Ohio Will Decide: One Week To Go

[Snipe]

Conventional wisdom says that the State of Ohio will decide this election. I think that Ohio has gone to every victor since JFK, but don't quote me on that.

We have one week to go.

The race is a dead heat right now, as far as I can tell, but what do I know?

How is Ohio going to go?

I live in a black neighborhood, in the West End in Cincinnati. After Mass on Sunday, we went driving around the hood, counting Obama signs. It was incredible how few signs they had out. We counted no Romney signs, and in my neighborhood, they pull those signs up if you try to put them down. But we had many street blocks without any Obama signs.

4 years ago, you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting an Obama sign. This year, they are tough to find in a community that is over 90% black. 4 years ago, we had many people coming to our door for Obama. This year, it has just been one white couple trying to spread the news. 4 years ago we had some true believers, and they were so excited to tell me about Barack Obama. They were missionaries, and they wanted to spread the good word. They wanted to spread the goodness. This year, not so much, one white couple that was more or less indifferent compared to the past.

Today Barack Obama opened up a campaign headquarters in the West End. I saw them do the finishing touches, and I think they will open for business tomorrow. Now black people vote for Barack more than anyone else, especially the poor single mothers in my neighborhood. If you are on foodstamps and section 8, Obama is your guy.

I was shocked at how little Obama had come to my neighborhood, and how little support that he had among blacks by the signs. Maybe this campaign spot could help. He really needed to do it in my opinion.

I am skeptical that he can draw blacks at the same level that he did in 2008. I live in a black hood. I know many blacks. I swim in that water, and I will even be sporting a Obama/Biden sign myself just for good measure to show solidarity. But I think that the support has waned, and that blacks will not support him in those numbers. The percentages will still be the same, but the turnout will not. I just can't feel it the way I did back then. It won't happen.

That is my report from on the ground in the West End, Cincinnati, Ohio.

[Snipe]

Steve Sailer is the King. (http://isteve.blogspot.com/2012/10/obama-v-romney-demographics-draw-your.html)


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aWzEdNHt--U/UI95m7OiAfI/AAAAAAAAAeo/x_6F3Ycpgis/s1600/Steve_Sailer_Obama_Romney_October_2012b.png

I couldn't include the graph on this board, because the file was too large to post. It is interesting though.

[Frambo]

i could have gone with either candidate last time, but went McCain at the last minute. I'm solidly for Romney this time. I've spoken to about 10 friends/relatives that voted Obama, but are now going for Romney. I've heard from no one doing the opposite.

My small contribution from the Kings Island area

[blueblob06]

Got an e-mail from a familiy member this week that I haven't talked to in months. Their e-mail was telling me the candidate I "have to" vote for with one sentence of explanation. It was quite off-putting.

Also, got 7 different pieces of political mail ads in the mail on Monday. My recycle bin can barely handle the volume I'm getting.

[BandAid]

4 years ago, you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting an Obama sign.

Do you go around swinging dead cats often?

[TheRunningMan]

I voted Obama last time. I honestly thought he would bring some good change to the WH and turn this country in a good direction. Man did I get hood-winked by that narcissistic POS. Note to self make sure people actually have experience and a track record before putting them into a position of power.

Romney all the way this time around. I didn't like the Romney nomination when it was decided, but he has slowly but surely convinced me he is the right man for the job.

I can also say 3 of my buddies I know that voted for Obama feel the same way I do.

[ChicagoX]

It does not appear that Romney has done enough to capture enough votes to win Ohio and therefore win the election, at least according to the vast majority of polls. I think the false recent ad in Ohio about GM doubling the number of cars built in China and Chrysler planning to start making Jeeps over there might hurt him, too.

Romney certainly made a remarkable turnaround after the first debate when I really thought Obama would run away with this election. It now appears that Obama will win with somewhere between 277-303 electoral votes instead of the electoral landslide that appeared likely before the first debate.

[Muskie in dayton]

I voted Obama last time. I honestly thought he would bring some good change to the WH and turn this country in a good direction.... I can also say 3 of my buddies I know that voted for Obama feel the same way I do.

Same here. I know several others like us who "drank the cool-aid" in 2008 are voting Romney (or 3rd Party) this time. This in combination with Snipe's observation, I feel like the pollsters will be wrong. Romney takes Ohio.

I personally like Romney - he's the only Republican I would have voted for. Yeah, I know he has no clue about the average person's life, but I'm much more concerned with the financial direction of our country. I don't care if my company's CEO has a clue about my life, as long as I have a job. I don't care if my President has a clue about my life, as long as there's a strong vibrant America for my kids.

[blueblob06]

I

I didn't like the Romney nomination when it was decided, but he has slowly but surely convinced me he is the right man for the job.

Not trying to be a dick here, but what has he done to convince you? I still haven't seen either candidate actually sharing what specific plans they will put into action, it's always just ragging on their opponent.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Not trying to be a dick here, but what has he done to convince you? I still haven't seen either candidate actually sharing what specific plans they will put into action, it's always just ragging on their opponent.

+1 on this.

I am not in either camp but Romney infuriates me so I am really stuck with Obama. I have not gotten to vote in a presidential election for a candidate I truly liked since Clinton and that was just for his second term. I really like Paul Tsongas who died a few years later of cancer and didn't beat Clinton in the primaries.

For those that voted for McCain...that a-hole was Keating 5. I could care less if his buddies in congress absolved him of that I am convinced he helped that guy and am really shocked how few actually remember that. If you also didn't like Clinton for his philandering ways, McCain had plenty of extramarital affairs himself.

After this boondoggle of an election is over I am having a hard time looking towards the future hoping for a real candidate of the people. I really like Elizabeth Warren but she is gaffe prone after the whole Native American crap and how she repeated a family belief of ancestry before it was proven. I hope she learns from her mistake because she could be what this country needs.

[TheRunningMan]

There isn't one specific thing that I would say that does it for me. It's just one of those things I feel in my stomach when I see/listen to him. I really knew nothing about him when he was nominated. I am apolitical by nature, I hate all the politics and how heated everyone gets, but I do research and watch the debates when the time gets near.

Don't get me wrong I think he has many flaws and I do not agree with some things on his agenda. But at this point in my life (my personal well-being) and the direction of America I think Romney is the guy. Basically it comes down to the fact I gave Obama 4 years to try and do something and IMO he failed. Others may see it different but I think a change at the top is the way he goes.

I guess we will get to see how everyone else feels on Tuesday.

[TheRunningMan]

There isn't one specific thing that I would say that does it for me. It's just one of those things I feel in my stomach when I see/listen to him. I really knew nothing about him when he was nominated. I am apolitical by nature, I hate all the politics and how heated everyone gets, but I do research and watch the debates when the time gets near.

Don't get me wrong I think he has many flaws and I do not agree with some things on his agenda. But at this point in my life (my personal/family well-being) and the direction of America I think Romney is the guy. Basically it comes down to the fact I gave Obama 4 years to try and do something and IMO he failed. Others may see it different but I think a change at the top is the way to go.

I guess we will get to see how everyone else feels on Tuesday.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I am seeing this on the boards and it's running slow for me. When I post quick reply it tries to post it twice as with RunningMan's. Luckily for me it has blocked it for posting within a 30 second time frame. I wonder what's up.

[xsteve1]

Not trying to be a dick here, but what has he done to convince you? I still haven't seen either candidate actually sharing what specific plans they will put into action, it's always just ragging on their opponent.

Yep, hearing a lot of the same. To much ragging and not enough substance from either guy. I may write in Ron Paul.

[Frambo]

I may write in Ron Paul.

Why waste your time even going then? I would LOVE to vote for Paul...or Johnson...if my vote would even mean something, but it wouldn't.

I long for the day when a 3rd party (representing the majority of us) develops that gives me a reason to vote for them. Obama had 4 years, but he's a failure. Romney is the ONLY republican I would vote for out of those that ran.

[Muskie in dayton]

Why waste your time even going then? I would LOVE to vote for Paul...or Johnson...if my vote would even mean something, but it wouldn't.

I long for the day when a 3rd party (representing the majority of us) develops that gives me a reason to vote for them. Obama had 4 years, but he's a failure. Romney is the ONLY republican I would vote for out of those that ran.

The only wasted vote is the vote not cast. A vote for a third-party candidate does mean something. The more people who vote for 3rd parties, the more power they have, even if they don't win. Unless people who grumble about the 2-party dominance let go of that attitude, it will never change.

Now in this case I still think you should vote for Romney, but I'm just sayin'! :rolleyes:

[DC Muskie]

To vote is to give your opinion. To dissent is to not to give your opinion. If you dissent that is not a wasted vote. If you decide not to vote simply because the polling station is too far away, it's cold out, you forget, or whatever, that is a wasted vote.

[vee4xu]

There goes that uppity Snipe bragging about his neighborhood.

Ohio only matters if Barack doesn't win either Florida or Virginia. If so, then Ohio is only icing on the cake. As I said in another thread some time ago, Barack will get 281. The math for Romney is tough and getting tougher. Intrade has Barry up to 66% from a low of 56% less than a week ago. Romney is down to 33% from 41% less than a week ago. Gallup, who has Romney up 5 points among likely voters had an article today saying that Americans still mostly believe that Barack wins re-election. Anything can happen, but the situation is getting tougher each day for Romney.

[XU 87]

+1 on this.

After this boondoggle of an election is over I am having a hard time looking towards the future hoping for a real candidate of the people. I really like Elizabeth Warren but she is gaffe prone after the whole Native American crap and how she repeated a family belief of ancestry before it was proven. I hope she learns from her mistake because she could be what this country needs.

So you think a left wing college professor with virtually no experience in the private sector is "what the country needs"? Then again, with those qualifications, she should be president.

But I find it interesting that you characterize her long time lie that she is Native American a "mistake". In my business, we call such intentional acts "fraud". This is particularly true since she apparently utilized this fraud to advance her academic career.

[SpectorJersey]

So you think a left wing college professor with virtually no experience in the private sector is "what the country needs"? Then again, with those qualifications, she should be president.

But I find it interesting that you characterize her long time lie that she is Native American a "mistake". In my business, we call such intentional acts "fraud". This is particularly true since she apparently utilized this fraud to advance her academic career.

If Warren ever becomes president this country is going straight down the tubes, she is awful. I could write a lot more on why but I dont want to waste my time on that ultra liberal who thinks government is the answer to everything. She by far had the worst speech at the DNC but will probably win a senate seat based on the state she is running in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-P-CoSNYaI

[DC Muskie]

So you think a left wing college professor with virtually no experience in the private sector is "what the country needs"? Then again, with those qualifications, she should be president.

Well, presidents that had experience, heck even success in the private sector, or even received an MBA from college professors didn't exactly fair well when in the White House...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-a-businessman-help-the-economy-for-presidents-the-answer-has-been-no/2012/10/19/3e96459e-17ab-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b_story.html

Oh and for the record, I'm not a huge fan of Warren, but her lack of private sector is not the main reason she should not be president at this time.

[Snipe]

Do you go around swinging dead cats often?

I fell in love with that expression the very first time I heard it. I love the visual. What can I say?

[Snipe]

It does not appear that Romney has done enough to capture enough votes to win Ohio and therefore win the election, at least according to the vast majority of polls. I think the false recent ad in Ohio about GM doubling the number of cars built in China and Chrysler planning to start making Jeeps over there might hurt him, too.

Romney certainly made a remarkable turnaround after the first debate when I really thought Obama would run away with this election. It now appears that Obama will win with somewhere between 277-303 electoral votes instead of the electoral landslide that appeared likely before the first debate.

I can't say that I know what is going to happen, other than I have a gut feeling that Romney will win Ohio. Living in my community has affected my vote. I live amongst his biggest demographic supporters, and it is surprising how less excited they are this time around. I think that will affect turnout.

They were expected a record turnout in 2008, but they were down nearly half a million votes from the 2004 election. I have to believe that Obama maximized his turnout, as many people wanted to cast the historic ballot to elect our first black President. The people who stayed home and didn't turn out were people that didn't want to vote for Obama, but didn't like how Bush held office and couldn't support McCain. I never liked McCain, and I said as much last time round.

