I’m a diehard Republican, but sadly give Saturday Night Live a little more time to completely de-ball Mitt Romney by convincing America that he’s dumb, would be a horrible President, etc. and then let’s see what the election results will be.
Romney giving up on home state of Massachusetts
“If Romney defeats Obama while losing Massachusetts, he would be the first presidential candidate elected without carrying his home state since before the Civil War.”
You keep saying he’s going to lose and that people are leaving him in droves, but the facts do not back that up. Rasmussen leans right. That’s a fact. If you look at the nine other polls, they are far off. Do you honestly believe that Rasmussen is right and the other nine are wrong?
You keep mentioning how well Rasmussen did in the last presidential election, but it’s a fact that they have skewed obamas numbers since he took office.
Also, look at the polls for Ohio, pa, va, NH, Colorado. They are all ahead for Obama. You keep talking about a blowout, but the facts just aren’t there.
As for the unemployment rate and approval rating and how people will not re-elect someone with poor numbers. Yes, that’s been history. However, what you are forgetting is that people still have Obama ahead of Romney right mow. So it isn’t so much that they want Obama to win, it’s that they don’t want mitt. Numbers don’t lie.
Obama lis not above 50 percent in any poll. He’s done.
And wright doesn’t have an ax to grind since Obama has moved away from him? Nonissue and no one cares. Just like if mitt said he supported multiple wives. Couldn’t care less and neither do most Americans.
And Rasmussen has been the most inaccurate since Obama took office. Reread the part about how they have not even been close on his approval rating. You are really reaching while I’m looking at facts.
And go to the polls for Ohio, pa, va, Colorado, new Hampshire. They are all for Obama. You need to do better research instead of portraying your opinions as facts. Do you really think if Vegas thought he’d lose, he’d get 1:2 odds? Come on look at the numbers.
Of all the polls in Ohio and Pa he had 50 percent on one. In several he doesn’t lead beyond the margin of error. Incumbents who don’t poll 50 don’t win. He’s Jimmy Carter only not as competent.
From Karl Rove – Senior Adviser and Deputy Chief of Staff to former President George W. Bush
Rove is all about raising money. Obama’s not getting over 50 percent. Toast.
Betting odds have nothing to do with one side winning? Are you serious? Betting odds tell you who Vegas thinks will win anything.
Last time I checked, 2010 was more recent than 2008. The Rasmussen polls were so far off in 2010. Do any independent research and they tell you that Rasmussen leans right. That’s a fact.
And take five minutes and do research on the battleground states. Obama is winning 7 by more than five points. Stick to the facts.
Rasmussen was most accurate in the last presidential race. Pretty sure we’re talking about a presidential race here. In which states does is he above 50%? Let’s see how the media react to the story that he tried to bribe the most holy Reverend Wright. Can you say “unraveling?”
Assuming it’s true if Obama used his own money who cares? But I’ll bet the Post paid Wright to say that.
Who cares about Rev Wright anyways? It’s not like Wright is Al Capone. He’s probably never even had a speeding ticket.
Perfectly predictable answer. It further exposes Obama as a fraud.
Las Vegas sets odds based on getting 50% to vote on either side. It has nothing to do with who they think will win.
Betting odds are created to attract an equal amount of betting money for each outcome, not who Vegas thinks will win. Bookmakers who set these odds also have to consider what type of people will actually be making these bets, which likely will not be representative of those who will actually vote in November.
With that said, I’ve never heard of anyone actually betting on election results. I’m assuming these odds are mostly for publicity. Or as the old football tip sheets used to read” “for amusement only”, which in the case of election odds, might actually be true.
both of them are clowns, you people are no different than the people that said anybody was better than bush
obama can’t change anything he said he would change, romney is a spolied rich guy that is out of touch with today’s world
we lose either way
If you would read the article, it would tell you that Rasmussen hasn’t been close to accurate since Obama took office. You cite an article from 2008 results, mine was 2010. Stick with the most recent. Plus have you looked at any other poll??? Most polls have Obama up or tied. Rasmussen favors Republicans. Look at the average polls and Vegas odds for the battleground states. It’s Obama by several points. I’d say 10 betting sites that give Obama a 1:2 odds on winning are pretty accurate. Keep reaching though.
Betting odds have nothing to do with the chances of one side winning. It’s all about getting people to bet. Rasmussen called the 2008 presidential election on the money. Pretty sure that was the most recent presidential election. They poll only likely voters. If an incumbent isn’t polling 50 percent, he loses because undecideds go heavily for the challenger. show me a swing state where Obama is at 50. He will lose Fla, Ohio, Va, and North Carolina. Pa is a toss up. Toast.
“Betting odds have nothing to do with the chances of one side winning.”
Absurd. Why is Manny Pacquiao always favored to win his fights then? Odds have everything to do with the probability of one side winning. It isn’t an over/under or a spread.
It has nothing to do with the bookmakers’ opinion. They set the lines in order to get the maximum amount bet on both Sides. Most people do tink that Obama is going to win because they’re not paying attention.
Actually Rasmussen is one of the most inaccurate. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/
If you look at the betting odds, Obama is well favored. http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election/winner
Last time I checked, Vegas isn’t in the habit of losing money.
