Page 56 of 58

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 01:05pm
by Lord Zentei
I'm pretty sure it is decided, since you only need 270 votes to win. Unless there's a clause somewhere which says that you have to wait for all the states to count their votes before the winner is declared or sometihng. If so, I haven't heard of it.

AFAIK, the main effect will be that we can quit hearing about it on TV, which doesn't matter for me personally, since I don't watch TV anyway. :P

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 01:15pm
by Dalton
There is literally no difference except that Obama wins the EV by double digits instead of triple. The election will go to Obama, but Florida needs to finish the official count for procedural purposes so that the Electoral College election can proceed correctly in December and January, I believe.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 01:45pm
by Dalton
This man is literally insane. Like, gone off the deep end. Pants-on-head bonkers. Believes that anyone who voted Democrat should be met with hatred and disgust, and advocates disassociating with any and all Democrats in one's life, including spouses and children. I fear this person.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:06pm
by Aaron MkII
He's going to be pretty fucking lonely by the time he dies. Divorce your spouse if they voted Obama...wow.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:25pm
by Flagg
So apparently Romney cancelled all of the campaign credit cards before his staffers could use them to buy tickets home. Classy.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:46pm
by Aaron MkII
Jesus, the idiot put his phone number in the comments!

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:53pm
by Executor32
He already had it listed on the 'Contact' page, since apparently he thinks it's 1994 and nothing bad can possibly come from posting your real contact info on the Internet.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:56pm
by Aaron MkII
I bet his wife will be real impressed with his soon to be massive bill.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:57pm
by Flagg
Aaron MkII wrote:I bet his wife will be real impressed with his soon to be massive bill.
Cellphone or Landline? Because in the US you don't pay for incoming calls unless they call collect and you approve the charge on landlines.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:58pm
by Crossroads Inc.
Ye Gods, the stupid Burns, this guy is way WAY off the deep end. Its just..Sad I think the following comment says it all:
[Liberal Commenter]This isn't war. Nobody is out to get to you. I am a liberal. I'm not out to get anybody. Get help for your extreme paranoia, please.
November 7, 2012 5:11 PM
Eric Dondero said...
this is most certainly war, and yes, you are out to get me. If you are a liberal, you are scum of the highest order. You are a Hitler worshiper who wants to destroy America. You represent everything that is evil in this country.

You should be ashamed of yourself. I truly hope you never reproduce.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 02:59pm
by Aaron MkII
Flagg wrote:
Aaron MkII wrote:I bet his wife will be real impressed with his soon to be massive bill.
Cellphone or Landline? Because in the US you don't pay for incoming calls unless they call collect and you approve the charge on landlines.
Pretty sure its cell, as he says you can text him.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 03:02pm
by Aaron MkII
Definitely cell, listed on the contact page as such.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 03:36pm
by Dalton
Romney concedes Florida. Which means once all is said and done, Obama 332, Romney 206, which falls right in line with Nate Silver and other math-literate analysts (as well as my own map prediction posted earlier in this thread).

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 04:04pm
by Flagg
So they are saying the FL I-4 corridor is no longer a swing area and leand Democratic now.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 04:51pm
by Terralthra
Dalton wrote:This man is literally insane. Like, gone off the deep end. Pants-on-head bonkers. Believes that anyone who voted Democrat should be met with hatred and disgust, and advocates disassociating with any and all Democrats in one's life, including spouses and children. I fear this person.
In a similar vein, a now-removed blog entry from "B-Skillet" on the Christian Men's Defense network (says it all, really):
What the Right Doesn’t Get About Elections wrote:I’ll be the first to admit it. A couple weeks ago I predicted a Romney win. I predicted this largely because he played up his alpha cred in the first debate. But one photo-op on the Jersey Shore with Obama looking tough in a bomber jacket destroyed all that, which is yet another reason sane societies don’t let women get involved in government.

Instead, we are looking at four more years of skyrocketing debt, stifling regulation, and the only First Lady who could possibly be bitchy enough to make Hillary Clinton look feminine.

Ever since the primary debate when George Snuffleupagus seemingly out of nowhere asked Willard Mitt Romney about birth control (he’s Mormon, so I guess his position is “missionary”), we should have known how the leftists in the media and the Obama campaign (redundant, I know) intended to define the campaign. Because on radio ads, on TV, and on the web, the Democrats tried to make this election about a single issue:

The right to slut.

Or more precisely, the right to slut without the responsibility of consequences. The famous “gender gap” isn’t really a gap based on gender. The right overwhelmingly wins older and married women. The “gender gap” should more accurately be called the slut vote.

Women make up about 54% of the electorate. It is very hard to win without winning that segment, or at least losing it only narrowly while winning men big. While the right usually wins married women, the fact is that married women constitute an ever-decreasing share of the female population. Women want to delay marriage as long as possible so they can “have it all,” and usually “have it all” means “have as much hot alpha sex as possible without any consequences.” And thus, less married women and more sluts (not that these two groups are mutually exclusive, per se)

And that’s where the Democrats come in. Contrary to common belief, the primary reason the Democrats own the black vote has nothing to do with civil rights. The Democrats were only partially supportive of civil rights in the 60′s (with southern Democrats advocating “segregation forever”). Lincoln was a Republican, and Republicans in the House and Senate voted for civil rights legislation in the 60s.