Given the Tea Party and the enthusiasm on the right, I think they are heading towards a strong turnout in Ohio. People are genuinely concerned about the debt and deficits and out of control spending. And yes George Bush did it too, they would agree with you. I am not a fan of George Bush either.

They say this is going to come down to turnout. I have my doubts about Obama's turnout and the enthusiasm on the left. I think Romney's voters are going to show up.

[Snipe]

i could have gone with either candidate last time, but went McCain at the last minute. I'm solidly for Romney this time. I've spoken to about 10 friends/relatives that voted Obama, but are now going for Romney. I've heard from no one doing the opposite.

My small contribution from the Kings Island area


That is a great point. I don't know anyone that voted for McCain that is now going to vote for Obama. I do know Obama voters that are done with him.

I think he will get less black votes than last time out. I think he will get less Hispanic votes than last time out. I think he will get less White votes than last time out.

But what do I know? The polls are all over the place. The experts can't agree on anything. At this point I am just going with my gut, but I am biased and their is so much that nobody knows.

It is exciting in a way to have people predicting that the election might come down to Ohio. And we have to remind ourselves that Hamilton County is in kind of a bubble. We are right next to Indiana and Kentucky which will go strongly Republican. This is Red State America. Upstate Ohio is a different ball of wax. It is quite possible that I have no idea what I am talking about.

[Snipe]

There goes that uppity Snipe bragging about his neighborhood.

Ohio only matters if Barack doesn't win either Florida or Virginia. If so, then Ohio is only icing on the cake. As I said in another thread some time ago, Barack will get 281. The math for Romney is tough and getting tougher. Intrade has Barry up to 66% from a low of 56% less than a week ago. Romney is down to 33% from 41% less than a week ago. Gallup, who has Romney up 5 points among likely voters had an article today saying that Americans still mostly believe that Barack wins re-election. Anything can happen, but the situation is getting tougher each day for Romney.

If Romney can't win Virginia it is going to be a long night. He has to have Florida as well. The oddsmakers have indeed favored Obama all along, but I think that is because they think that Obama will win Ohio. If you told those oddsmakers that Romney was going to win Ohio, he would instantly be the favorite to win the election IMHO.

On the other hand, Obama has been campaigning in Minnesota and PA. Clinton was sent to Minnesota, and Bide was just in PA. Those states are supposed to be safe Democrat plays, and they are on the defensive. Minnesota was the only state in the Union that didn't vote for Ronald Reagan, and they had two chances to do it. They have voted Democrat since 72. If Minnesota is in play, it could be trouble for Obama. You could be looking at a wave election and a blowout for Romney. Michigan and Wisconsin are within the margin of error.

And when Obama can't get 50 percent of the vote in the polls in Minnesota, that state is still winnable for Republicans. I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time either.

[paulxu]

Interesting living in a solid red state. We don't get the bombardment of TV ads, robo calls, etc. If we didn't get bleed over from Western NC ads, I would never see a presidential ad.
Talking to 2 friends in Cincinnati, they say you guys get it, nonstop, 24/7.
Are the Chrysler/GM presidents' response to Romney's ad getting any play? After his early remarks on the auto bailout, it makes sense for him to try and work somehow back in Ohio, but have his ads ended up being counterproductive...or are they working?

[X-band '01]

I can't say that I know what is going to happen, other than I have a gut feeling that Romney will win Ohio. Living in my community has affected my vote. I live amongst his biggest demographic supporters, and it is surprising how less excited they are this time around. I think that will affect turnout.

They were expected a record turnout in 2008, but they were down nearly half a million votes from the 2004 election. I have to believe that Obama maximized his turnout, as many people wanted to cast the historic ballot to elect our first black President. The people who stayed home and didn't turn out were people that didn't want to vote for Obama, but didn't like how Bush held office and couldn't support McCain. I never liked McCain, and I said as much last time round.

Given the Tea Party and the enthusiasm on the right, I think they are heading towards a strong turnout in Ohio. People are genuinely concerned about the debt and deficits and out of control spending. And yes George Bush did it too, they would agree with you. I am not a fan of George Bush either.

They say this is going to come down to turnout. I have my doubts about Obama's turnout and the enthusiasm on the left. I think Romney's voters are going to show up.

You're also overlooking the push that Obama's campaign is making for early voting. Virtually all of the early voting pamphlets are coming from Democrats - this is their way of countering the effects of a low turnout on the actual Election Day.

And because of Hurricane Sandy, there's also a possibility that some polling places may have a hard time to get open if people can't get out to vote and poll workers can't get their to work the polling places.

[coasterville95]

Paul, how about we send you half of the political advertsing we are getting buried in here in Ohio. If you have a land line phone, it is surely ringing off the hook with robo calls and "live town hall meeting invites" (Nice that they exempted political ads from Do Not Call), it will be refreshing to see commericals other than political commericals, oh and the Microsoft Surface one. The recycle bin is getting lined with all kinds of flyers. And if that wasn't enough my Facebook feed is going crazy with people brainlessly repeating every thing they can possibly like or share about their candidate of choice.

It seems like we are getting visits by either side at least once or twice a week for rallys.

So, what's it like living in a State the candidates have written off as a lock for one side or the other?

[paulxu]

So, what's it like living in a State the candidates have written off as a lock for one side or the other?

On the surface, it would seem nice since I am not overwhelmed by the stuff you mention. I don't believe we've gotten one robo call yet.
Ads on TV are minimal.

But, I'm in a district that is quite enamored by the Tea Party...we're the place where the woman said "keep your government hands off my Medicare." So, rational political discourse is very hard to come by. People are very set in their ways, and unfortunately the undercurrent of race remains strong.

I can't wait for basketball season to start.

[GoMuskies]

the undercurrent of race remains strong.


Thankfully there's none of that in Cincinnati.

[bjf123]

Talking to 2 friends in Cincinnati, they say you guys get it, nonstop, 24/7.


They're right. Every other commercial on TV and radio is political, mostly Romney vs. Obama and Sherrod Brown vs. Josh Mandell (US Senate race). The robo calls every night are also non stop. I did find out from a couple of friends that if you vote early, the robo calls stop within a day or two since both parties know you've already voted. I'll be voting very early four years from now.

[muckem muckem]

Anyone want to apply for an ambassadors job under this guys watch? He's making W look like George F'ing Washington.

[coasterville95]

That's dubious that they would even TELL the parties who has or has not voted yet. Not questioning that they do it, just seems shady.

Then again the whole early voting/ mail in voting thing just seems wrong to me. For some reason, part of election day to me is in the formality of going to the polling station, standing in line with your neighbors, and going through the actual act of voting in a voting booth. To me mail in voting especially seems to open the barn doors wide open for abuse. I wonder what the going street price is for somebody's blank ballot. I hear in one Ohio community its a slice of pizza. To think that such an important state has what would seem to be some of the most lax regulation of voting. An article last night mentioned that in Kentucky, you still have to complete a sworn statement explaining why you can't go to the polls like everybody else if you want to early vote. mail in vote.

I know the current scan-tron ballots we have now are counted faster, but I still miss the IBM card stylus punch machines. (Or in other areas the lever pull machines). Though does the optical scanner NOT look just like a paper shredder to anybody else?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

In Arizona, it has become absolutely terrible. I watched Amazing Race last night on my DVR and only watching the political commercials (including the show) and only one wasn't a smear add. We aren't a swing state so Romney/Obama adds were not there but our State and local adds were horrific. The Jeff Flake/Richard Carmona US Senate adds were almost comedic but the Anti Kristin Sinema adds were downright tasteless. The only positive add I saw was a pro-Richard Carmona add. I thought it was a toss up between the two so the one positive add caused me to cast my vote on my early ballot.

I can't imagine what you guys are getting in Ohio.

[Kahns Krazy]

I live in a black hood. I know many blacks. I swim in that water, and I will even be sporting a Obama/Biden sign myself just for good measure to show solidarity.

What an odd choice of words.

[blueblob06]

I can't imagine what you guys are getting in Ohio.
It's pretty disgusting in Ohio. I get tons of stuff in the mail every day, 90% of it seems to be negative although I try my best to not read any words on it before I get it to the recycle bin. People I know with landline phones are getting 6 to 10 calls each day.

Madeira police arrested a couple of 17-year olds for repeatedly stealing Obama signs. The teens were apparently doing this so frequently that people in Madeira starting to bring their signs inside each night. What teenager (who can't even vote yet) has the persistence to go out of their way to do this every night? I guess it'd be funny if say their parents were huge Romney fans and every morning they wake up to 200 new Obama signs in their front yard or something. Who knows.

[American X]

Anecdotally, my recent drive through Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana was saturated with Romney/Ryan signs, far outnumbering the Obama/Biden signage.

Not to deflate your self-importance Ohioans, but it looks like Romney could lose Ohio and still win overall with a surprising number of blue/purple states a toss-up or leaning Romney (Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Colorado...).

[GoMuskies]

I'm glad it's almost over. Tomorrow should actually be fun, although I fully expect my favored candidate to lose.

[X-band '01]

Anecdotally, my recent drive through Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana was saturated with Romney/Ryan signs, far outnumbering the Obama/Biden signage.

Not to deflate your self-importance Ohioans, but it looks like Romney could lose Ohio and still win overall with a surprising number of blue/purple states a toss-up or leaning Romney (Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Colorado...).

Minnesota? The only state that voted for Walter Mondale back in 1984?

Even a Romney win in Michigan, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin would be quite a stretch. There's just too many union voters in those states for Romney to overcome.

Just at a minimum, Romney will have to carry McCain's states plus Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and Colorado before getting to Ohio. Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada are states of Obama that could flip to Romney, but it's not likely at all he gets all 3.

[KC4X]

Doesnt' Romney have to win all of the "undecided" states to win? Yeah, that doesn't seem likely. Romney is pumping $ into the undecided states, leading to more signs, but does that really equate to a win in those states? Even if yes, it would have to be a win in all of them (short of turning a blue state to a red state) for him to win the election. I doubt that will happen.

[GoMuskies]

For whatever it's worth, Nate Silver of 538 Blog from the NYT gives Romney less than a 10% chance of winning.

[Snipe]

It is a big day for Nate Silver.

[Snipe]

I was at my polling place in the West End at 7 AM. The West End is over 90% black and trends heavily Democratic. No lines, no waiting. The polls had been open for half an hour and I was ballot number 28. It could certainly pick up later, because unlike four years ago many people in my community don't have jobs to get to under Obama so they can afford to sleep in.

Just like the yard signs, four years ago they were waiting for the polls to open. Today, not so much.

Romney is going to take Ohio or I am going to shave my mustache. Ohio is on the board, and based upon my internal scientific polling I am calling Ohio and the nation for Mitt Romney, the next President of the United States. Over 400,000 more people showed up for the 2004 elections than 2008. Republicans stayed home for McCain. They won't be doing that for the Romney. This isn't even going to be close.

[xubrew]

I was at my polling place in the West End at 7 AM. The West End is over 90% black and trends heavily Democratic. No lines, no waiting. The polls had been open for half an hour and I was ballot number 28. It could certainly pick up later, because unlike four years ago many people in my community don't have jobs to get to under Obama so they can afford to sleep in.

Just like the yard signs, four years ago they were waiting for the polls to open. Today, not so much.

Romney is going to take Ohio or I am going to shave my mustache. Ohio is on the board, and based upon my internal scientific polling I am calling Ohio and the nation for Mitt Romney, the next President of the United States. Over 400,000 more people showed up for the 2004 elections than 2008. Republicans stayed home for McCain. They won't be doing that for the Romney. This isn't even going to be close.

The first official projection is in!!!!

[CinciX12]

If this NY Times guy is right and the election goes 313 to 225 I am going to be so incredibly pissed that we had to endure all of these adds in Ohio when it turns out, no we did not in fact even matter all that much.

[vee4xu]

If this NY Times guy is right and the election goes 313 to 225 I am going to be so incredibly pissed that we had to endure all of these adds in Ohio when it turns out, no we did not in fact even matter all that much.

Very true. The polls in FL, VA and OH all close at about the same time. They are all close and the first one to report an Obama victory will be the decider (contrary to what former President W Bush thinks). Reason being is that all of the 281 scenarios include OH but not FL or VA. So assuming OH stays in Obama's column, then FL or VA only add to 281. FL is 29 electoral votes and VA is 13 electoral votes. We'll see.

