world

Obama, Romney make final pitches to voters

101 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

101 Comments
Login to comment

Just watched Karl Rove on Fox News "try" to explain how Romney's going to win the election. It was hilarious. You can tell by his facial expression that even he's not buying what he's selling.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Notice to posters: Hold the crystal ball predictions -- it will all be over in about 30 hours, so there is no sense in making comments on who is going to win or else you would be on the nightly news casts instead of typing ridiculously long comments that have no substance.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Whoever wins the presidential election we get the same basic policies. Obama wins and the Republicans resist, Romney wins and the Senate Democrats have already promised to make his life hell. If you emphatically support either party you're part of the problem and the result is that we get crud candidates like this. A business man who can't decide on a message and a community organizer that's bought into failed Keynesian economic models. Neither appear interested in any view points except for their own and the result are evident.

My states Senate and House races are a little more interesting and I also get 3 supreme court picks and 6 ballot proposals. Thats something with a little more impact.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Early U.S. voting leads to lines, lawsuit in Florida

The voter suppression has no place in America. This news is spreading very fast making voters very angry. This is now working against GOP.

Many more voters are now determined to show up tomorrow for casting their votes.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Finally get this election craziness over with!

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Well, if the graphic in this article is correct (which I believe it "pretty much" is), it will be 4 more years!! Bronco Bamma!!!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Yep, Mirai. Bronco Bama girl will be very happy to get her NPR back.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I'd like option "C" please cuz both these clowns will sink our country :(

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

What will sink the country is more of this polarized thinking. This almost high school rivalry between the parties means that nothing gets done no matter who gets elected. Working people should be outraged by both parties.

What needs to happen is one of them needs to win, I prefer Obama for quite a few reasons, and then congress needs to sit down with him and work out some compromises instead of drawing impassable lines in the sand.

The real reason nothing changed over the past four years comes down to obstructionism. If Romney wins, it will be the same story again. Nothing moves forward in a significant way.

We need a cooperative government that works on solving problems for the working masses. Period.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I think Romney wins the popular vote by a couple percentage points and takes the Electoral College by a slim margin.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

We need a cooperative government that works on solving problems for the working masses. Period.

It won't happen. The reason: Democrats are convinced that Republicans want to "destroy the safety net and kill grandma" - as if they don't have grandma's - and because Republicans are convinced that Democrats are spending the country into oblivion and stealing their freedoms bit by bit. Obama is unable to work his will in Congress and raise taxes enough to pay for all of his spending. He hasn't even tried to reform entitlements. There must be some fiscal sanity or both will be right (except for the killing grandma part - I hope).

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I think Romney wins the popular vote by a couple percentage points and takes the Electoral College by a slim margin.

I hope you are right - but it's too close to call. Folks on both sides have made good arguments as to why they think their guy will win. To an extent. the incumbent always has the advantage as in 2004. It's just sad that so many Americans actually believe the snake-oil trickle-down economic malarky that Obama has been dishing out the last four years.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Obama is without a doubt the worst of the two officially approved charlatans. The change he touts would have made any early twentieth century socialist in Europe proud. He's also the first to be endorsed by the Chinese Communist Party.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

For Obama supporters it's going to be a very long day tomorrow. For Romney supporters, don't sweat the load, he's going to be our next Presdient.

It's going to be along these lines:

Romney 300 plus EV's with a 53 to 47 percent nationwide vote tally.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

If anyone still as doubts as to why voting GOP is the worst possible choice for America, read this:

Capitol Hill’s Rabid, Ravaging Republicans -- Who Is Electing These People?

www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/capitol-hills-rabid-ravaging-republicans-who-electing-these-people?paging=off

"House Republicans have a conflict of interest between their families’ lungs and their corporatized minds. Resolution? Vote to weaken the Clean Air Act, drinking water safety standards, cut funding for these cancer preventing, health protecting programs while pushing for more military weapons and bloated Pentagon budgets. The Republicans went so far as to vote for polluters over children, pregnant women and people who live in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities. These Republicans voted to block the EPA mercury and air toxics standards that the agency estimated would save 12,000 lives every year and prevent more than one million asthma attacks."