Rather, Democrats have won the black vote because the black community is dominated by illegitimacy, and the Democrats are willing to subsidize and support that illegitimacy (as well as provide access to cheap abortions) so as to take away from sluts the consequences of their actions. Consequently, young black people grow up on the dole and not only never realize there might be something wrong with that, but eventually come to believe that’s the way it should be. The Democrats have won the black vote by first “empowering” single black mothers.

This is now beginning to happen in white suburbia, except unlike women in the urban black community, white suburban sluts start from a place of relative wealth and privilege (daddy’s little princess). Thus, food stamps–and increased rewards for having illegitimate kids while on food stamps–don’t (yet) appeal to them.

So instead Obama appealed to rich white sluts by forcing someone else (the Catholic church, in this case) to pay for their birth control, and by scaring them about alleged threats to their ability to take advantage of Planned Parenthood’s services (Planned Parenthood being conveniently located in the minority part of town, of course, so as to provide anonymity to visiting white girls whose white girl friends never go over there–except to visit Planned Parenthood themselves). This created a wedge issue in the suburban community that allowed Obama to play more strongly there than he might have if the election ended up purely about the economy or the national debt.

One thing one has to remember about women, especially slutty ones: They usually don’t make decisions based on reason. So all the Obama administration had to do was scare them that Mitt Romney was going to take away their birth control and their access to abortion. The fear for them is that, without birth control and abortion, they might actually get pregnant and have to give birth. That is scary not simply because of the economic burden of having a child (since, hey, they can get all kinds of cash and prizes if that happens), but because if that happened then everyone would know they’re sluts, and their image as daddy’s pure little snowflake princess goes out the window.

The right loses the female vote primarily because so many of them still operate from a feminist world-view: Women are pure, perfect, kind, and altruistic, and the only reason they “get into trouble” is that some evil, conniving, manipulative man tricked them into sleeping with the entire football team.

Twice.

And so, the Republicans believe they can win the female vote by focusing on education, or (as Romney did in the third debate) “peace,” or whatever feel-good idea the right can talk about without selling its soul too transparently.

Admittedly, the desire to slut it up isn’t the only factor in the gender gap. America has a fiscal problem primarily because women want free stuff without ever having to work. America is over-regulated because women don’t want to have to compete in the free market. America has profound moral problems in part because the rationalization hamster makes it impossible for 54% of the American electorate to ever admit a moral shortcoming.

However, this election cycle shows that the Slut Vote is real, and Republicans lose because they discount the existence of original sin in women. Abortion is often called the “third rail of American politics,” but in truth, the third rail is a woman’s right to slut (with cash and prizes).
The comments are equally insane, e.g.:
Cane, well said. The GOP is the emotional tampon of American politics. The very act of trying to win over the female vote makes women less likely to vote for Republicans, since women despise men who supplicate.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 05:33pm
by CaptJodan
Dalton wrote:Romney concedes Florida. Which means once all is said and done, Obama 332, Romney 206, which falls right in line with Nate Silver and other math-literate analysts (as well as my own map prediction posted earlier in this thread).
::sigh:: Can I pick the sauce to go with my hat?

I'm actually happy the state went blue again. I wish it could just do that more consistently, and a hell of a lot faster.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 06:11pm
by Blayne
Orson Scott Card also has a particularly crazy slant on the election. Which just breaks my heart as he's still my favorite living sci fi writer.
While most thinking people (granted, a smaller proportion of humanity than we'd like) will figure out what Edi meant, the technically correct term in the US is "state legislature" and that's the one used by Americans. If the Europeans speak of US state parliaments, well, I can understand why they'd do that but it's a linguistic difference that can cause confusion.

It also has to do with now outdated view that the US states were, in fact, sovereign entities that were electing the PotUS rather than the people electing the PotUS.
Yeah I agree; the States no longer being quite the same sovereign entities they were before was raised earlier so its just sorta didn't stay in my head.

Stewart covered some of the best parts of Fox New's meltdown from the election, though the torrent of twitter crazyness hasn't been remarked yet as far as I know.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 07:00pm
by CaptJodan
OSC wrote:When Hurricane Sandy devastated a part of America, you showed Barack Obama only in a favorable light.