[bjf123]

I was at my polling place in the West End at 7 AM. The West End is over 90% black and trends heavily Democratic. No lines, no waiting. The polls had been open for half an hour and I was ballot number 28. It could certainly pick up later, because unlike four years ago many people in my community don't have jobs to get to under Obama so they can afford to sleep in.

Did you have to show an ID to vote? At my polling place in Liberty Township, I had to show my driver's license, which they scanned to get my name. I only had to verify my address, not tell them who I am. In previous years, I had to show the license, but still give my name, and they'd find my entry in the preprinted listing of registered voters. The listing showed my signature and I would sign next to the copy of my signature. The poll worker would then write the ballot number on my line and hand me the card I'd enter in the voting machine. This year, I signed a touch screen using a stylus and had no idea what ballot number I was, though I still got the same kind of card to enter in the voting machine. I really think we should all be voting the same way.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I was at my polling place in the West End at 7 AM. The West End is over 90% black and trends heavily Democratic. No lines, no waiting. The polls had been open for half an hour and I was ballot number 28. It could certainly pick up later, because unlike four years ago many people in my community don't have jobs to get to under Obama so they can afford to sleep in.

Just like the yard signs, four years ago they were waiting for the polls to open. Today, not so much.

Romney is going to take Ohio or I am going to shave my mustache. Ohio is on the board, and based upon my internal scientific polling I am calling Ohio and the nation for Mitt Romney, the next President of the United States. Over 400,000 more people showed up for the 2004 elections than 2008. Republicans stayed home for McCain. They won't be doing that for the Romney. This isn't even going to be close.

You should shave that porn'stache anyway.

[DC Muskie]

Did you have to show an ID to vote? At my polling place in Liberty Township, I had to show my driver's license, which they scanned to get my name. I only had to verify my address, not tell them who I am. In previous years, I had to show the license, but still give my name, and they'd find my entry in the preprinted listing of registered voters. The listing showed my signature and I would sign next to the copy of my signature. The poll worker would then write the ballot number on my line and hand me the card I'd enter in the voting machine. This year, I signed a touch screen using a stylus and had no idea what ballot number I was, though I still got the same kind of card to enter in the voting machine. I really think we should all be voting the same way.

Why did you have to show an ID? Did Ohio implement a voter ID law?


In Maryland I just show up give them my name, address and date of birth. The best way to vote.

[bjf123]

Why did you have to show an ID? Did Ohio implement a voter ID law?


In Maryland I just show up give them my name, address and date of birth. The best way to vote.

According to ballotpedia.org, the rules for Ohio are "On election day at the polling place, Ohio law requires that every voter announce his or her full name and current address. Additionally, voters must provide proof of their identity. A photo ID is not required." FWIW, I was not asked for my name. Apparently, I could have used something other than my driver's license, but I'm not sure what's acceptable. There's probably a list somewhere.

[DC Muskie]

According to ballotpedia.org, the rules for Ohio are "On election day at the polling place, Ohio law requires that every voter announce his or her full name and current address. Additionally, voters must provide proof of their identity. A photo ID is not required." FWIW, I was not asked for my name. Apparently, I could have used something other than my driver's license, but I'm not sure what's acceptable. There's probably a list somewhere.

You standing in front of the polling official is not proof of identity enough? Just kidding.

Interesting. Why wouldn't they ask your name?

[paulxu]

I think all that might be reflecting the difficulty and pushes in recent years in swing state; restrictive and otherwise.
I'm here in a solidly red state, and today there was a guy on the computer, and a lady with a sign in sheet.
I showed my voter registration card, he looked my name up on the voter rolls in his computer, I signed her sheet...and that was it.

I think in Canada they may still vote with paper ballots and have no problem at all. Seems like somehow there should be better ways than you all are describing.

[Smails]

I had to show my license, then sign my name next to the ballot # and they had a copy of last year's signature next to where I signed. We used paper ballots with 'color in the box' instructions. Then I fed them into a machine and they verified that my vote was recorded. I live in Cincy...Wyoming to be exact

[chico]

I had to show my license, then sign my name next to the ballot # and they had a copy of last year's signature next to where I signed. We used paper ballots with 'color in the box' instructions. Then I fed them into a machine and they verified that my vote was recorded. I live in Cincy...Wyoming to be exact

Same thing in beautiful Sycamore Township.

DC, this is the way it's been in Ohio since I've been voting. I can't ever remember doing anything different.

[xubrew]

Why did you have to show an ID? Did Ohio implement a voter ID law?


In Maryland I just show up give them my name, address and date of birth. The best way to vote.

Throughout highschool and college, it would have been nice if buying liquor was that easy.

[XUglow]

They nabbed a lady at my daughter's polling place this morning. Signs say that you should be prepared to produce ID, but they never require it. Anyway, this lady walked out of one booth to the end of a different line. One of the poll watchers saw it and officials questioned her. She had a list of names in her hand and several of the names were already crossed off. She told the officials that she was just voting for friends the way they told her to vote. I wonder how many of her "friends" are dead.

She should have at least had the decency to walk out of the building and then back in. Just walking from line to line show no respect for the system at all.

I wonder what the penalty for voter fraud is. I honestly have no idea. I don't think I have ever seen anything about formal charges being made against anyone.

[coasterville95]

Sweep it under rug. There is no voter fraud in the USA. Just ask them.

That story is exactly why photo ID should be mandatory. I should say refusing or objecting to showing ID is practically admitting voter fraud. 18 to vote so anybody who wants to drive, Get a job, smoke (and drink at 21) have an ID.

And who is to say all those mail in ballots are from the person they say they are. Our system is so open to fraud but no one cares to say so. Didn't one story say somewhere in Ohio votes were sold for a slice of pizza?

Then people get all self righteous when the UN wants to send in poll monitors. We should be ashamed they want to. That's saying there is no confidence in our voting system on an international level. We're all in support of the UN when they want to watch over some 3rd world countries elections.

On that note - time to go to the polls.

[vee4xu]

So just curious, can anyone name one election (local, state or federal) that was determined due solely or even primarily to voter fraud? If so, please list it. I am not saying at all that voter fraud doesn't exist. What I am saying is that voter fraud does not determine the outcome of elections. It should be caught and dealt with per the law for fraud of any sort is illegal. But, to elevate the issue to the levels that some wish to do seems the equivalent of the bedbug scare to me. Hype and fear.

[bjf123]

You standing in front of the polling official is not proof of identity enough? Just kidding.

Interesting. Why wouldn't they ask your name?

Probably because the driver's license I handed the poll worker had my picture, so he could see it was me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

Ohio seems to have decided. Doesn't look like it's going to be particularly close, either.

[gladdenguy]

What time will Romney concede?

[BENWAR]

What time will Snipe say that he was wrong?

[RealDeal]

What time will Romney concede?

He can't he didn't write that speech.

[vee4xu]

Done.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Bill Cunningham said he will retire if Obama wins

[American X]

So just curious, can anyone name one election (local, state or federal) that was determined due solely or even primarily to voter fraud?

It has been convincingly shown Al Franken has a Senate seat because of shenanigans.

[GoMuskies]

Right now, Obama leads VA, OH and FL by a combined 86,000 votes. And yet this election looks like a landslide. Crazy.

[XULucho27]

Karl Rove is currently on-air going through the denial stage of the Kübler-Ross grief model. It's hilarious.

[Cheesehead]

Karl Rove is currently on-air going through the denial stage of the Kübler-Ross grief model. It's hilarious.

Red or Blue, Carl Rove is a douche.

[GoMuskies]

Romney now trails in Ohio by about 1500 votes. I suppose Cleveland precincts must be the ones left to count?

[vee4xu]

It has been convincingly shown Al Franken has a Senate seat because of shenanigans.

Officially? If so, by whom?

[GoMuskies]

Romney now has a 20,000 vote lead in Ohio....the state he's apparently lost.

[waggy]

Romney now has a 20,000 vote lead in Ohio....the state he's apparently lost.

I know, WTF? I know why I never watch these political news channels with their douchie cronies.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Romney now has a 20,000 vote lead in Ohio....the state he's apparently lost.

Cuyahoga county hasn't been completely counted yet.

Also Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Penn all went to Obama so Ohio doesn't matter anyways. Obama is over 270

[vee4xu]

Romney now has a 20,000 vote lead in Ohio....the state he's apparently lost.

Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) and Lucas County (Toledo) still have over 400,000 votes to report and Obama is winning 65% of the votes in those two areas. The rural areas have only 200,000 more uncounted votes. That is the basis for calling Ohio. Even Fox has called Ohio for Obama.

[vee4xu]

Also, Colorado was just called for Obama and he will win Nevada. So even if for some goofy reason Ohio goes red, Obama wins with those two states.

[waggy]

6 trillion dollars of debt buys a lot of votes apparently.

[TheRunningMan]

Obama won a campaign that was good enough. While he's not candidate I voted for, he's our president. I really hope he can do some good for this country. I think we can all agree the politicians need to get to work and start working together.

[kmcrawfo]

The country seems to have made a statement about the direction it wishes to continue. We are a country where 50% of the people think it is the government's job to take care of them.

I hired a lady who was on welfare, food stamps, etc 3 weeks ago. She couldn't get a job and I decided to give her a chance. She quit on Monday stating the job was too hard. I asked what job she had decided to take. She stated she didn't have another, but she would be okay because she still had her Medicaid, food stamps, and unemployment. If she worked another week she would have lost these items. So... stopped a $35,000 per year job with benefits because it was too hard and she preferred to soak up on the public pill. Sadly, this is becoming a trend. Why work when the gov't will take care of you....

I believe, this election was our last chance to reverse this trend. This is a standing president who based on his economic record should have been demolished in the polls, but the results show simply that we are a different country now than 20,30, 40 years ago.

I had hope that we would show that America still held onto our traditional, conservative values, but clearly that is not the case.

I do not believe there is any going back now.... Welcome to the new USA.

He is our President and the office should always be respected. The country has changed, the people hold different values, we will head down the path of Western Europe/Greece/Spain/etc. That is what this country has chosen. I feel for our children as they will shoulder the burden/consequences more than each of us.

[TheRunningMan]

On a side note I'm heading to CO for a ski trip. LEGAL!!

[CinciX12]

Can we get this over with Romney? Jesus

[Snipe]

What time will Snipe say that he was wrong?

I thought he would take Ohio. It looks like Ohio wouldn't even have mattered. I had a good feeling about Ohio. Would be interesting to see if he won Hamilton County.

FOUR MORE YEARS!

[waggy]

Can we get this over with Romney? Jesus

It's a news organizations duty to cover the news, not direct it because they've had a long day and want to go home.

[Snipe]

For whatever it's worth, Nate Silver of 538 Blog from the NYT gives Romney less than a 10% chance of winning.

Nate Silver just got a pay raise and four more years of statistical goodness. I like Nate, and I am happy for him. It appears he also is an Amazing Jew, as he got a score of 11 on Jew Or Not Jew (http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=514).

Nate Silver is now the go-to man in American politics. He was already, but that has been validated for another four years. He is a big baseball fan too.

[CinciX12]

It's a news organizations duty to cover the news, not direct it because they've had a long day and want to go home.

I had a long day and want to go to bed. I don't care what the news does lol.

[Snipe]

So just curious, can anyone name one election (local, state or federal) that was determined due solely or even primarily to voter fraud? If so, please list it. I am not saying at all that voter fraud doesn't exist. What I am saying is that voter fraud does not determine the outcome of elections. It should be caught and dealt with per the law for fraud of any sort is illegal. But, to elevate the issue to the levels that some wish to do seems the equivalent of the bedbug scare to me. Hype and fear.

I do think that voter fraud is a serious issue, as it undermines our whole Democracy. Legends of the past tell of Cook County in Illinois. I tend to believe some of the legends of the past. Now that is one county, and one state, and most importantly one big City (Chicago), but I think the stories aren't made up. I bet they had fraud.

Minnesota had some choice events during the Al Franken Congressional run that could bear some witness, and that isn't long ago. I think the Washington State had a Governors race that was a bit tainted as well. And if I had to point to any one city today, I would guess voting in Philadelphia should go up for audit.