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Mirai HayashiNov. 06, 2012 - 07:35AM JST

Just watched Karl Rove on Fox News "try" to explain how Romney's going to win the election. It was hilarious. You can tell by his facial expression that even he's not buying what he's selling.

Mirai, I have just watched this. Oh dear, Karl Rove is a full of c***!! He is not using a correct electroral count base to start with for analysis. Many stats professional would probably catch his tricks, but many public probably would not.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Just watched Karl Rove on Fox News "try" to explain how Romney's going to win the election. It was hilarious. You can tell by his facial expression that even he's not buying what he's selling.

What's even more funnier and I'm still laughing is that at the Obama network of entertainment, they think Obama will have a flawless victory and win in a landslide. My sides hurt from cracking up.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

@tkoined

What needs to happen is one of them needs to win, I prefer Obama for quite a few reasons, and then congress needs to sit down with him and work out some compromises instead of drawing impassable lines in the sand.

I think it's more the other way around. Obama is the one that is defiant and doesn't want to deal with the Republicans because he doesn't want to compromise. Likewise, Republicans will never give in to their principals that are so over the top far-left, it'll never happen.

The real reason nothing changed over the past four years comes down to obstructionism. If Romney wins, it will be the same story again. Nothing moves forward in a significant way.

You and I don't know that for sure, you could be right and you could be wrong, we just don't know. We didn't know about Obama either at first and look what happened! Debt, debt and more debt!

We need a cooperative government that works on solving problems for the working masses. Period. I totally agree!

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

The American public believes itself to be free, to have a spirit of rugged individualism, to live in a democracy admired by the world. In fact Americans are not particularly free and becoming less so by the minute, are not individualists but herd consumers formed by a controlled press, and do not live in a democracy. It is said that democracy depends on an informed public. This is to say that democracy is impossible. In the American case, blank ignorance of anything outside the borders leaves people easily manipulable. The genius of the American political system is that it is not necessary to suppress inconvenient information, but only to keep it off television. So few people will encounter it as not to matter.

Giving people the choice between Candidate A and Candidate B , neither of whom addresses the real problems of the nation, is to grant them the influence they would have had in the Habsburg Empire. But it keeps them quiet or lowing in the fields.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

What's even more funnier and I'm still laughing is that at the Obama network of entertainment, they think Obama will have a flawless victory and win in a landslide. My sides hurt from cracking up.

I don't get the sense he particularly wants to be re-relected anyway. The campaign seems to be more or less standing down compared to 2008 and going through this act for the downticket races.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

@global

Mirai, I have just watched this. Oh dear, Karl Rove is a full of c***!! He is not using a correct electroral count base to start with for analysis. Many stats professional would probably catch his tricks, but many public probably would not.

So you know this for sure? You are a professional pollster? You know more than Pew, Gallup, Zogby and all the rest??? So why don't you criticize the pundits on the Barack....nevermind....lol

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Yogi said, "It ain't over until it is over." Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Thank God Almighty, I am free at last." Who wins? The American people, who are absolutely exhausted from the media coverage and the ads.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

bass4funkNov. 06, 2012 - 11:43AM JST

So you know this for sure? You are a professional pollster?

bass, how many times do I have to tell you. I am fully retired and my time has been well spent for this campaign full time. In economics, I have done many stats. Economics and law go together for public policy making.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I don't get the sense he particularly wants to be re-relected anyway.

I've been saying the same thing since watching the 1st debate when America finally got to see an unfiltered Mitt Romney. Since then, Obama's been running like he's the challenger; not the incumbent. Hell, Obama even admitted this past weekend that he views himself as only a "prop" in his own campaign.

On a related note, remember the only thing Obama's done "successfully" in his adult life is to run for higher political office.

RR

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Romeo - "On a related note, remember the only thing Obama's done "successfully" in his adult life is to run for higher political office."

