Exactly correct. The only hope Santorum, Gingrich and the rest of the gang has is if the US economy goes in the shitter. Otherwise they have no shot. How's that for a leader? Your Reep candidate has to hope/work for the ruination of the US economy. Lovely. The GOP is a failed party with a shortage of workable solutions and a zest for war. (Not for them or their kids, of course, but you and yours should go march off a cliff somewhere). Here's a few clues; Balanced budget; Clinton. Loss of the WTC Towers; Bush. Massive deficits, collapse of the markets, bank bailouts; Bush. Market recovery; Obama. Killed OBL; Obama. let Osama escape; Bush. The Republicans have nothing. N-o-t-h-i-n-g. Anti birth control? A loser. Flat tax? a loser. Invade Iran? A loser. Boener, Gingrich, Santorum, Palin, etc? All losers. The Dems need an opposition party. The current reediculous brand that is the GOP just isn't up to the job.
Ronald Reagan. FBI rat? Did the FBI assist Reagans political campaigns? Court orders release of documents. http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/08/44527.htm
So, are there any polls regarding how the leftover GOP candidates would do against Obama, both in absolute terms and when it comes to the electoral college?
Obama vs: Romney Gingrich Santorum Electoral College (Obama vs "GOP") The fallout of the Electoral College map is basically this: Obama probably needs 43 Electoral Votes from the following states to win again (electoral votes in parentheses): Colorado (9) Florida (29) Iowa (6) Missouri (10) Nevada (6) New Hampshire (4) North Carolina (15) Ohio (18) Pennsylvania (20) Virginia (13)
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...sure-about-interracial-marriage.php?ref=fpblg I know this is a series of cheap shots, but it's still fun.
How are these cheap shots? If people in the Deep South are vile racists, shouldn't we as a country be upfront about it?
Well I was lied to when they said the North won the war, the joke is on us We should have learned from the British, sometimes is just easier to let go of some land.
Aside from the whole issue where you have the Northeast/Great Lakes area and West Coast that would make up the "Liberal States of America" separated by a large stretch of the "Conservative States of America".
It's not a cheap shot, but the South is far from the only place that has plenty of vile racists in significant concentrations in the US.
Nice info-graphic on gas prices/profit/etc from the White House incorporating the above and more - which I predict will get 0 time in the MSM, but we will instead be forced to sit and listen to balding, poorly dressed guys who should know better spout reactionary nonsense to keep their paychecks coming instead. http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy/gasprices
You'd have to provide some definable "goods" that would come out of it, and not just the wishful "perceived" goods that twats on either side of the fence think would come about. You would have had a hard time making it to Chicago.
Yahoo! now has a headline from a poll that claims that Mitt has caught Obama because of gas prices. If true, so much for Fortune's theory. If true .. the polls are all over the place, let me see what Silver is saying.
Thanks. So, in 2016 can we just agree to hold the presidential election only in Ohio and Florida and spare the rest of us the myth that we have a say in this?
Yeah. but the "large stretch" also happens to be the most sparsely populated region of the country. We have air travel, and each coasts can be pretty self-sufficient for most things that require ground travel. Plus, the Conservative States would be desperate enough for funds that we can pay a reasonably low tariff to pass through. Also, those red states in the Southwest and the Rockies are pretty purple (Utah excepted), and given the choice, I'm pretty sure they'll be pragmatic enough to join the Liberal States.
Depends on whether Romney makes Rubio his VP or McDonnell. Picking Rubio could go a long way in securing Florida and it's 29 electoral votes for the Republicans, while McDonnell only gets 13. It could also blunt the Hispanic vote for Obama in some of the western swing states enough to keep them in the Republican column. However, a lot of Hispanics view Cubans as a completely different beast as they are generally immune to the whole immigration battles, while Hispanics from Mexico and Central America get the book thrown at them, so it might not have that big of an effect.
By the way, isn't it about now that the GOP should be pushing wedge-issue ballot measures in places like Ohio? Has anyone heard about any? In a close election they could make a huge difference.
Eh. Idaho and Wyoming would definitely go CSA, which pretty much means Montana would have to, or they'd be surrounded. New Mexico and Colorado would largely depend on where Arizona went and they'd be leaning pretty hard LSA, IMHO. People keep saying Arizona is purple, but there isn't much about Arizona politics that would hint at them being anything more than red with a slight hint of blue.
Or, as in every other election, the VP nomination has no influence on the outcome. But I will grant you that pulling a few votes from FL could be a coup for Romney.
National polling numbers show he's at least close, though close at this point in the cycle (before he's the nominee) is historically problematic. More problematic (and relevant to who actually wins) is the Electoral College. The numbers there just don't lie. Romney needs to win a LOT of tossup states in order to make it close.
I dunno.. I think McCain's had a fairly decent sized impact on the election, but in general, VPs are a good way to pull their home state into your column, but outside that, you're right, the impact is usually negligible.