I think it is absurd to assume everyone plays nice. I had some contacts and friends in the Mayoral race in Cincinnati when Pepper lost to Mallory. It was a close race and Pepper was in the lead all night when a few precincts came in and did him dead. I didn't hear him speak the words, but Old Man Luken had some choice words about the Mallory brother that works at the board of elections. Old Man Luken was a Democratic Congressmen for around 30 years. He didn't trust our own Hamilton County Board of Elections. I did an internship for that man (he was a grumpy and and powerful old man, but grumpy in a reasonably good way, Democrat and Conservative at the same time, something we don't have today).

I thought that if Old Man Luken doesn't trust our own Board of Electons, and he is a Democrat, than I shouldn't trust the Board of Elections as well. That is why I don't cast early votes. A 30 year Congressman who was on the most important committees in the nation didn't trust his own county board, and he knows more about that than you and me. I thought that if I voted, where does my ballot go? And who guards it 24 hours a day? I don't like early voting because of that. 30 days before an election you can vote in Ohio, and nobody is really safeguarding you vote. After all, we are talking about the government now.

I don't think that a conspiracy made Obama win. I think Obama won. But to discount the whole idea of voter fraud is ridiculous. Voter Fraud is real.

[Snipe]

It has been convincingly shown Al Franken has a Senate seat because of shenanigans.

I think the case is strong for that.

[Snipe]

6 trillion dollars of debt buys a lot of votes apparently.

Quoted for truth! How many votes can you buy by cutting the Budget!

SINGLE MOTHER NATION!

[vee4xu]

I said that voter fraud is an issue and also said it needs to be prosecuted. It just doesn't decide elections period. To think otherwise is to believe in the boogie man.

[Strange Brew]

I said that voter fraud is an issue and also said it needs to be prosecuted. It just doesn't decide elections period. To think otherwise is to believe in the boogie man.

Haha! Chicago, circa 1960 is snickering at you. :)

[XU 87]

I thought he would take Ohio. It looks like Ohio wouldn't even have mattered. I had a good feeling about Ohio. Would be interesting to see if he won Hamilton County.

FOUR MORE YEARS!

Obama won Hamilton County by 5%. That really worries for me going forward.

[vee4xu]

Haha! Chicago, circa 1960 is snickering at you. :)

Again, myth or fact? Where's the link to the story? Even if so, how many elections are run every year in the history of our country?

[STL_XUfan]

Romney is going to take Ohio or I am going to shave my mustache.

Moment of silence for Snipe's mustache.

[XU 87]

6 trillion dollars of debt buys a lot of votes apparently.

I just read a good article about this. Obama, and democrats generally, win elections by taking from people who won't vote for them and giving that money to people who will. If you're a student we'll give you Pell Grants. If you're poor we'll give you free food, welfare, medical care, housing and cell phones. If you work for the federal government we'll give you wages, benefits and retirement benefits that the private sector doesn't get. Work in the auto industry? We'll give your company billions of taxpayer dollars.

If a person receives free government goodies, which candidate are they going to vote for?

[boozehound]

Obama won Hamilton County by 5%. That really worries for me going forward.

Entitlement nation, buddy. It's not getting any smaller. There is a huge chunk of voters who don't really care about the defecit, or don't understand it at all.

Obama phones for everyone!!!!!

[Kahns Krazy]

I just read a good article about this. Obama, and democrats generally, win elections by taking from people who won't vote for them and giving that money to people who will. If you're a student we'll give you Pell Grants. If you're poor we'll give you free food, welfare, medical care, housing and cell phones. If you work for the federal government we'll give you wages, benefits and retirement benefits that the private sector doesn't get. Work in the auto industry? We'll give your company billions of taxpayer dollars.

If a person receives free government goodies, which candidate are they going to vote for?

I have said during this election season that I'm going to run on a platform that I will take from the richest 49% and give it all to the 51% that vote for me. I should win every time. As a numbers guy, I just can't take it. We are in a hole, and we re-elected the guy who campaigned on a shovel.

On the upside, interest rates should stay stupid low for the forseeable future.

[RealDeal]

Wow, turns out Romney was an awful candidate who ran an awful campaign. Who knew?

A legitimate candidate beats Obama pretty easily.

[muckem muckem]

I have no debt. i want interest rates high. No raises for my 40 employees for another four years. Hope and Change. " We live in the greatest country in the world. Help me change it." Four down, four to go. God Bless America. Go X.

[DC Muskie]

If it helps anyone, I'd be happy to take your redistribution checks. We could cut out a lot of red tape.

The sooner the better because I would love to quit my job right about now and live off of you all.

Thanks!

[coasterville95]

Not that it matters since I think The electoral vote is to the point where Ohio's 9 votes don't effect the final outcome - but did we finish within the margin that triggers an automatic recount? I know, the only thing that really does is give Snipe's mostache a repreive until the results are declared official.

Most important county in the country eh, that's why the election was called while CBS showed a table at the Board of Elections where they were just starting to feed the memory cards from the voting machines into the computer.

The country, she is a changing, ladies and gentlemen.

And in much less reported news, almost ignored really, apparently Puerto Rico had statehood on its ballot, and it passed. I'm surprised that isn't getting any bigger play. If Puerto Rico is granted full statehood, that means they get congressional seats, and isn't the electoral college based on one vote per congressional seat? And I thought the Congress is now capped at 540 seats, which means somebody is going to lose seats if this happens. Another variable in our dynamically changing society.

[coasterville95]

True, if the laon interest rates go high, in theory doesn't that mean the interest paid on savings accounts, CD's, Money markets and other investment vehicles go hihger as well. Be a great boon to those of us with no debt and some stashed away. Not going to happen short term, unfortunately.

Man, I can remember when a basic no frills savings account paid 5-6%.

[boozehound]

Wow, turns out Romney was an awful candidate who ran an awful campaign. Who knew?

A legitimate candidate beats Obama pretty easily.

I don't know about 'awful' but I do think that the Republican party needs to do some SERIOUS soul searching. This election should have been theirs to win. If they can't take the presidency under the current circumstances I'm not sure when they can. They need more likeable and dynamic candidates and I think that they also need to tone down their retoric. People in America don't like rich people right now. Romney was a super-rich uber white guy. I don't think he was an awful candidate. If anything I think he was too 'good' of a candidate for the American people to identify with. The guy has no skeletons in his closet whatsoever. He's an incredibly successful businessman. He doesn't drink. I think too many Americans struggled to identify with him.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

[xu95]

I guess the good news is we have a Republican controlled House so all of the things that Obama promised on the campaign trail will not come true. The only thing he will be able to do is put a few more liberal judges on the Supreme Court.

Next up, Sequestration.

[muskienick]

There's ALWAYS voter fraud (when your guy doesn't win)!

[XU 87]

I'll add one more thing. We now have 49 million people on food stamps. Republicans see that as a big problem. Democrats see that at as an opportunity for 49 million potential votes.

And I left out the democratic purchase of the young female vote- free birth control.

[RealDeal]

Bill Cunningham said he will retire if Obama wins

Bonus!

[GuyFawkes38]

I don't know about 'awful' but I do think that the Republican party needs to do some SERIOUS soul searching. This election should have been theirs to win. If they can't take the presidency under the current circumstances I'm not sure when they can. They need more likeable and dynamic candidates and I think that they also need to tone down their retoric. People in America don't like rich people right now. Romney was a super-rich uber white guy. I don't think he was an awful candidate. If anything I think he was too 'good' of a candidate for the American people to identify with. The guy has no skeletons in his closet whatsoever. He's an incredibly successful businessman. He doesn't drink. I think too many Americans struggled to identify with him.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

I'm getting a good laugh at this type of reaction. Incumbents win. That's what they do. Yes, there are exceptions. But the odds are in your favor if your an incumbent.

The GOP will likely win in 2016 and the incumbent GOP president will likely be reelected.

That's just how American politics work.

[DC Muskie]

I'll add one more thing. We now have 49 million people on food stamps. Republicans see that as a big problem. Democrats see that at as an opportunity for 49 million potential votes.

And I left out the democratic purchase of the young female vote- free birth control.

So the Democratic party was able to flip former, non food stamp females to their side?

Interesting theory.

[Frambo]

I'm getting a good laugh at this type of reaction. Incumbents win. That's what they do. Yes, there are exceptions. But the odds are in your favor if your an incumbent.

The GOP will likely win in 2016 and the incumbent GOP president will likely be reelected.

That's just how American politics work.

I think Hillary is stepping down to prep for a run in 2016. Not sure if the Republicans have a candidate that can beat her, unless one of the young bucks makes a big jump along with the party becoming more inclusive. If the far right still controls the party....I see no chance of beating her.

[DC Muskie]

I think Hillary is stepping down to prep for a run in 2016. Not sure if the Republicans have a candidate that can beat her, unless one of the young bucks makes a big jump along with the party becoming more inclusive. If the far right still controls the party....I see no chance of beating her.

Inside the beltway, it's generally believe their are far more GOP candidates in the stable then on the Democratic side. Of course anything can happen.

My early guess would be Christie, Pence, Rubio, Thune and Clinton, Warner, Bayh on the left.

Keep an eye on Mark Warner. If anyone could take Clinton in the primaries it would be him.

[DC Muskie]

I'll add one more thing. We now have 49 million people on food stamps. Republicans see that as a big problem. Democrats see that at as an opportunity for 49 million potential votes.

And I left out the democratic purchase of the young female vote- free birth control.

Actually, looking at it, if the Democrats want to make better inroads with white people, this is the way to go.

[chico]

Here's my Romney theory for what it's worth, which is really nothing. There were far too may debates when he was running for the nomination. And in order to win he had to pander to the the far right wing of the party. After he got the nomination, he needed to get back to the center to capture moderate independents. He wasn't too successful in doing this and it cost him.

Sure, there were a lot of other things that doomed him. But I think one of the main issues is that the primary process needs to change. All too often the only people who get geared up for primaries are the extremists, and as such they carry too much weight in determining who the nominee will be. A candidate who panders to that base will get bit in the ass after the primary because the opponent is given all sorts of ammo to paint him as an extremist as well.

If Romney could have conveyed a more moderate approach during the primaries the outcome may have been much different.

[Frambo]

Inside the beltway, it's generally believe their are far more GOP candidates in the stable then on the Democratic side. Of course anything can happen.

My early guess would be Christie, Pence, Rubio, Thune and Clinton, Warner, Bayh on the left.

Keep an eye on Mark Warner. If anyone could take Clinton in the primaries it would be him.

my point was that one of those younger guys (and not Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, etc) needs to step up with a platform that doesn't involve gay marriage, abortion or other moral agendas while including new groups into their thinking.

[DC Muskie]

my point was that one of those younger guys (and not Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, etc) needs to step up with a platform that doesn't involve gay marriage, abortion or other moral agendas while including new groups into their thinking.

Agree. The GOP is facing a serious situation with the Hispanic community. The map for Democrats has expanded into Virginia and North Carolina. Up next will be Arizona and Texas. If the GOP loses Texas in 2020, they might as well stop holding elections.

Gay marriage is never going away, and Planned Parenthood proves itself as a serious organization when threatened. But they have to stop looking like white guys who know more about women than women themselves.

[GuyFawkes38]

my point was that one of those younger guys (and not Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, etc) needs to step up with a platform that doesn't involve gay marriage, abortion or other moral agendas while including new groups into their thinking.

Like I said, I think people are over reading this election. Incumbents just win.

Furthermore, pro-life presidential candidates have and will win in the future. Of course, that being said, GOP candidates should not touch the issue of rape. Not a great move by akin/murdoch...

[XU 87]

So the Democratic party was able to flip former, non food stamp females to their side?

Interesting theory.

The democratic model is to essentially purchase votes. What do you think all this business about free birth control was about? It's about purchasing the votes of young females.

[DC Muskie]

The democratic model is to essentially purchase votes. What do you think all this business about free birth control was about? It's about purchasing the votes of young females.

Do you somehow think the GOP doesn't have a strategy of purchasing votes? Tax breaks?

It's really silly to think that only one party is in the business of purchasing votes. There would be no parties if that wasn't the goal.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Entitlement nation, buddy. It's not getting any smaller. There is a huge chunk of voters who don't really care about the defecit, or don't understand it at all.

Obama phones for everyone!!!!!