Heh, with "insight" like that, it's no wonder the GOP is going down. :-)

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Gonna be a tight race either way, we'll know by noon Wednesday Japan time. The fact that the Democrats have their star player, Big Bill Clinton, touring in Pennsylvania is enough to say that Penn is in play. It remains to be seen how the cookie crumbles, though.

As others have said, there IS less energy this time around in the Democratic camp. None of the predestined star stuff that happened in 2008. No catharsis. Just an old fashioned political slugfest.

Can we all at least agree that, whoever comes out on top, they deserve our respect, support, and a chance to turn the country around? A year of partisan politics should be enough for everyone.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@sushi

Really? How so?

NY Daily News Long Island News day Houston Chronicle Fort Worth Star Telegram Orlando Sentinal Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinal Illinois Daily Herald Los Angeles Daily News Star Telegram, Long Beach, CA

All these papers ( most of them liberal) last time around endorsed Obama and now they are endorsing Romney. Romney is up 22% with independents There is something in the water you liberals keep drinking. It's called a "desperation elixir."

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Can we all at least agree that, whoever comes out on top, they deserve our respect, support, and a chance to turn the country around? A year of partisan politics should be enough for everyone.

An admirable sentiment. Well said.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

NY Daily News Long Island News day Houston Chronicle Fort Worth Star Telegram Orlando Sentinal Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinal Illinois Daily Herald Los Angeles Daily News Star Telegram, Long Beach, CA

bass, again, these are all conservative news paper samples. Your blog does not change, these endorsements do not change, but the VOTE does.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

NY Daily News Long Island News day Houston Chronicle Fort Worth Star Telegram Orlando Sentinal Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinal Illinois Daily Herald Los Angeles Daily News Star Telegram, Long Beach, CA

All these papers ( most of them liberal) last time around endorsed Obama and now they are endorsing Romney.

The Economist has endorsed Obama. Nobody cares about endorsements from your list of rags. The Long Island News?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Holy moly...Nate Silver has Obama's chances of winning at 92%!

315 Electoral votes (average)

50.9% popular votes

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@global

You think so? Trust me, except for the Houston Chronicle, they are all liberal and were deeply in the tank for Obama last time around.

@plastic

The Economist has endorsed Obama. Nobody cares about endorsements from your list of rags. The Long Island News?

I never mentioned anything about the Economist. hat in blazes are you talking about? Nobody cares, hmmm, most Americans DO care about the economy which Obama our socialist President has done nothing about. the economy is ALL that matters now, nothing else! Remember that.

Nate Silver? ROFL

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Mirai, my state (swing state) is showing Obama is leading by 2%. 80% mail in ballots have been already counted. CBS is the only one to know about this. Looks good:)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nate Silver? ROFL

LOL...except that Real Clear Politics, PPP, Intrade, and several other polls and statisticians are saying similar things...but of course, I keep forgetting that republicans don't believe in math or facts..

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@GW Which state is that?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

bass4funkNov. 06, 2012 - 02:02PM JST

never mentioned anything about the Economist.

Very sophisticated and well respected magazine in the world, but not for everyone.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Mirai, remember this is a global site. You will find out it tomorrow's newspaper. Romney should know this by now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funkNov. 06, 2012 - 02:02PM JST

@global

You think so? Trust me, except for the Houston Chronicle, they are all liberal and were deeply in the tank for Obama last time around.

bass, they are not in center.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Economist has endorsed Obama.

Somehow I don't think an endorsement from one of Britain's top line magazines is going to go over big with American's this election cycle..

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

hat in blazes are you talking about?

the economy which Obama our socialist President has done nothing about

The point is that The Economist, which is a highly respected newspaper leaning to the right on most economic issues, has endorsed Obama. I don't think they would support a 'socialist' candidate.

