwing out the incumbent. It wasn’t a declaration of a new, more diverse America. Shaping a new destiny wasn’t on the casual voter’s mind on November 6th.

There is a rational explanation for the President’s reelection which doesn’t invoke a deep or complex meaning. The only way to explain the outcome is in the simplest and direct prose: the moochers prevailed.

Obama’s winning tactic was to do what any respectable man does when he wishes to have something; he bought it. From cell phones and contraceptives to food stamps and unemployment benefits, the Obama administration kept the money flowing to ensure a steady turnout on Election Day. The coup de grâce was painting his opponent as a second coming of Dickens’ Scrooge that was ready to cut the voters from their trust funds.

The campaign made no attempt to hide this tactic. In an online video, celebrity Lena Dunham was tapped to extol the virtues of government-supplied birth control. The advertisement was aimed at a younger generation already guaranteed access to their parent’s health insurance till they turn 26 (and then morph simultaneously into full grown, self-sufficient adults). The video was a great demonstration of the campaign strategy but it was topped by one woman from Cleveland, Ohio who exemplified the public trough mentality on camera. Commonly referred to as the Obama-phone lady, this woman was so enraptured by her “free” cell phone and other welfare entitlements, she was determined to “keep Obama in president” to use her exact words. Though clearly dimwitted, Ms. Obamaphone was a phenomenal orator of the President’s message of goodies in exchange for votes.

Though it worked splendidly, Obama’s strategy was not brilliantly crafted from the minds of experts. It was the same bread and circus routine employed by the Romans and applied to modern demographics that relish in a victim-like mentality.  Women, the youth, blacks, Hispanics, and the elderly were all catered to through subtle patronization and outright payoffs.  It was the same tactic employed by the Roosevelt administration when the New Deal got underway. As journalist John T. Flynn wrote of the popular 32nd president:

It was always easy to sell him a plan that involved giving away government money. It was always easy to interest him in a plan which would confer some special benefit upon some special class in the population in exchange for their votes.

The 2009 auto industry bailout was Obama’s great tribute to Roosevelt. By infusing two auto giants with the federal government and still maintaining the appearance of their private ownership, the President convinced a majority in the battleground state of Ohio to put him back in the White House. Criticizing the auto bailout was the last nail in the coffin for Mitt Romney’s presidential aspirations.

None of this is to say the election of Romney would have meant the much needed axing of the welfare state and state-subsidized dependency. The army of bureaucrats tasked with cutting checks in the name of kindness would still work to expand their budgets. The wealthy interests the former Massachusetts governor looked to appease were welfare queens in themselves and would likely receive all the state coddling money can buy.

Obama won the election by catering to the worst of all human traits: envy. He demonized the rich while promising to take more of their income and give it out in the form of entitlement payments. Under his presidency, the attitude of the takers will continue to swell as they clamor for more privileges. Anybody who speaks out against the Robin Hood scheme will be called an unconscionable xenophobe and a hater of the poor. The protestant work ethic will slowly be choked into submission through deliberate iconoclasm launched by the political class and their pet media pundits.

The opponents of capitalism will keep blaming money and greed for all the ills of society. They will also keep wearing fashionable clothes and coordinating protests on their smartphones while drinking caffeinated drinks that cost the same as some third world country’s average salary. They will scoff at hard work when it’s the sweat and labor of generations before them that has created the living standard they enjoy today. Under their tutelage America will be brought into its final form of, as right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh accurately defined it, a “country of children.”

Economist Thomas DiLorenzo sums up the key to Obama’s victory in this pungent bit of fine wisdom:

Every time Romney made one of his “let’s get the economy going again” speeches extolling the virtues of hard work he terrified the millions of welfare bums and parasites and motivated them more than ever to stand in line for hours to vote for Santa Claus Obama, their “savior” from having to work for a living.  (It’s always the low opportunity cost class that has the “luxury” of spending half a day or more standing in a line).

With Obama’s reelection comes the onward march of American society’s degeneration into that of the lazy, bitter masses forever on the lookout to loot a hapless minority still trying to make an honest living. The coming brave new world will be filled to the brim with self-righteous individuals eager to shuffle around the Earth’s gifts to achieve some kind of equality. In the process, none of them will produce a lick of good outside of satisfying their own disturbed need to dominate. It will be rule of the inept over the capable. Barack Obama will lead the way. He will be replaced in four years with someone that follows the same doctrine. The collective age of the country will continue to collapse till it reaches just shy of an unclothed infant wailing for succor. Except it will be grown men doing the crying and no one around to feed him because the sensible among us has already left.

The people have spoken and made it so.
 
I guess we'll be discussing\ parsing\ argueing this thread until 2015 when the 2016 Election thread takes hold.

I'm really, really sorry if I can't get excited\ pissed off\ twisting my nuts in a vice over what road some other country decides to head down\ drive off\ whatever.

Yeah, yeah, I know they're a big trading partner and all that, but if we put as much thought and time into our OWN elections, instead of worrying about the US and their decisions, maybe a few more of OUR people would be more interested\ educated\ caring about our own elections and outcomes.

It's done. Get over it. Move on. Nothing has changed, nor is it likely to, barring a death.

That's why we moved it to Radio Chatter.
 
recceguy said:
I guess we'll be discussing\ parsing\ argueing this thread until 2015 when the 2016 Election thread takes hold.

I'm really, really sorry if I can't get excited\ pissed off\ twisting my nuts in a vice over what road some other country decides to head down\ drive off\ whatever.

Yeah, yeah, I know they're a big trading partner and all that, but if we put as much thought and time into our OWN elections, instead of worrying about the US and their decisions, maybe a few more of OUR people would be more interested\ educated\ caring about our own elections and outcomes.

It's done. Get over it. Move on. Nothing has changed, nor is it likely to, barring a death.

That's why we moved it to Radio Chatter.

Aren't you worried about the huge socialist worker's paradise that your neighbor to the south is becoming?  >:D

We all know the last place Canadian Snowbirds want to spend their winter vacations is a hotbed of socialism.

Oh. Right. :nevermind:
 
Back
Top