Or....some who understand that you don't have to attack entitlements first in order to balance said budget. I earn a decent living and work my ass off and am learned enough to know that it's the defense+wars should be our first target for budget cuts and make Eisenhower proud that we attacked the Military Industrial Complex.

[XU 87]

Do you somehow think the GOP doesn't have a strategy of purchasing votes? Tax breaks?

It's really silly to think that only one party is in the business of purchasing votes. There would be no parties if that wasn't the goal.

Unlike democrats, the GOP does not have an economic platform of redistributing income. Now I'm not going to argue that the GOP has been pure in this regard. They haven't, not even close. But they've been a helluva lot better than the Dems.

But we are in scary times- we have such a huge percentage of the population that relies on government assistance. And the dems love that since, other than retirees, those are democratic voters. Democrats love government dependancy- it keeps them in office.

But at some point in time, we're going to run out of enough productive people to pay for the unproductive.

P.S. There's a huge difference between tax breaks- letting someone keep more of the money that they earn- and just taking one person's money and just giving it to another person.

[XU 87]

Or....some who understand that you don't have to attack entitlements first in order to balance said budget.

You might want to take a look at the budget numbers before making such a statement. To say you're wrong is an understatement.

[muckem muckem]

Two wolves and a lamb sit down and decide what's for lunch.....

[Frambo]

Like I said, I think people are over reading this election. Incumbents just win.

Furthermore, pro-life presidential candidates have and will win in the future. Of course, that being said, GOP candidates should not touch the issue of rape. Not a great move by akin/murdoch...

unless the pro-life candidate (for a national election...not local) is against abortion, except for rape/incest/health of the mother/etc....I never see them winning. The akin/murdoch's of the far right will never win nationally.

[American X]

Now my avatar and location work for both Xavier basketball and the American experiment.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Unlike democrats, the GOP does not have an economic platform of redistributing income. Now I'm not going to argue that the GOP has been pure in this regard. They haven't, not even close. But they've been a helluva lot better than the Dems.

But we are in scary times- we have such a huge percentage of the population that relies on government assistance. And the dems love that since, other than retirees, those are democratic voters. Democrats love government dependancy- it keeps them in office.

But at some point in time, we're going to run out of enough productive people to pay for the unproductive.

P.S. There's a huge difference between tax breaks- letting someone keep more of the money that they earn- and just taking one person's money and just giving it to another person.

Do you think that massive subsidies to the Oil Industry and bank bailouts are not income redistribution?

Edit: http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/09/27/who-is-47-not-paying-taxes/

There is your 47% from Fox news which is so fair and balanced. 6.9% are non-elderly and seem to be the food stamp lazy people you are referring. 28.3% are employed albeit underemployed but employed nonetheless. The rest are elderly at 10.3% and a catch-all 1% remainder.

So are you saying that 6.9% of our population is causing the $1.4T deficit? That would be $22.7M per person.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

You might want to take a look at the budget numbers before making such a statement. To say you're wrong is an understatement.

Defense plus the cost of war is the single biggest budget line item. So to answer your question, yes I have looked at the budget.

[XU 87]

Do you think that massive subsidies to the Oil Industry and bank bailouts are not income redistribution?

Tell me what those "massive subsidies" are that are given to the Oil Industry?

[DC Muskie]

Unlike democrats, the GOP does not have an economic platform of redistributing income. Now I'm not going to argue that the GOP has been pure in this regard. They haven't, not even close. But they've been a helluva lot better than the Dems.

But we are in scary times- we have such a huge percentage of the population that relies on government assistance. And the dems love that since, other than retirees, those are democratic voters. Democrats love government dependancy- it keeps them in office.

But at some point in time, we're going to run out of enough productive people to pay for the unproductive.

They are their own redistribution program. The rich give it out the poor.

You simply forget what happened from 2007-2009. People are on government assistance because the economy bottomed out. 4.4 million people were added into the programs in 2008, up from 1.7 in 2007. That's not from Democratic economic dreams of adding more votes. That's 4.4 million people who wouldn't starve. I saw increases in demographics here in DC when I worked in a social service industry that dealt with food distributions. I worked with Bush's undersecretary at the USDA to expand where people could use SNAP benefits. Now you see that people can use them in 7/11, farmers markets and more and more grocery stores. They had to help more people get basic food in rural areas and urban cities where there are food deserts. They lowered the criteria to be eligible, because they were getting priced out of things like vegetables.

We are just now coming out of it. You will see less and less people on these programs. The rich have done pretty well under the Democrats the last few years. The country has added over a million millionaires.


I think after this election there needs to be a reality. The GOP can't continue to run campaigns like it's 1988, they can't simply tax cut their way to an election, or even economic success. And people need to stop looking at America as the "unproductive" vs the "productive," where one half truly believes they are carrying the backs of the "worthless" citizens of this country.

[DC Muskie]

Tell me what those "massive subsidies" are that are given to the Oil Industry?

Annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually.

[XU 87]

Annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually.

You didn't answer my question. Describe in detail what these subsidies are.

[XU 87]

Defense plus the cost of war is the single biggest budget line item. So to answer your question, yes I have looked at the budget.

You obviously haven't. Entitlement spending is the number 1 budget item.

[chico]

And people need to stop looking at America as the "unproductive" vs the "productive," where one half truly believes they are carrying the backs of the "worthless" citizens of this country.

Two-way street. People also need to stop looking at every rich person as evil. Just as there are people who truly need help, there are people who made their money honestly through hard work, and have nothing to be ashamed of.

[XU 87]

And people need to stop looking at America as the "unproductive" vs the "productive," where one half truly believes they are carrying the backs of the "worthless" citizens of this country.

If not the productive, who is carrying the backs of the unproductive?

[DC Muskie]

Two-way street. People also need to stop looking at every rich person as evil. Just as there are people who truly need help, there are people who made their money honestly through hard work, and have nothing to be ashamed of.

Yes, but forgive me for not feeling sorry for the new 1.1 million new millionaires. Rich people are not evil and people who are on food stamps are not lazy.

[DC Muskie]

If not the productive, who is carrying the backs of the unproductive?

My issues is with the entire premise of "productive" and "unproductive." It screams of the out of touch logic of Romney's 47% of Americans.

[chico]

Yes, but forgive me for not feeling sorry for the new 1.1 million new millionaires. Rich people are not evil and people who are on food stamps are not lazy.

Nobody's asking you to feel sorry for them, just don't resent them as many people do.

[DC Muskie]

You didn't answer my question. Describe in detail what these subsidies are.

How did I not answer your question? You didn't ask for details you asked what are these "massive subsidies." They are in billions of dollars. Usually involves costs in drilling, transporting fossil fuels. When you combine it with local and state subsidies they reach to $133 billion annually.

I'm not understanding what you are looking for? A line item of $52 billion worth of subsidies? I don't have that kind of time to waste. I need to waste it on other things on this board.

[DC Muskie]

Nobody's asking you to feel sorry for them, just don't resent them as many people do.

Do you people on food stamps resent millionaires?

Steinbeck put it best I think....

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

[XU 87]

My issues is with the entire premise of "productive" and "unproductive." It screams of the out of touch logic of Romney's 47% of Americans.

We do have unproductive people, and lots of them. And the democratic policies incourage this because it means more votes.

Read George Will's article about the huge increase of people on social security disabiltiy. Look at all the people on the welfare rolls and public housing. It's generational. We have 49 million people on food stamps. That's not productive. However, it is productive for your party, because that means more votes for them.

[DC Muskie]

We do have unproductive people, and lots of them. And the democratic policies incourage this because it means more votes.

Read George Will's article about the huge increase of people on social security disabiltiy. Look at all the people on the welfare rolls and public housing. It's generational. We have 49 million people on food stamps. That's not productive. However, it is productive for your party, because that means more votes for them.

I just explained to you how under Republican leadership, the rolls grew. That's pretty simple fact. So unless the Republican party is being duped by the Democrats by tripling the number of people on food stamps in order to elect Barack Obama, what you are theorizing is simply in your imagination.

Or your party is simply too stupid to figure out what you are already know.

[XU 87]

How did I not answer your question? You didn't ask for details you asked what are these "massive subsidies." They are in billions of dollars. Usually involves costs in drilling, transporting fossil fuels. When you combine it with local and state subsidies they reach to $133 billion annually.

I'm not understanding what you are looking for? A line item of $52 billion worth of subsidies? I don't have that kind of time to waste. I need to waste it on other things on this board.

I'll help you out. One of these so-called subsidies is depreciation on equipment. Every company in America gets it but when it's oil, it's a subsidy.

But if there are subsidies where we are simply tranferring money from one pocket to another, get rid of them. Why didn't Obama do that instead of complaing about them?

[GoMuskies]

Yes, but forgive me for not feeling sorry for the new 1.1 million new millionaires. Rich people are not evil and people who are on food stamps are not lazy.

Generally speaking, of course. I know some rich people I definitely think are evil, and I know some quite worthless, lazy po folks as well.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

If not the productive, who is carrying the backs of the unproductive?

So what should be do? Should we just let them die?

You can't get blood from a stone. Do you cut taxes for the 1% allowing them to save all the more or buy another car or a home with a 7th bedroom and raise taxes on tax payers in the remaining 99%, a lot of whom don't really get to save that much and what they do save is set aside for their kids college which by the way Romney was planning on cutting Pell Grants also. A lot of that 99% that pay taxes live close or at paycheck to paycheck level.

Even before the economy tanked, a lot of people living at middle class level grew increasingly indebted because of things totally out of their control whether it be medical, home repair, and a lot took on debt to educate their children. You simply can't raise their taxes.

[XU 87]

So what should be do? Should we just let them die?



You don't have policies permanently keeping people unproductive.

The trouble with liberals is that you create these social programs which make the problems much, much worse. Then you double down and want to create even more social programs.

Look what your social programs have done to urban areas. Do you think they made things better? They haven't. Our inner cities are exhibit "A" of your failed social experimentations.

[GoMuskies]

Should we just let them die?


Only if they are unborn.

[chico]

Do you people on food stamps resent millionaires?

Steinbeck put it best I think....

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

All right, when Steinbeck starts getting quoted it's time for this English major to call it a day here.

[DC Muskie]

But if there are subsidies where we are simply tranferring money from one pocket to another, get rid of them. Why didn't Obama do that instead of complaing about them?

He tried. It was voted down in the Senate. Crazy I know. Fortunately he and other Democrats put more people on the dole to get elected so he could try again.

[DC Muskie]

All right, when Steinbeck starts getting quoted it's time for this English major to call it a day here.

You hate Steinbeck????

It's because of Grapes of Wrath isn't?

[DC Muskie]

You don't have policies permanently keeping people unproductive.

The trouble with liberals is that you create these social programs which make the problems much, much worse. Then you double down and want to create even more social programs.

Look what your social programs have done to urban areas. Do you think they made things better? They haven't. Our inner cities are exhibit "A" of your failed social experimentations.

If these obviously failed experiments are still around, why haven't conservatives gotten rid of it. Why in eight years did Bush add to the total number of food stamp dependents?

[XU 87]

. Fortunately he and other Democrats put more people on the dole to get elected

That was their plan, and it worked. And that's the plan for the future.

Do you deny that more people on the dole is beneficial to the democrats?

[XU 87]

If these obviously failed experiments are still around, why haven't conservatives gotten rid of it. Why in eight years did Bush add to the total number of food stamp dependents?

If you want to argue that these programs work, have at it.

[DC Muskie]

Do you deny that more people on the dole is beneficial to the democrats?

Yes. I know you vehemently disagree and are upset at the outcome of this election. But yes I disagree.

If you look at the breakdown of this election the racial lines are staggering. Whites make up the most people who are on food stamps. Obama got killed by poor white voters in this election. Right there, that demographic kills your theory.

[DC Muskie]

If you want to argue that these programs work, have at it.

Having worked specifically with the SNAP I can assure you these programs benefit people greatly. It's not that hard to understand.

[xu95]

I think Hillary is stepping down to prep for a run in 2016. Not sure if the Republicans have a candidate that can beat her, unless one of the young bucks makes a big jump along with the party becoming more inclusive. If the far right still controls the party....I see no chance of beating her.

IF (and I mean if) people in this country feel the same way 4 years from now as they feel now, the Democrats could have John F. Kennedy run again and they will not win. I hate to say it, but I agree with Guy. We are almost in a cycle where it will be 8 and 8 for a while. I guess like everything politics is cyclical.