You brought up the issue of newspaper endorsements (with a list of local newspapers/tabloids) to show how Obama's support is in trouble. I brought up The Economist to counter your nonsensical reasoning.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"Nate Silver has Obama's chances of... 50.9% popular votes"

Not much of a mandate for a charismatic, incumbent president, is it? But Nate might be wrong, maybe it'll be Romney who ends up with the majority of the popular vote.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But Nate might be wrong

His academic major is a Probability in Mathematics. I would not under estimate his skill. knowledgel.and experience.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Gov. Romney wins, according to the Redskins Rule.

The Redskins Rule is: The incumbent wins if the Redskins win the weekend before the general election; The challenger wins if the Redskins lose. This formula has been accurate in 17 of the past 18 elections since the Redskins moved to Washington in 1937.

Sunday's final score: Carolina 21, Washington 13.

RR

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@global - Yeah, Nate is a real whiz kid, but he doesn't know what people will do when the moment comes to either give Obama 4 more years to continue this disaster, or give Romney a chance.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@RR - "Carolina 21, Washington 13"

Hooray! Hooray! Obama is toast!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

@RR - "Carolina 21, Washington 13"

Hooray! Hooray! Obama is toast!

LOL...YEAH! Let forget math, probability and science and see what Yahweh and the Picard says while we're at it...because if they say Romney's gonna win, then it must be so

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yeah, Nate is a real whiz kid, but he doesn't know what people will do

And the Redskins do? Really?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Mirai - Nah, the Redskins actually don't know squat. We need to find out what Paul the Octopus says about this.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"the president is close to sealing the deal"

It's not a foregone conclusion? What gives?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

270towin.com gives Obama a 81.9% probability of winning. Romney is at 17.2%...uh oh!!!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Only 81.9%? Pfft! The whiz kid's 92% is more like it! Ha ha!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Obama probably is incredulous that nearly half or maybe even over half of the country is voting against him.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Well according to calculations, its 100% Obama to 0% Romney....I guess I win!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

SerranoNov. 06, 2012 - 02:55PM JST

@global - Yeah, Nate is a real whiz kid, but he doesn't know what people will do when the moment comes to either give Obama 4 more years to continue this disaster, or give Romney a chance.

Serrano, I think this guy know how to get a confidence interval in Probability. .I reviewed his stats and it looks good.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What's even more funnier and I'm still laughing is that at the Obama network of entertainment, they think Obama will have a flawless victory and win in a landslide. My sides hurt from cracking up.

Sorry, I can't imagine anyone actually laughing all that hard at something like that unless they're taking this whole election way too seriously. Neither have I found this "Obama network of entertainment" you speak of, even the most pro-Obama commentary I've read gives him no more than a slim chance of victory.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Obama probably is incredulous that nearly half or maybe even over half of the country is voting against him.

How do you deduce that, given that the polls have been saying pretty much the same thing virtually the entire campaign?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You brought up the issue of newspaper endorsements (with a list of local newspapers/tabloids) to show how Obama's support is in trouble. I brought up The Economist to counter your nonsensical reasoning.

Yes, I surely did. Well, No, you didn't counter anything, although I love the Economist, I was totally a struck back in 2008 when they endorsed Obama the first time. Now it seems like they finally came to their senses. But nice try anyway. ;-)

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

You can't trust politicians with electoral boundary responsibilities, so how can you trust them at all?

Even 3rd world countries know that any party given the chance will subvert democratic representation for its own selfish ends.

How come you Americans haven't figured that out yet? Most countries have independently appointed electoral commissions to draw up voting boundaries. That way you can't really manipulate the vote distribution - this is a form of rigging, which is downright undemocratic. No wonder your political system is such a frigging mess. You've actually left the crooks to police themselves.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

TheQuestion:

" Whoever wins the presidential election we get the same basic policies. "

I would tend to agree. The party of tax-and-spend vs. the party of borrow-and-spend... the domestic mess will get bigger either way.

HOWEVER.... I dont believe that foreign policy can possibly get worse than the current PC-addled administration with their pandering to islamist countries. When Obama stood up in the UN and declared that "There is no place in the future for people who insult the prophet Mohammed" I had to cringe.... who is this guy, a president or the Grand Mufti of the US?