As several readers mentioned, it’s an electoral vote. He’s ahead in Ohio, florida and pa. Check the average of all polls. The odds are favoring him as well on all gambling sites. Sorry, get ready for four more.
If Obama loses rest assured the narrative from the media will be that the US is a racist country again. I am already sick of the Hollywood club pledging their allegiance to Obama. Liberal guilt.
No question. That’s one of the many reasons he’s going to lose big.
What kind of guilt was it when Hollywood was in the White House from 1980-88? Is Hollywood only liberal when it’s convenient for you or did Hollywood just flock to the natural leader regardless of party?
As long as it stays that way on election day…. Still a long way to go, though.
A) Electoral college math is what matters
B) Media Pravda is and will be completely in propoganda mode
C) There where will be all kinds of illegal voting shenanigans
D) In a subtle way, riots will be threatened if Obama loses
We don’t elect the president by a national vote. We elect the president state by state. Need to break the poll down state by state and then add up the electoral votes. 270 wins. The NY Times has a elector map that show Obama leading 217 to 206 with 115 tossup. Tossup states include big states PA, Ohio, and Fla. Romney would have to take all 3 to win. This will be an exciting election night. Vote early and often.
I understand the electoral college. Like it,too. Obama is going to lose several purple states,all the red ones and a few blue. Hello Jimmy Carter.
Those are nice polls. Rasmussen is likely voters and has been the most accurate. This is the beginning of a rout.
I think you’ve been reading “The Secret”. If you say something enough it will come true through the power of positive thinking. Obama will win. What will your post be then?
My post would be that I was wrong. I won’t have to. It’s not going to be close.
Won’t be the first time you’ve been wrong and you’ve never admitted it then so why would you change this time? ha ha ha…..just having a little fun at your expense….
You talk about the Republicans the way an 8 year old talks about the Penguins.
This post. Saying this election is not going to be close is just not serious. Its a childish way of discussing politics that talk radio engages in and stupid people are drawn to. You probably didn;t think Obama could win last year at this time because he’s a “Marxist” or “communist” or some other word you don’t know the meaning of. But guess what, George Bush was the worst president in the history of america and most people don’t want to go back to that. This election will come down to NV, NM, CO, IA, OH, VA, and FL. Saying “he’s toast” and the election will be a landslide is weird and childish especially when based on a poll by the reliably unreliable Rasmussen. And can you name one policy that Romney diagrees with Bush on? Didn’t think so. This will be a nail biter. Quit being a baby.
Check back with me in November. Why don’t you compile a list of the incumbents who have had 8 percent unemployment and won re-election. Also, how about a list of the incumbents who have not been above 50 percent in the polls in May and gone on to win. This guy is going to appear on the cover of Newseek under the title America’s First Gay President. Independents are leaving him in droves. Young voters are leaving him and won’t turn out in numbers close to 2008. He’st not going to win Ohio, Fla, Virginia or NC. The media are in the tank for him and will continue to paint the most positive scenario possible. You can dismiss Rasmussen as unreliable but he predicted the last two presidential elections within one percentage point. History and common sense say he will be the next Jimmy Carter. I didn’t think he would win in 2008 and he would not have if not for the economic meltdown. McCain had moved ahead of him in the polls just before that. We’re you in a coma in November 2010 when the Democrats suffered one of if not their worst defeats ever under a Democratic president? What has happened to make the voters any less pissed off? Obama’s personal favorabilty numbers have been relatively high and now they’re beginning to tank. Romney will be seen as the business man who will come in and clean up the mess of the last 8 years. (That’s right 8 years.) Obama has been and will continue to be exposed as a fraud and a phony who is in way over his head. There are not enough stupid people in the country who will go into a voting booth and say., “Yeah, I think I’d like four more years of this.” Hasta la vista.
Not surprisingly, you still haven’t addressed the differences in policy between Romney and Bush. That is the key issue that partisan hacks are adamant about glossing over. Obama has Bill Clinton campaigning for him, who is one of the most popular political figures in America. Another fact partisan hacks don’t want to hear. Clinton campaigned for Kerry in ’04. Do you think Bush will hit the trail for Romney this summer? Didn’t think so. Because he is a loser and a failure of historic proportions. That is a fact that will be driven home until November. And as bad as you want to believe he is, even under the most biased scrutiny, Obama is nowhere near as bad as Bush. And you probably thought that it was a net negative when Clinton was called the first black president in the ’90’s. You were on the wrong side of history then and you’re on the wrong side of history now.
The Clintons despise Obama. Bush spent like a liberal in his seco d term. Romney has promised to cut spending. Obama’s solution is to spend more. Clinton was saved from himself by the Republicans taking over both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years, two years into his first term. He had no intention of balancing the budget or reformi g welfare until Dick Morris convinced him to move to the right. Google “triangulation.” Bush 41 would beat Obama if he ran against him this year.
Is Bush 41 still alive? Clinton would have beat Bush 41’s son in a land slide in 2000 and he would be running for his sixth term this year. I don’t know maybe he would get beat by Bush 41 but he would probably beat him again. Dismiss the Clintons at your own peril. Whether they “despise” Obama or not, they need him to win and they are working for him.
178 days and counting. Enjoy them while you can Obama.
I hope like hell they’re right!!!
I’m beginning to wonder if it will even be close.
It’s not going to be close.
You’re right, it wont be. Obama is going to win going away.