[DC Muskie]

IF (and I mean if) people in this country feel the same way 4 years from now as they feel now, the Democrats could have John F. Kennedy run again and they will not win. I hate to say it, but I agree with Guy. We are almost in a cycle where it will be 8 and 8 for a while. I guess like everything politics is cyclical.

Not if you breakdown the demographics of this election. Times are a changing people, it's not 1988. We just reelected the first Democrat with a majority vote since FDR.

[GoMuskies]

Not if you breakdown the demographics of this election. Times are a changing people, it's not 1988. We just reelected the first Democrat with a majority vote since FDR.

And if the Rs move about three inches to the left, they erase that majority.

[DC Muskie]

And if the Rs move about three inches to the left, they erase that majority.

Yeah it just depends on what they want to give up. I'd start with stop promoting "self deportation."

[XU 87]

Having worked specifically with the SNAP I can assure you these programs benefit people greatly. It's not that hard to understand.

Look at any statistics, particularly the breakdown of the family structure, or maybe just read the newspapers to see all of the crime in urban areas, and you will see that these social programs have been a disaster. The facts are indusputable, unless they go against one's political beliefs, and then you simply ignore them.

[GoMuskies]

Yeah it just depends on what they want to give up. I'd start with stop promoting "self deportation."

That's probably #2 after they stop courting the rapist vote.

[DC Muskie]

Look at any statistics, particularly the breakdown of the family structure, or maybe just read the newspapers to see all of the crime in urban areas, and you will see that these social programs have been a disaster. The facts are indusputable, unless they go against one's political beliefs, and then you simply ignore them.

Yeah, I'd rather sit and read statistics, read newspaper articles about the inner city, and see how indisputable the facts are on how horrible the SNAP is. Forget working with actual human beings or have personal experiences, I'd rather ignore those, and the articles I read.

Great argument!

[XU 87]

Yeah, I'd rather sit and read statistics, read newspaper articles about the inner city, and see how indisputable the facts are on how horrible the SNAP is. Forget working with actual human beings or have personal experiences, I'd rather ignore those, and the articles I read.

Great argument!

Like I said, if the objective factual data goes against your political beliefs, then just ignore it.

You should read a book called Losing Ground by Charles Murray. You may learn something.

[DC Muskie]

Like I said, if the objective factual data goes against your political beliefs, then just ignore it.

You should read a book called Losing Ground by Charles Murray. You may learn something.

You might want to take the time and work in social service. You will definitely learn something.

Seriously I have never heard an argument so silly.

"Shut up person whose worked with the poor! You need to read a book that I have read!"

I have read numerous books on the subject, and trust me while there are issues, our services are overall good.

[XU 87]

Seriously I have never heard an argument so silly.



Yes, understanding and learning about the facts is silly. Understanding and learning about the objective factual data which shows the long term implications of social welfare programs is just plain silly.

[DC Muskie]

Yes, understanding and learning about the facts is silly. Understanding and learning about the objective factual data which shows the long term implications of social welfare programs is just plain silly.

Look i love you 87. But please. I'm going to be the asshole here.

Please don't lecture me about the learning process of social programs. I have read numerous books, I had to, it was a part of my job. In fact I lived the process of learning. I can see the good and the bad and actually would have a better understanding then someone like you, who frankly has zero skin in the game.

And when I mean skin, I mean your actual skin, not your taxes, or whatever burden you think you hold. Until you have actually spent years working with people who need and use these benefits, and not spending the a couple hours here and there volunteering at the local soup kitchen, your opinion is frankly meaningless to me.

You have zero objectivity, because you simply have never encountered it. I will never convince you that there are benefits to programs like this, because you have a read book. Fred Gavin used to make fun of me because I read a book on the Teapot Dome Scandal. Good book by the way.

All you see is the bad. You have zero experience, but have no problem being an expert on other people's theories.

[boozehound]

my point was that one of those younger guys (and not Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, etc) needs to step up with a platform that doesn't involve gay marriage, abortion or other moral agendas while including new groups into their thinking.

I am with you 1000% on this. The majority of people I know who voted Republican (myself included) did so somewhat reluctantly, due to their complete opposition of much of the GOP's social agenda. They agreed with most of the budgetary theories espoused by the GOP but found their social views repugnant. You have guys running around making incredibly stupid comments about issues like rape and instead of severing ties with them you double down on the support. Drop the faux morality and focus on personal choice, limiting government, and fixing the economy.


Like I said, I think people are over reading this election. Incumbents just win.

Furthermore, pro-life presidential candidates have and will win in the future. Of course, that being said, GOP candidates should not touch the issue of rape. Not a great move by akin/murdoch...

The below quote would seem to cast some doubt.

I also think you are grossly underestimating the impact of a poor economy on reelection. The last one term president we had was H.W. Bush and he lost (largely) because the economy was bad in 1991-1992. Before than it was Carter who lost his reelection bid amid a tough economy. Incombants may generally win, but recession seems to counteract that. It was easy for Clinton and Bush (W) to win reelection because the economy was strong when they were both running for reelection. Ditto for Reagan. We generally seem to preserve the status quo, unless the status quo is bad and then we vote the other guy in. That didn't happen this time. The crazy thing is that a lot of people rated Romney stronger on economic issues and then proceeded not to vote for him. What is more important than the economy right now?


Not if you breakdown the demographics of this election. Times are a changing people, it's not 1988. We just reelected the first Democrat with a majority vote since FDR.

Times are definitely changing. I, for one, would like to see the GOP change with them.




I think after this election there needs to be a reality. The GOP can't continue to run campaigns like it's 1988, they can't simply tax cut their way to an election, or even economic success. And people need to stop looking at America as the "unproductive" vs the "productive," where one half truly believes they are carrying the backs of the "worthless" citizens of this country.

I agree. The election is over. It's time for the Republicans to compromise. They didn't win. Now they have to work with the guys who did win. The country can't afford 4 more years of gridlock. The first order of business needs to be avoiding the 'fiscal cliff'. They may have to agree to roll back the Bush tax cuts for $250K+ earners to preserve them for the rest of the taxpayers and avoid economic disaster. Pick your battles, and compromise to get some key things done. Focus on what you can agree on, not what you disagree on.


Two-way street. People also need to stop looking at every rich person as evil. Just as there are people who truly need help, there are people who made their money honestly through hard work, and have nothing to be ashamed of.

Agree.


And if the Rs move about three inches to the left, they erase that majority.

Agree. When are they going to do that though? With the state of the economy coming into this election this should have (in my opinion) been a very winnable election for the GOP. They completely crapped the bed. Guys like Akin and Murdoch need to be marginalized, if not removed from the party.

[boozehound]

Also, this is an interesting article that relates to some of my earlier post:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/07/analysis-slivers-hope-in-economic-recovery-helped-boost-obama/

[XU 87]

And when I mean skin, I mean your actual skin, not your taxes, or whatever burden you think you hold. Until you have actually spent years working with people who need and use these benefits, and not spending the a couple hours here and there volunteering at the local soup kitchen, your opinion is frankly meaningless to me.

You have zero objectivity, because you simply have never encountered it. I will never convince you that there are benefits to programs like this, because you have a read book.

All you see is the bad. You have zero experience, but have no problem being an expert on other people's theories.

Since you have never met me, you know not what you're talking about when it comes to my own experience. In addition, I can also tell you that in the past I've done a fair amount of research on this very issue we're discussing.

That said, your "I've played the game and you haven't and therefore you should have no opinion on the matter" argument is the weakest of all possible arguments. Since you've never been in political office, then I suggest you stop offering your opinions on anything political. And since you have never played college basketball, the same goes for Xavier basketball as well.

What I can tell you, once again, is the objective factual data clearly demonstrates that the government's social engineering has had a terrible and profoundly adverse affect on work, poverty, the family structure and other associated problems like crime. And you don't need to be working at HUD to grasp or understand those facts.

[DC Muskie]

Since you have never met me, you know not what you're talking about when it comes to my own experience. In addition, I can also tell you that in the past I've done a fair amount of research on this very issue we're discussing.

That said, your "I've played the game and you haven't and therefore you should have no opinion on the matter" argument is the weakest of all possible arguments. Since you've never been in political office, then I suggest you stop offering your opinions on anything political. And since you have never played college basketball, the same goes for Xavier basketball as well.

What I can tell you, once again, is the objective factual data clearly demonstrates that the government's social engineering has had a terrible and profoundly adverse affect on work, poverty, the family structure and other associated problems like crime. And you don't need to be working at HUD to grasp or understand those facts.

Good Lord, the "this is the weakest argument" argument. Is there a book that rates such arguments? I guess when you are complaining over the fact that president never ran a business so how would he know how to create growth in business is stupid argument you and Romney made over the last few months. Whatever that's not the point...

All I am merely saying is, throw me a freaking bone that I may know at least an ounce of what I am talking about. One ounce. Not this jibberish that since I never played college basketball I shouldn't have a position, crap, which completely moves the argument from the principle belief that not all is bad with programs like SNAP.

I can see the troubles that HUD brings, that doesn't mean we should scrap SNAP. WIC is a good program, but that doesn't mean they are not abuses or loopholes that need to be closed.

What may I ask are your experiences with working with people who live in public housing or on SNAP? I can tell you two years ago during Thanksgiving I worked with soldiers at Walter Reed and Andrews Air Force Base to provide food to military families. They used SNAP benefits to purchase them. Can you believe their are soldiers who are on SNAP? Maybe a book you read told you that. I actually met people.

Can you at least say that maybe just this one certain time, that SNAP was beneficial to our soldiers? Or are you completely stuck in keeping with the stereotype that conservatives are heartless dicks who only think of people on welfare as drains on their pocketbooks?

[XU 87]

Or are you completely stuck in keeping with the stereotype that conservatives are heartless dicks who only think of people on welfare as drains on their pocketbooks?

Studies have shown that conservatives give much more to charities than liberals.

[DC Muskie]

Studies have shown that conservatives give much more to charities than liberals.

And in my experience that is true!

But that has nothing to do with the fact that they think people on welfare are a drain on their pocketbooks.

[Kahns Krazy]

There are programs that I think are helpful to those that need help. From what little I know about the program that DC either works with or used to work with, I think that is one of those programs. There are also programs that hand out cash or cash equivilents to lazy people. I don't think those programs help any. I think it's time to blow the whole process up and start over. Figure out what portion of our budget we can afford to spend then figure out who needs it the most, in the most efficient way, until we've spent it. Then stop spending.

One of the problems I see is that there are multiple programs that support the same person or family for theoretically the same thing. There are food stamp programs and free school lunch programs. Do you get less food stamp assistance if you also get free school lunches?

I am a believer in a safety net for those in need. I don't think our current system provides that. I also think it costs too much.

[xu95]

Boozehound, why do you think it is time for the Republicans to compromise? Have you seen Obama compromise on anything? Both sides have to give up something to compromise. One of my problems with our President is that his demeanor (and words for that matter) say "it is my way or the highway". Maybe the rhetoric from the other side wouldn't be quite so bad if they actually thought that he would give something to get something.

Both sides are to blame for this gridlock, not just the Republicans.

[DC Muskie]

Boozehound, why do you think it is time for the Republicans to compromise? Have you seen Obama compromise on anything?


Really, where do you get this narrative?

In 2011 Democrats were killing Obama for compromising on the extension of Bush's tax cuts so the payroll tax cut could go through.

The debt ceiling crisis was averted because Obama ceded more than a trillion dollars in spending.

Heck the president even caved to the Speaker on the time to give a speech to a joint session in Congress.

When the minority leader of the Senate says it's his job to ensure Obama is a one term president, it sounds like they weren't interested in anything to do to move the country forward.

I'm sure you will disagree.

[DC Muskie]

There are programs that I think are helpful to those that need help. From what little I know about the program that DC either works with or used to work with, I think that is one of those programs. There are also programs that hand out cash or cash equivilents to lazy people. I don't think those programs help any. I think it's time to blow the whole process up and start over. Figure out what portion of our budget we can afford to spend then figure out who needs it the most, in the most efficient way, until we've spent it. Then stop spending.