No other administration can possibly be so deluded and stoop so low. No matter how much of a mess they make otherwise. So I am hoping for some change in the White House.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

FORWARD !

2 ( +2 / -0 )

No, you didn't counter anything, although I love the Economist, I was totally a struck back in 2008 when they endorsed Obama the first time. Now it seems like they finally came to their senses. But nice try anyway. ;-)

Are we talking about the same newspaper, the one that published this article:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709 ?

I interpreted it as a not very enthusiastic endorsement of Barack Obama. Did I miss something?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Fingers crossed for Obama! Romney would be a disaster for American.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I write this on my iPad as I stand in line waiting for the voting station to open in about 5 minutes to cast my ballot.

If the 2010 election was a historic republican landslide, the 2012 presidential election will be a Gov. Romney landslide as well.

What's changed since 2010? Spending has gone up, the debt is bigger than ever, family income is down 8.2%, unemployment has gone up, the poverty level has gone up, and the number of people on food stamps has almost doubled. Things in this country have only gotten worse.

Time to let Obama go.

RR

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Rasmussen, in a finding similar to Gallup, revealed yesterday that for the month of October, its data showed that among likely voters, the electorate is 39 percent Republican and 33 percent Democratic. Never in the history of polling, dating back to 1936, have self-identified Republicans outnumbered Democrats on Election Day. Never. Ever.

This comes from a survey of 15,000 people taken over the course of a month. Yes, 15,000 people —15 times the number in a statistically significant poll. Have ANY polls oversampled Republicans by 6%, or even 1%? Cry me a river. If Obama somehow manages to lose, it will be a stunning defeat for the for the entire punditocracy that headed into the day filled with confidence that Obama had it in the bag. Nate Silver’s unhappiness is only just beginning.....

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@RR

That would be the best thing for him to step down. Anyway, Obama will make a crap load of money! Traveling around the world giving speeches and getting paid $10, 000 and up just to appear, ain't too shabby, plus book deals and movies and I heard they are shopping for a Hawaiian mansion in the range of $35 million Public speaking without a teleprompter. This is the best thing for Obama and he doesn't have to worry about a teleprompter anymore.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Romney/Ryan 2012

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@bass

Yeah, and don't forget the annual 200k he'll get off of us taxpayers in "retirement". But I'm OK with that. It's a small price to pay for him to no longer be in control of our domestic and foreign policies.

RR

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Amen to that!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"FOWARD !"

Or, FOREWARNED !

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

I have really tried to look at this race objectively in spite of my choice and I think that President Obama is going to win this one going away. He is likely to win the popular vote in a close one, but I think he will get between 300 and 310 electoral college votes to wrap of the evening early.

In addition, the Tea Baggers have sunk what could have been a very winnable contest for the Republicans in the Senate. Not only will the Democrats hold their majority, but I think that they may add as many as three seats (but probably more like one or two) to the total.

Driving Olympia Snowe from the Senate and running a primary opponent (who thinks that preganancy as a result of rape is the will of God no less!) against Dick Lugar turned out not to be such great ideas in retrospect.

Oh well, I guess it will give Fox something to put on the air and it will also give Palin a camera to bloviate into.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Reality is about to dawn on the republicans in a few hours. If you are close to Ted Nugent or any like him, keep a safe distance. Losing twice to the black President is going to be rough for most republicans to handle.

I am so grateful that the republican party is not such a sorry mess that no one sane wants to lead it any longer. The candidates for President that ran were straight out of a Marx Brothers movie. And the worst one of all was picked in the end, the rich out of touch vulture capitalist. Perfect. Obama's secret weapon in this election, the Mittster.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Obama should win,but no thanks to you R/R fans.They are a worse choice than Bush.The 2 richest men in America Buffet,Bloomberg are going for Obama.Do you think that they are clued out?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Reality is about to dawn on the Democrats in a few hours.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Sailwind,

If you want to blame bush for something, blame him for Obama winning in 2008 and now again in 2012. Only bush could screw up so bad that the USA would elect a black man as president to clean up after 8 years of failure.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Funny albeit sad to watch the conservatives on this site take their last gasps of hope before their hopes are extinguished.

