Okay, I'm calling it. Romney's toast.

[JoeMorgue]

The only way I can see a win for Romney is for him to take Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, and score an upset in Wisconsin. And Obama took ever single one of them in '08. I don't see a shift of that size. The conventions are over, I don't see the debates being a major upset for either candidate especially Romney. Any one, two, maybe even three of them going to Romney? Possible, hell probably gonna happen. I honestly don't think Obama's gonna take NC this time and VA, OH, and FL are all up in the air. But all of them? Not gonna happen.

So outside of something really out of left field (All predictions null and void in case of alien invasion, zombie uprising, or one of the candidates being caught in a sleazy hotel room with an 8-ball, the entire cast of Glee, Charlie Sheen, and a donkey) I don't see it.

Although to be fair the absolute worst thing the Democrats could do right now is act like they've got it won. The Democrats are absolute masters at throwing away elections they should have in the bag. For all their faults the Republicans are much better politicians then the Democrats.

So my prediction? A repeat of 08 except for Obama not getting Indiana this time, he probably not getting NC, and maybe him loosing one, maybe two of VA, FL, and OH.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Think Colorado is sure to go Romney? the Springs is coated with Romney/Ryan signs.

 

[SkepticalDrew]

What's funny is that the AP is still calling it a tight race and CNN characterized a five point lead as a tie.

 

[Neally]

What's funny is that the AP is still calling it a tight race and CNN characterized a five point lead as a tie.

And Gallup and Rasmussen have the race dead even. Far from over just yet.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Think Colorado is sure to go Romney? the Springs is coated with Romney/Ryan signs.

I was focusing more on the double digit swing states. Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, and New Hampshire could all go either way, but unless Romney wins all the bigger swing states or scores a major upset in an Obama safe state it's not going to come down to any of them.

If Romney manages to win Florida, Virginia, Ohio and Virginia he would still need one of the smaller swing states, or to score an upset in Wisconsin, to get to 270 electoral votes.

So basically election night is pretty much over the second any of the big 4 swing states gets called for Obama. And that point a win for Romney would be technically possible, but a damn near miracle politically speaking.

In fact I'm calling it that way. Unless Romney takes Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia he has no chance of taking the election. And even if he does all it does it put him on even ground fighting Obama for the remaining smaller swing states. Him taking Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin is the only way he will win with any margin at all.

 

[Robrob]

What's funny is that the AP is still calling it a tight race and CNN characterized a five point lead as a tie.

I suspect it's self defense. If they start calling it one sided they will be accused of "bias" by the usual gang of idiots.

 

[JoeMorgue]

That and the general election almost certainly will be extremely close, probably a statistical tie or within 1 or 2% difference at most, but electoral votes are what matters and Obama has many more safe electoral votes then Romney.

 

[jnelso99]

Think Colorado is sure to go Romney? the Springs is coated with Romney/Ryan signs.

Boulder and Colorado Springs tend to cancel each other out.

 

[SkepticalDrew]

And Gallup and Rasmussen have the race dead even. Far from over just yet.

Yeah I agree the national polls are close and it will be a close race in that regards but the state by state polls consistently show Obama 5-6 points ahead in states Romney needs to win.

I suspect it's self defense. If they start calling it one sided they will be accused of "bias" by the usual gang of idiots.

Yeah that can be an irksome facet of the media.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Think Colorado is sure to go Romney? the Springs is coated with Romney/Ryan signs.

The most recent Denver Post poll had Obama and Romney in a statistical dead heat in Colorado.

 

[theprestige]

The most recent Denver Post poll had Obama and Romney in a statistical dead heat in Colorado.

Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
--Orwell

 

[Muldur]

About the worst thing that could happen to the Democrats right now is to get complacent because they think it's over.

I agree. The race is still dangerously close (within 2-3 points with ~10-13% still undecided or third party)

The other disaster would be to neglect the Congressional races. The last couple of years have proven that the President needs both Houses by a good margin to get anything done.

Thankfully, the Dems are shifting some resources into those races now.

Of course, so are the Republicans, sensing that Romney may be a lost cause.

The really DISheartening thing is that it isn't a blow out for the Democrats, despite some of the most pig-headed, morally bankrupt, knuckle-dragging behavior out of the Republican party in living memory.

Despite Romney's elitism, despite Ryan's "let the poor die" philosophy, despite Todd Akin's imbecillically moronic "legitimate rape" statements, Republicans are still polling well in many states, even among the rural working class and poor who stand to lose the most if these monsters get any more power than they've managed to swindle out of us already.

 

[Baylor]

Sad, but true.

How is Reagan's mean-spirited government paradigm coming to an end a bad thing?

 

[DavidJames]

I disagree. I hope they learn the opposite lesson and begin to moderate themselves.

We actually agree here. Like an addict, I don't think they will recover until they hit rock bottom and I don't think they're there yet..

How is Reagan's mean-spirited government paradigm coming to an end a bad thing?

Don't get me wrong, I don't want another 8 years of Reagan crap but compared to the the Tea Party **** you I got mine, and the **** the country, all we care about is making Obama a one term president attitude of the main stream Republicans today, the Reagan years, in comparison were better. As bad as Reagan was, he occasionally worked with Democrats and performed the (per current Republican mantra) mortal sin of raising taxes when needed.

 

[dc1971]

And Gallup and Rasmussen have the race dead even. Far from over just yet.

It ain't over until the fat Republican sings!

 

[DavidJames]

It ain't over until the fat Republican sings!

Here ya go.

 

[theprestige]

The really DISheartening thing is that it isn't a blow out for the Democrats, despite some of the most pig-headed, morally bankrupt, knuckle-dragging behavior out of the Republican party in living memory.

Either you're 80 years old, or you've interviewed a lot of 80 year-olds, or you may not know what you're talking about and should probably revisit your starting assumptions. Especially if you're reaching a conclusion as implausible as the one quoted above.

 

[R.Mackey]

I agree. The race is still dangerously close (within 2-3 points with ~10-13% still undecided or third party)

[...]

Thankfully, the Dems are shifting some resources into those races now.

Of course, so are the Republicans, sensing that Romney may be a lost cause.

Does not compute... If the race is dangerously close, then nobody would be abandoning Romney. I say it's much farther apart than it appears. The media are doing their best to keep it interesting, but for all intents and purposes Romney's flat out done. Cash was his only real ally, and cash can no longer help him.

Despite Romney's elitism, despite Ryan's "let the poor die" philosophy, despite Todd Akin's imbecillically moronic "legitimate rape" statements, Republicans are still polling well in many states, even among the rural working class and poor who stand to lose the most if these monsters get any more power than they've managed to swindle out of us already.

I agree except I'd argue Nixon was still far slimier than Romney. Romney reminds me more of the second coming of Warren Harding.

 

[brazenlilraisin]

Either you're 80 years old, or you've interviewed a lot of 80 year-olds, or you may not know what you're talking about and should probably revisit your starting assumptions. Especially if you're reaching a conclusion as implausible as the one quoted above.

Maybe I misunderstand, because I think an informed child in grade school could make the same observation and it would be equally valid to (and match) the 80 year old's.

 

[This is The End]

Either you're 80 years old, or you've interviewed a lot of 80 year-olds, or you may not know what you're talking about and should probably revisit your starting assumptions. Especially if you're reaching a conclusion as implausible as the one quoted above.

Why do you assume that the poster meant "the living memory of an average maximum life span human being" and not, oh I don't know, the living memory of that poster?!

It seems you made that assumption just to be uncivil....

And, ironically, while making that assumption, you accuse the poster of making unfounded assumptions!