One of the problems I see is that there are multiple programs that support the same person or family for theoretically the same thing. There are food stamp programs and free school lunch programs. Do you get less food stamp assistance if you also get free school lunches?

I am a believer in a safety net for those in need. I don't think our current system provides that. I also think it costs too much.

Definitely.

40 states in this country pay more in welfare than an $8 an hour job. 26% of people who are on AFCD have done so for at least two to five years. there are definite places where reforms need to be place, not only scaling back spending, but increasing spending in certain places. You should Read Out of Reach by Scott Allard, who has some interesting data to back up how this money is allocated.

[GuyFawkes38]

The GOP panic is driving me crazy. The economy has been growing the past year (yes, slowly, but still growing). Obama is an incumbent. Incumbents have a huge advantage.

It's that simple.

[boozehound]

Boozehound, why do you think it is time for the Republicans to compromise? Have you seen Obama compromise on anything? Both sides have to give up something to compromise. One of my problems with our President is that his demeanor (and words for that matter) say "it is my way or the highway". Maybe the rhetoric from the other side wouldn't be quite so bad if they actually thought that he would give something to get something.

Both sides are to blame for this gridlock, not just the Republicans.

Yes, it's time for the Republicans to compromise. Democrats too, but the Republicans just lost the presidential election and while they do have a majority in the house they are a minority in the Senate so they may have to give a little more than the Democrats since they (in my mind) have less bargaining power right now. They have spent the last four years being (admittedly) obstructionist and refusing to entertain any kind of tax increase. Half of these guys (or more) signed that stupid pledge from that piece of sh!t Grover Norquist to never raise taxes on anybody, for crying out loud.

Both parties need to sit down and figure out the fiscal cliff. Right now the Republicans are saying that it is all or nothing - either extend the Bush tax cuts for everybody or extend them for nobody. The Democrats are saying extend the Bush tax cuts for all but the $250K+ earners. There needs to be some kind of compromise. You can't hurt 90% of the population because you are in a pissing match over 10%.

[DC Muskie]

The GOP panic is driving me crazy. The economy has been growing the past year (yes, slowly, but still growing). Obama is an incumbent. Incumbents have a huge advantage.

It's that simple.

Five of the last six presidential elections the GOP has not won the majority of the popular vote.

That's more than a trend.

[GuyFawkes38]

Five of the last six presidential elections the GOP has not won the majority of the popular vote.

That's more than a trend.

Well, if you make the cuttoff right at the Clinton first election, it's a bit misleading. The GOP held the presidency the 12 prior years.

There's a pattern. The presidency switches hands routinely. Again, in all likelyhood, GOP wins in 2016 (this election reminds me of democrats freaking out in 2004).

[SemajParlor]

Boozehound, why do you think it is time for the Republicans to compromise? Have you seen Obama compromise on anything? Both sides have to give up something to compromise. One of my problems with our President is that his demeanor (and words for that matter) say "it is my way or the highway". Maybe the rhetoric from the other side wouldn't be quite so bad if they actually thought that he would give something to get something.

Both sides are to blame for this gridlock, not just the Republicans.

With all due respect, this is a horrible point. Completely wrong. Simply paying attention to the last 4 years while Obama was in office would tell you differently.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Yes, it's time for the Republicans to compromise. Democrats too, but the Republicans just lost the presidential election and while they do have a majority in the house they are a minority in the Senate so they may have to give a little more than the Democrats since they (in my mind) have less bargaining power right now. They have spent the last four years being (admittedly) obstructionist and refusing to entertain any kind of tax increase. Half of these guys (or more) signed that stupid pledge from that piece of sh!t Grover Norquist to never raise taxes on anybody, for crying out loud.

Both parties need to sit down and figure out the fiscal cliff. Right now the Republicans are saying that it is all or nothing - either extend the Bush tax cuts for everybody or extend them for nobody. The Democrats are saying extend the Bush tax cuts for all but the $250K+ earners. There needs to be some kind of compromise. You can't hurt 90% of the population because you are in a pissing match over 10%.

No, let the Bush cuts for $250k+ drop off and put in Republican cuts for entitlements only not medicare/medicaid and no increase for the retirement age. Include with it an expense drop off when we leave Afghanistan without any corresponding spending increase and you have real change there both parties are happy with. So basically the same deal we had in 2011 that Boehner backed out on with the end of the war tossed in for good measure.

All that is pretty fair. Obama just got over 50% of the vote, electoral landslide, and he actually said the words tax increase for $250k+ people of this country.

[xubrew]

If you look at the breakdown of this election the racial lines are staggering. Whites make up the most people who are on food stamps. Obama got killed by poor white voters in this election. Right there, that demographic kills your theory.

America blows my mind sometimes.

I live down in SEC country. The state I live in is among the redist of red states. My state has an unemployment rate that is higher than the national average, my state has more people on foodstamps than the national average (by far), my state receives more in federal spending than what it pays back in taxes, yet most of the people in my state can't stand Obama, they don't want the government playing a role in their lives, and feel America should be run like a business.

It isn't just my state. It's most of the SEC states, and for that matter, it is a large majority of the red states.


Here is the breakdown of how each state voted this year....

http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/


Now, here is a map of food stamps by state....

http://chartsbin.com/view/1403


And here is a map depicting the ratio of federal spending vs federal taxes....

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union


When I assess that, my mind is blown.

When I come across someone who is on foodstamps saying that he hates Obama and that the government needs to leave him alone, what the hell am I supposed to think?? This is not an uncommon occurance down where I live. Most states who have the highest percentage of people on food stamps are red states. Most states that spend more federal dollars than what they pay back in taxes are red states. They say they want government out of their lives and that America needs to run like a business. If the president were to run America the way a CEO were to run a business, my state, and many other red states would be deemed a financial detriment to the business, and it would be laid off.

I shudder to think what would happen to my state, and others like it, if the people down here actually got what they wanted, and have America run like a business, and have government out of their lives. I don't think it would survive. My state is a big part of the very problem that it is complaining about.

Like I said, America blows my mind.

[DC Muskie]

Well, if you make the cuttoff right at the Clinton first election, it's a bit misleading. The GOP held the presidency the 12 prior years.

There's a pattern. The presidency switches hands routinely. Again, in all likelyhood, GOP wins in 2016 (this election reminds me of democrats freaking out in 2004).

What's misleading? You either win the majority of voters in an election, or you don't. For someone who likes to keep the idea that Obama was president, ergo would easily win reelection, that is pretty simple.

The Democrats have now reelected only their second president since FDR.

Parities should freak out frankly when they lose. They should figure how to win next time. It's not a given that they win the White House, the demographics show that right now that is not a probability.

[DC Muskie]

Like I said, America blows my mind.

White people are crazy.

I don't get the idea that the Democrats are expanding their voting electorate simply by putting more people on welfare. People have such a wide variety of reasons why they vote for a president. What's a Matter with Kansas is a great book to read about people voting against their economic issue. Just one perspective of course.

[boozehound]

Solid post by brew. I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but I agree with most all of it. There is a major disconnect between the average voter and reality right now. That goes for both parties.

[ChicagoX]

Since Republicans aren't allowed in increase taxes because Grover Norquist owns them and tells them what they can and can't do, it wouldn't surprise me if we actually went over the fiscal cliff. Then, on January 2, Congress can pass legislation that would return the tax cuts to the bottom 98% and rates for the wealthy would stay at the 39.6% that they will go to after the Bush tax cuts expire. Republicans will be able to do this at that point because it won't be a tax increase. The rates will have automatically gone up at midnight on January 1 so they will essentially just remain the same for the top 2%.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if this is what happens, but I still don't understand how the Republicans can hold the debt ceiling hostage, cost us our credit rating with S&P and possibly allow an economic flurry of bad things to happen at the end of the year all because of a nominal 4.6% increase in taxes on the wealthy. This will not affect "job creators" in any way because it is such a small increase back to the rate it was in the 90s. The debt ceiling crisis was the #1 reason why I voted Democrat this year. I couldn't believe the GOP turned down offers of 75-80% in spending cuts on primarily Democrat programs in exchange for 20%-25% in revenue generated by raising taxes on the wealthy from 35% to 39.6%. Even at 39.6%, that is still a historically low tax rate for the wealthiest Americans. When one side offers you 3/4 of something and asks you for 1/4, that seems like a pretty good compromise. It's also called governing...something the Republicans in Congress haven't done for four years.

[blueblob06]

I can tell America is starting to put their differences aside and come together. This morning, driving to work, I saw a van in front of me with a large posterboard taped to the back window. In black marker it said, "SUCK IT TEA PARTY RACISTS!".

I couldn't see the driver but my bet is that it was Snipe driving already town in celebration.

[bjf123]

Yes, it's time for the Republicans to compromise. Democrats too, but the Republicans just lost the presidential election and while they do have a majority in the house they are a minority in the Senate so they may have to give a little more than the Democrats since they (in my mind) have less bargaining power right now. They have spent the last four years being (admittedly) obstructionist and refusing to entertain any kind of tax increase. Half of these guys (or more) signed that stupid pledge from that piece of sh!t Grover Norquist to never raise taxes on anybody, for crying out loud.
Maybe I'm wrong, and according to my wife, I frequently am, but didn't the Democrats have control of Congress the first two years of Obama's term? Can't blame the Republicans for being obstructionists when they were in the minority. I agree that signing the Norquist pledge, while looking good to your base, was incredibly short sighted and stupid.

Didn't Boehner originally, and pre-Norquist pledge, propose a plan with a tax increase coupled with spending cuts of an equal amount? DIdn't Harry Reid over in the Senate go apoplectic over that and say it had no chance of passing there? That seems like a reasonable plan. Revenue goes up, spending goes down, both sides have gotten a little and given a little. It ain't that tough to figure out.

[XU 87]

All the pundits have said that the reason Obama won was because the demographics have changed and he's getting most of the hispanic vote and almost all of the balck vote, both of whose voting numbers are increasing. While that is true, I just read an interesting article. the problem for Romney was that about 6.5 million less whites voted in this election than in the last. The article doesn't say why, but that's what defeated Romney. If the same amounts voted, and Romney continued with his 61% of the white vote, that's almost 4 more million votes for him and probably wins him the election.

[paulxu]

Are we absolutely certain that the outcome of this election is not somehow the fault of the admistration at Xavier?

[xu95]

Maybe I'm wrong, and according to my wife, I frequently am, but didn't the Democrats have control of Congress the first two years of Obama's term? Can't blame the Republicans for being obstructionists when they were in the minority. I agree that signing the Norquist pledge, while looking good to your base, was incredibly short sighted and stupid.

Didn't Boehner originally, and pre-Norquist pledge, propose a plan with a tax increase coupled with spending cuts of an equal amount? DIdn't Harry Reid over in the Senate go apoplectic over that and say it had no chance of passing there? That seems like a reasonable plan. Revenue goes up, spending goes down, both sides have gotten a little and given a little. It ain't that tough to figure out.

Exactly. Every single time the House votes on something Reid says, "Why waste your time, we won't pass it". Way to at least act like you are willing to compromise.

And DC, how about when Obama wanted to spend another 700 Billion dollars on his job plan? I believe his exact words were "Pass my jobs plan or else". Way to compromise Barack Hussein Obama.

Both sides are at fault. Don't try to pretend your party is above it all.

[DC Muskie]

All the pundits have said that the reason Obama won was because the demographics have changed and he's getting most of the hispanic vote and almost all of the balck vote, both of whose voting numbers are increasing. While that is true, I just read an interesting article. the problem for Romney was that about 6.5 million less whites voted in this election than in the last. The article doesn't say why, but that's what defeated Romney. If the same amounts voted, and Romney continued with his 61% of the white vote, that's almost 4 more million votes for him and probably wins him the election.

White vote participation has been down since 2004. When 55% of the vote is women and you are killing that demographic, you are going to do very well.

[DC Muskie]

Maybe I'm wrong, and according to my wife, I frequently am, but didn't the Democrats have control of Congress the first two years of Obama's term? Can't blame the Republicans for being obstructionists when they were in the minority. I agree that signing the Norquist pledge, while looking good to your base, was incredibly short sighted and stupid.