They picked a loser. Maybe just maybe next time they'll learn: don't do that.

The candidates themselves are simply reflections of the base. Honestly, I doubt this will ever change until the average IQ of conservatives breaches 50.

Only if/when the conservative base smartens up mentally will the GOP begin to finally start putting up sone serious candidates.

Sorry guys, better luck in '16.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

SushiSake3, Couldn't have said it better.Cheers,Obama 2012!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

When community organizer Barack Obama wins again, will conservatives finally admit their president is a competent community organizer?

And will they acknowledge that it was God's plan all along that Mitt Romney and the Teapublicans would lose?

How are they going to live this down?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Putting my political differences to one side, I'll be the first to admit Romney did put up a real good fight.

He'll probably earn a lot on the book and speaking circuit after he winds down his campaign.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yes, I surely did. Well, No, you didn't counter anything, although I love the Economist, I was totally a struck back in 2008 when they endorsed Obama the first time. Now it seems like they finally came to their senses. But nice try anyway. ;-)

bass, "I love the Economist", well, I doubt that. You have no economic theory. No BS, please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bass - "I love the Economist,"

Heh, that has all the hallmarks of Ann Romney at the RNC with her "I love you women!!" shout out.

That was totally fake too.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Global - "You have no economic theory."

I disagree! Bass, like most conservatives, does have an economic theory:

Give more to the Rich and Clobber the Poor.

Was that Ann Rand or Saddam Hussein?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Exit polls are in the president's corner.

Obama stands a 91 percent chance of victory.

Is that all??

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Exit polls are in the president's corner.

I don't trust exit polls. However, this much I can say:

I took advantage of "advanced voting" here in Cobb County, GA, last Friday. The line was several hundred long and took about 80 minutes to get to the place to cast my ballot. Judging from the people around me, there wasn't a single person who could say they were proudly casting their vote for Romney. Probably the vast majority deciding that way have been left with little choice than to vote against something rather than for it.

On the other hand, I followed up my presidential vote of 2008 with extreme pride, as did many else in line also did.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

SushiSake3Nov. 07, 2012 - 12:56AM JST

Global - "You have no economic theory."

I disagree! Bass, like most conservatives, does have an economic theory:

Give more to the Rich and Clobber the Poor.

Was that Ann Rand or Saddam Hussein?

SushiSake, agreed. Unless they are in the 2%, they are shooting themselves. The sad part is that they are the last ones to know it. Speaking about social issues, they have no idea what Freedom means until they lose it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I followed up my presidential vote of 2008 with extreme pride, as did many else in line also did.

Well done! Proudly followed up my own vote of 2008 and hope to have done my part to deliver my battleground state for Obama.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I am in the battleground counry of important swing state.

Sunny skies and temperatures in the upper 60s encourage high tournout and expecting 70,000 voters will cast their ballots today.

216,812 people requested mail ballots and 163,594 had been validated and counted by yesterday (Monday) at 5.28 pm.

We expect about 312,000 to vote in this battleground county where all nations are paying attention to. This year's tournout will be about 12% higher than four years ago. Largely due to a a 75,000 increse in mail in ballots which led to a 17,000 decrease at voting sites. There were 5,4080 people who went to the polls on Friday's final day of early voting.

Elections are all about numbers, and so far Obama is leading by 2%. We should be able to combine this with other counties in my state to release the result by 8 pm tonight.

So far, everything looks good for Obama.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Here we go again, so it's either vote for the Sainted holy one or get bludgeon by one of these thugs. What a disgrace to insight fear and intimidation to force people to vote for this disaster of a president.

Here we go again. What a disgrace it is that people have to lie and misrepresent a situation.