Even though his administration, his FEMA, did at least as badly as the Bush administration did after Katrina, and with far less excuse, you did not run endless coverage of the people's suffering, the way you did with Bush.
Not that everything above this wasn't crazy, but this is when he truly flew off the rails into the next state. After that, he talks about how fair and balanced Fox News is, so I suppose it's to be expected.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 07:03pm
by Aaron MkII
It was damn near a week before FEMA got in after Katrina, people had to form fucking militia to defend themselves and help each other. The responses aren't comparable. There's plenty to criticize Obama on without lying.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 08:10pm
by Alyrium Denryle
Aaron MkII wrote:It was damn near a week before FEMA got in after Katrina, people had to form fucking militia to defend themselves and help each other. The responses aren't comparable. There's plenty to criticize Obama on without lying.
Yeah. A legion of canadian volunteers made it to New Orleans before FEMA did.

Oh no! The FEMA response in the east coast was not photograph perfect! Supply shortages and manpower constrain what they can do! The HORRORS!!!

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 08:44pm
by Blayne
I'm trying to glance through wikipedia about that; it seems FEMA had various preparations before hand, and there were problems, but I'm not finding specifically the criticism that FEMA was a week delayed, and only one mention of a 'delayed response' anyone know and with a source specifically how long?

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 08:49pm
by Broomstick
Crossroads Inc. wrote:
Broomstick wrote:Want to hear another one? Here in my thoroughly Republican state there are funds that assist the unemployed and poor in getting vehicle repairs, again, to assist them in getting the reliable transportation needed for gainful employment. Again, you need to qualify, but the program is out there. The rationale being that it's better to pay a few dollars so someone can get their car fixed and go to work and pay taxes than to support them in the social safety net (tattered mess that it is).

My thoroughly Republican state also has a state-subsidized health insurance program for the working poor without access to employer-sponsored insurance. It's why my family has had health insurance these past 4 years or so. I pay 5% of my monthly income towards the premium and the state covers the rest. The more I earn the more I pay in absolute dollars (up to the actual cost of the premium) but the percentage remains the same.
I never knew that, but it is freaking AWESOME! It is such an amazing display of how government can "Work" and how it can do things the private sector would never EVER do. Programs like that are an absoulte perfect example of why the far right belief system would never work. Can anyone imagine a private company doing this to unemployed people?
Unfortunately, it's also why Mitch Daniels refused to run for President. He puts practicality over ideology. The extremist part of the party would be having a meltdown over the notion of "giving away" anything to the poor, even if the effect was to get them less dependent on public assistance of any sort.

Add into that Daniels putting the social conservative agenda on the back burner during the economic crisis, by which I mean he explicitly said he was doing so and there was no way the far right was going to accept Daniels even though he's a Republican many Democrats could stomach voting for. They wouldn't even have to drag in him being part Syrian to discredit him, just his not toeing the party line to the last letter would mean he'd never make it through the primaries.

So, really, the Republican party is broken, even if momentum is allowing them to stagger onwards a bit longer. If they can't field a viable presidential candidate they're going to continue to lose elections and lose power. The party is starting to fracture, but the various groups are terrified to split off because that means the Democrats will be in ascendance until a new second major party forms up.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-08 10:37pm
by Eframepilot
Because U.S. elections are zero sum, the Republicans can still win the presidency, but only if the Democrats have a massive fuckup like a stupid war or economic collapse. In a normal, cyclical recession, the Democrats would probably still have the advantage unless the Republicans can find their equivalent of Bill Clinton.

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-09 01:44am
by fgalkin
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Aaron MkII wrote:It was damn near a week before FEMA got in after Katrina, people had to form fucking militia to defend themselves and help each other. The responses aren't comparable. There's plenty to criticize Obama on without lying.
Yeah. A legion of canadian volunteers made it to New Orleans before FEMA did.

Oh no! The FEMA response in the east coast was not photograph perfect! Supply shortages and manpower constrain what they can do! The HORRORS!!!
Clean up Manhattan while people are starving in Queens and killing each other over flashlights and canned food in Red Hook. Distribute supplies to areas that don't need them while ignoring those that do. Close all shelters in Staten Island when the nor'easter came, abandoning the people to fend for themselves and leaving Occupy volunteers the only source of help.

FEMA is just as bad as it was in New Orleans.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Re: [Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

Posted: 2012-11-09 02:15am
by Dark Hellion
fgalkin wrote:
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Aaron MkII wrote:It was damn near a week before FEMA got in after Katrina, people had to form fucking militia to defend themselves and help each other. The responses aren't comparable. There's plenty to criticize Obama on without lying.
Yeah. A legion of canadian volunteers made it to New Orleans before FEMA did.

Oh no! The FEMA response in the east coast was not photograph perfect! Supply shortages and manpower constrain what they can do! The HORRORS!!!
Clean up Manhattan while people are starving in Queens and killing each other over flashlights and canned food in Red Hook. Distribute supplies to areas that don't need them while ignoring those that do. Close all shelters in Staten Island when the nor'easter came, abandoning the people to fend for themselves and leaving Occupy volunteers the only source of help.

FEMA is just as bad as it was in New Orleans.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin
If what I know from Law and Order is true then everything you said is actually just business as usual. :lol:

Does anyone else on this board ever just get the impression that the true progressives just need to get laid more so they aren't bitchin' about little things so much... 8)