Didn't Boehner originally, and pre-Norquist pledge, propose a plan with a tax increase coupled with spending cuts of an equal amount? DIdn't Harry Reid over in the Senate go apoplectic over that and say it had no chance of passing there? That seems like a reasonable plan. Revenue goes up, spending goes down, both sides have gotten a little and given a little. It ain't that tough to figure out.

You understand that there were months and months of discussions with the Republicans on the health care law that they simply walked away at the last minute. You can still be obstructionist when in the minority. You then turn it around politically to take back power. That's pretty much what happened in 2010.

Exactly. Every single time the House votes on something Reid says, "Why waste your time, we won't pass it". Way to at least act like you are willing to compromise.

And DC, how about when Obama wanted to spend another 700 Billion dollars on his job plan? I believe his exact words were "Pass my jobs plan or else". Way to compromise Barack Hussein Obama.

Both sides are at fault. Don't try to pretend your party is above it all.

My point is not to say the Democrats are not political. Your point was to question when Obama had EVER compromised. I gave specific examples. Examples that people in his own party were pissed at him over.

[XU 87]

White vote participation has been down since 2004. When 55% of the vote is women and you are killing that demographic, you are going to do very well.

About 1 million less whites voted in 2008 than 2004. And that would make sense to me to some extent. But I can make no sense of another 6.5 million drop off.

So the real story in this election is: what happened to all those white voters?

[GoMuskies]

I'm white, and I didn't vote. I live in Kansas, so my vote was meaningless. I had better things to do than wait in line for an hour to cast a meaningless ballot.

[DC Muskie]

About 1 million less whites voted in 2008 than 2004. And that would make sense to me to some extent. But I can make no sense of another 6.5 million drop off.

So the real story in this election is: what happened to all those white voters?

I have no idea. And what I would want to know is, how do they break out economically?

[bjf123]

You understand that there were months and months of discussions with the Republicans on the health care law that they simply walked away at the last minute. You can still be obstructionist when in the minority. You then turn it around politically to take back power. That's pretty much what happened in 2010.

My point is not to say the Democrats are not political. Your point was to question when Obama had EVER compromised. I gave specific examples. Examples that people in his own party were pissed at him over.
You mean that law that Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass so we could see what was in it? The one they rammed through with no time to actually try to understand what was being passed? Yep, that's certainly the right thing to do. I'm not saying the Republicans are without fault. Personally, I think they're all useless. One thing I like about American politics is that whatever side you're on, you can find things to support your position and things to denigrate the other side, regardless of the accuracy of the data.

[XU 87]

I have no idea. And what I would want to know is, how do they break out economically?

You can read the article on Real Clear Politics. One thing the author found was rural Ohio voting was down. He guessed that due to high unemployment they weren't voting or maybe Romney's wealth and the negative Obama ads turned them off.

Biggest mistake of the campaign- Romney never responding the Obama ads airing in the summer. Dumb. He let Obama define him.

P.S. And I just read the reasons why he didn't respond- he had no money at the time. And the GOP PAC's spent their money attacking Obama during that time.

[DC Muskie]

You mean that law that Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass so we could see what was in it? The one they rammed through with no time to actually try to understand what was being passed? Yep, that's certainly the right thing to do. I'm not saying the Republicans are without fault. Personally, I think they're all useless. One thing I like about American politics is that whatever side you're on, you can find things to support your position and things to denigrate the other side, regardless of the accuracy of the data.

Yup rammed through. We haven't been speaking about national health care until January 2009. But Nancy Pelosi is a ninny, so I refuse to defend her.

[boozehound]

Maybe I'm wrong, and according to my wife, I frequently am, but didn't the Democrats have control of Congress the first two years of Obama's term? Can't blame the Republicans for being obstructionists when they were in the minority. I agree that signing the Norquist pledge, while looking good to your base, was incredibly short sighted and stupid.

Didn't Boehner originally, and pre-Norquist pledge, propose a plan with a tax increase coupled with spending cuts of an equal amount? DIdn't Harry Reid over in the Senate go apoplectic over that and say it had no chance of passing there? That seems like a reasonable plan. Revenue goes up, spending goes down, both sides have gotten a little and given a little. It ain't that tough to figure out.

The Democrats are far from guiltless here, and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are pieces of sh!t as well. I am in no way trying to argue that one party is any better than the other in terms of putting politics aside and trying to do what is right for the American people.

My point regarding the Republicans needing to compromise now was a direct response to the fact that they have been admittedly obstructionist to advance a stated agenda of making Obama a one term President. That didn't work out, so it's time to come back to the table and work something out RE: the fiscal cliff.

I don't want to hear about Obama ramming Obamacare through (he did) or anything that happened in the past. We need unity right now and we cannot afford more gridlock. Stop being politicians and start acting like people (and leaders).

[chico]

You can read the article on Real Clear Politics. One thing the author found was rural Ohio voting was down. He guessed that due to high unemployment they weren't voting or maybe Romney's wealth and the negative Obama ads turned them off.

Biggest mistake of the campaign- Romney never responding the Obama ads airing in the summer. Dumb. He let Obama define him.

P.S. And I just read the reasons why he didn't respond- he had no money at the time. And the GOP PAC's spent their money attacking Obama during that time.

I agree - it was dumb. Obama ran a much better campaign. He basically had his people planning for the last 4 years on the ground and painted Romney early. Romney not coming out against all the negative ads cost him dearly.

Two straight elections the Democrats ran a better campaign than the Republicans. You can bemoan changing demographics all you want but if Romney runs a more competent campaign he probably wins.

[PM Thor]

I'm white, and I didn't vote. I live in Kansas, so my vote was meaningless. I had better things to do than wait in line for an hour to cast a meaningless ballot.

Then, I'm sorry, but you have no right to complain about any political event in America. You don't vote, you just accept whatever happens. That's fact.

I think these debates are great. This is what makes America great. Chinas communist party is picking their leadership for the next decade right now, with no input from the people. We don't have that problem, and people can say how they voice their displeasure with how it goes as they see fit. It's great. Keep it up. Even if you get a bit insane.

I HATE dayton.

[GoMuskies]

[COLOR="#0000CD"][B]Then, I'm sorry, but you have no right to complain about any political event in America. You don't vote, you just accept whatever happens. That's fact.


Yeah, that's a really stupid stance. Fact.

[vee4xu]

In the for-what-it's-worth category, I think freedom of speech is protected under the constitution and isn't tied to whether or not one is registered to vote or actually casts a ballot.

[waggy]

I think everyone should vote.

[GuyFawkes38]

I finally see an article with my view of this election.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/06/obama-will-probably-win-reasons-for-republicans-to-be-cheerful.html

Again, in all likelyhood GOP wins the presidency in 2016. And it's siilly for the GOP to start to freakout and change their beliefs and platform.

[vee4xu]

I finally see an article with my view of this election.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/06/obama-will-probably-win-reasons-for-republicans-to-be-cheerful.html

Again, in all likelyhood GOP wins the presidency in 2016. And it's siilly for the GOP to start to freakout and change their beliefs and platform.

Sounding like a typical wait-til-next-year Cleveland fan there Guy.

[GuyFawkes38]

Sounding like a typical wait-til-next-year Cleveland fan there Guy.

Let me make this clear. With the sports owners that Cleveland has, I have no confidence that Cleveland will win a championship in the next 25 years. :)

On the other hand, there's definitely, IMHO, a much better than 50% chance that the GOP will win the presidency in 2016. There's a lot of history to suggest that the pesidency shifts political parties in 8-12 year cycles. So GOPers, stop freaking out.

[bigdiggins]

I think everyone should vote.

I would agree if everyone had to get educated on the issues. As it is, I think less people should vote.

[PM Thor]

Yeah, that's a really stupid stance. Fact.

If you aren't engaged in the political aspect of our society in the simplest, most fundamental way you can be, then you accept whatever happens. If you think your vote doesn't matter, even if your viewpoint loses, then you are more of a problem than just being disconnected. Every vote matters. Every vote. Just think, if just 1 out of 1000 Americans don't vote based on thinking that their vote doesn't count, then that means hundreds of thousands of people just accept whatever happens to them. That's unacceptable to me. It should be to you too.

I HATE dayton.

[DC Muskie]

If you aren't engaged in the political aspect of our society in the simplest, most fundamental way you can be, then you accept whatever happens. If you think your vote doesn't matter, even if your viewpoint loses, then you are more of a problem than just being disconnected. Every vote matters. Every vote. Just think, if just 1 out of 1000 Americans don't vote based on thinking that their vote doesn't count, then that means hundreds of thousands of people just accept whatever happens to them. That's unacceptable to me. It should be to you too.

I HATE dayton.

A vote is an opinion. To abstain is an opinion.


I would agree if everyone had to get educated on the issues. As it is, I think less people should vote.

Something you can't really measure, unless of course the issues and candidates you vote for lose.

So I can understand that people would be disengaged with the process of voting, when you have basically 50% of the population will think you are dipshit.

[LadyMuskie]

A vote is an opinion. To abstain is an opinion.





Yes! Thank you. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils because two parties (which are only interested in preserving the money and power of said parties) picked two people to run for president and make it seem as though we have no other choice. People aren't not voting because they're lazy. They're not voting because they're fed up.

[paulxu]

How to alienate women and gays if you are a Tea Party Senator. This guy has been in the Senate 2 years. She has been in the House for 12 years before winning a Senate seat this election:


WASHINGTON -- Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D), Wisconsin's new senator-elect, is confident that she will be able to understand the federal budget without the assistance of Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

In an Associated Press interview on Wednesday, Johnson said he hoped he would be able to work with Baldwin in the Senate -- as soon as he explained the "facts" of the budget to her.

"Hopefully I can sit down and lay out for her my best understanding of the federal budget because they're simply the facts," he said. "Hopefully she'll agree with what the facts are and work toward common sense solutions."

"I was a double major in college in mathematics and political science, and I served for six years on the House Budget Committee in my first six years in the House," Baldwin responded in an interview with The Huffington Post on Friday.

"And I am very confident that when proposals come before the U.S. Senate, I will be able to evaluate them as to how they benefit or harm middle-class Wisconsinites. A yardstick of 'does it create jobs,' 'does it lower the deficit' and 'does it help grow the middle class' is an important one. I'm quite confident that I have those abilities," she added.

[GoMuskies]

How to alienate women and gays if you are a Tea Party Senator. This guy has been in the Senate 2 years. She has been in the House for 12 years before winning a Senate seat this election:

How is he alienating gays? Or women, really? I can understand how he's alienating Tammy Baldwin.

[GoMuskies]

If you aren't engaged in the political aspect of our society in the simplest, most fundamental way you can be, then you accept whatever happens. If you think your vote doesn't matter, even if your viewpoint loses, then you are more of a problem than just being disconnected.

This is ludicrous nonsense. My viewpoint was clearly going to win by a landslide without me in Kansas. And it did. And I will feel free to complain about whatever I damn well please.

[vee4xu]

Let's say I am at dinner with friends or family. At dessert time those at the table decide from between two desserts to share with the table. I decide not to vote on the choice, but when it comes the others offer me a taste. I absolutely have a right to opine on how the dessert tastes even if I wasn't part of the choice of that dessert. So, even though someone didn't vote, they have a right to an opinion about who is elected based on what they believe, but they really can't gripe about who the elected person is because they didn't choose them. To me there are two levels of non-voter griping. First, griping about what the person who's elected is doing in the job. That's cool. Second, griping about who that person is in the job. Sorry, that is above the non-voter's pay grade.

By the way, for the record, I did vote this past election as I have in every primary and general election for 38 years, except in cases where there was nothing on the ballot in my primary election precinct.

[paulxu]

How is he alienating gays? Or women, really? I can understand how he's alienating Tammy Baldwin.

She's the first openly gay person in the Senate.(admittedly his statement is not gender or orientation specific)
I'm guessing he may not have said exactly that if she had been a newly elected male Senator. Then again, who knows.
But for him to evidence a lack of understanding of his collegue's background to me is very telling. And it sounds condescending.
It obviously bothered her.

[PM Thor]

Go, did you vote on local issues though? Or did you just throw your vote away on those issues too? Hell, in Walton an election is being decided by a coin toss, think your vote doesn't matter?

I HATE dayton.

[PM Thor]

You think the politicians really care if you don't vote? Actually they would prefer those people who aren't happy to not vote, so congrats, you empower the status quo by not voting.

I HATE dayton.