Members of the New Black Panther Party in many cities in the US -- not just Philly -- have properly registered and trained as poll watchers. The goon who carried a stick at a Philly site in 2008 was not an authorized poll watcher and had to leave. (And did leave when police told him to. His colleagues, authorized and credentialed poll watchers, were allowed to stay.) No voter was assaulted, but a few ostensible Republican voters were laughed at and taunted -- which for them must have been very scary, coming from a black guy with a stick.

Have the BPP poll watchers shown up at the polls with weapons of any kind this year? If not, then conservatives must be afraid of them for some irrational visceral reasons. Perhaps some whites are afraid that some blacks are astute enough to see the racial hatred felt towards our president (as well as them)-- hatred intense enough to distort a very simple situation all out of proportion.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Why would anyone need 'poll watchers'? I proudly voted for Mitt. If this country is sentenced to four more years of stupidity, I won't be responsible. Unfortunately my children will pay the bill - as will all of yours. But I'm sure they'll thank you some day for crappy health care.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Tigermoth, according to yabits, you couldn't possibly have voted for Mitt Romney with as much pride as he had when he voted for Obama.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

In Philadelphia a judge had to order a mural of Obama right next to the polling booths covered up.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@tiger

Why would anyone need 'poll watchers'? I proudly voted for Mitt. If this country is sentenced to four more years of stupidity, I won't be responsible. Unfortunately my children will pay the bill - as will all of yours. But I'm sure they'll thank you some day for crappy health care

Thank you! Yabits and most liberals want to just make excuses for these thugs. If it were the other way around, you know thew would be up and arms raving that conservatives are the absolute racist, but for the NBP to do it, no matter what is totally understandable and justifiable. By the way, just proudly voted for Mitt myself, never felt better. There's still time and let's hope we can get this guy out of office and get Romney in. A man that knows about creating business.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

In China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits and most liberals want to just make excuses for these thugs.

The "excuses" are called "laws" and "rules." Election laws say that any citizen can be a poll watcher. As long as BPP members are citizens, register and follow the rules, they have every right to be a poll watcher as any American. I understand the zeal at which some conservatives would use their racist discomfort to try and remove this basic right granted to all citizens. Just as they are using a push for VoterID as a mask to deny minorities, the disabled, elderly and the poor the right to vote.

you know thew would be up and arms raving that conservatives are the absolute racist, but for the NBP to do it,

Conservatives have as much right to poll-watch as any other citizen. To the extent that they would try to deny another citizen that right, it could very well be a racist act, depending on who they are targeting.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I can't help but note how a vote for Romney is cast more out of disgust and fear than pride.

"If this country is sentenced to four more years of stupidity.." and "let's hope we can get this guy out of office" are dead giveaways.

Romney's ability to "create jobs" is greatly exaggerated. Did his secret Swiss bank account eventually force him to apply for amnesty as a tax cheat? Why are the people who have made such a big issue about Obama's grades not interested in seeing Romney release his 2009 tax returns?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Here come the train! President Obama with over 300 College votes.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@yabits

Conservatives have as much right to poll-watch as any other citizen. To the extent that they would try to deny another citizen that right, it could very well be a racist act, depending on who they are targeting.

Which the NBP were doing 4 years ago, my point exactly.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I think Romney wins the popular vote by a couple percentage points and takes the Electoral College by a slim margin.

@Patrick Hattman:

Great call!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Rasmussen, in a finding similar to Gallup, revealed yesterday that for the month of October, its data showed that among likely voters, the electorate is 39 percent Republican and 33 percent Democratic. Never in the history of polling, dating back to 1936, have self-identified Republicans outnumbered Democrats on Election Day. Never. Ever.

@Lizz

I predicted that you were going to get a good lesson about polling. The lesson is there; whether you take advantage of it is up to you.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Serrano:

Reality is about to dawn on the Democrats in a few hours.

Sorry, what was that you were saying about Romney winning?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

TOUCH DOWN!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Reality is about to dawn on the Democrats in a few hours.

Dawn has arrived. And how sweet that reality IS!!!!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites