I am beginning to become scared that Romney/Ryan will win. Can smart people please post here and say reassuring things to convince me that he won't?

the more interesting question would be what obama would do next if he lost

it really cracks me up that dude looks like he fell directly out of The Omen III

He is almost cartoonishly evil looking.

the inverse Adams family

― Gandalf’s Gobble Melt (DJP), Friday, November 2, 2012 11:08 AM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yet still creepy, kooky, and altogether ooky.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/nov-1-the-simple-case-for-saying-obama-is-the-favorite/#more-37035

sometimes I wonder if Obama could accomplish things that improve peoples lives a hell of a lot more easier if he weren't president

Really curious how much that single IN senatorial poll will change the 538 odds in that state.

Do you mean presidentially? I think a few polls from that Senate race have shown that Mourdock is finished

No I mean for Donnelly/Mourdock. Right now 538 is still showing Mourdock as a 65% favorite. I have to assume that as soon as the most recent IN poll is added that will flip flop completely. IN is very under-polled by the way according to RCP.

According to RCP there has been only one IN senate poll post comments (and only two in October altogether.)

oh, maybe it was just something I read on the Fix that the internal polls for both campaigns show Mourdock in a world of hurt

The group implosion of the Republican senate candidates has been a beautiful thing to watch.

the exact same thing happened during the mid terms too. gotta wonder how long the 'serious' members of the gop will tolerate these tea party morans.

serious Republicans have no influence or are David Frum.

If that was true Rick Santorum would be the presidential candidate.

serious republicans are feeling downright grave atm

Primary voters chose Mitt because he didn't dress his children and his children's dolls in the same skirts.

they should have david gergen run for president every year

serious Republicans have no influence or are David Frum.

― the ones that I'm near most: fellow outcasts and ilxors (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, November 2, 2012 12:28 PM (34 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

If that was true Rick Santorum would be the presidential candidate.

― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Friday, November 2, 2012 12:30 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

'no influence' might be an overstatement but they sure don't run the show. 'their guy' won because the 1000 crazy people that the base preferred flamed out + crazies can't handle national media not because the srs republican establishment took over. rick santorum isn't the candidate because of rick santorum. rick perry isn't the candidate because of rick perry.

Mitch McConnell has run the show in the Senate since Obama was elected, WTF are you talking about

basically if srs republicans were holding the puppet strings we wouldn't have spent half the year talking about donald trump and herman cain. and once romney became mathematically inevitable, santorum woulda found the exit door.

you mean this thing?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/03/02/health/mcconnell480/mcconnell480-blogSpan.jpg

yes

not saying he runs everything but to say he has no influence is nutso

http://wuzzadem.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/turtle.gif

when the only gop senators still around are far right and the filibuster exists you don't have to do anything to make nothing happen. that's not the same as having real control w/r/t how the party operates.

xp

making nothing happen for Obama in the Senate is real control

I'm not arguing that 'republicans don't control congress' I'm arguing that srs people don't control republicans

and i am saying for you to argue that he is not a serious Republican, or a serious person who controls other Republicans, is quite foolish

he's a serious asshole

'the republican party' means a lot more than the 47 people in the senate

what iatee is saying is that mcconnell 'controls' the far right republicans pretty much by leading them in the direction they want to go, kind of like a five year old walking a great dane. the five year old holds the leash, but the great dane is making the decisions.

I'm trying to imagine David Gergen saying that sentence.

'the republican party' means a lot more than the 47 people in the senate

no shit

i am not saying the republican party only exists in the vacuum of the senate

I think we need Pleasant Plains to weigh in on this one.

the fundamental difference between 'serious' republicans and tea partiers is way overstated

yeah I mean the tea party was just a rebranding campaign, it's not like the gop wasn't filled w/ crazies in 2008 either. but the cleansing of moderates that's been going on means that there are fewer and fewer people who you can go to for making any contrast within the party. and even when they exist and 'hold power' ie mcconnell and romney - they're forced to play by other peoples' rules. romney didn't run the campaign he wanted to run - he *couldn't*. nor could mccain.

I mean nobody thinks that if romney wins the presidency - 'at his deep dark core' probably the single most moderate republican to run for pres since eisenhower - he'll have any real capability w/r/t molding the gop to his image. even as the single most powerful man in the country!

serious asshole

http://i48.tinypic.com/1f4op.jpg

despite all the cheery poll numbers, i think i'm just go to have this low level anxiety until the election is over....

thinking about signing up for a shift canvassing for obama, at least feel like i've done something i guess

2 possible ways to visualize/make intuitive a 70% chance of winning

-> if there were an election every day for ten days, w/ the result every day independent of that of the previous day obama would win 7 days, and romney 3
[...]

― flopson, Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:06 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

really late to reply to this, but this would only be correct if the election was done by sampling, which it isn't. with actual voting it could be more like a 69% chance of obama either winning all 10 days, a 29% chance of romney winning all 10, and 2% a mix of results.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VlmHNP9So5Y/S86arf3VhTI/AAAAAAAAFcI/yZ-JaIaYn2o/s1600/mcconnell.jpg

c'mon guys we've been over this re: Senator Blobfish

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01565/blobfish_1565953c.jpg

it's become kind of hilarious watching everyone on ile take a turn at coming up with a shaky analogy about what polls may or may not actually mean

Shakey's pretty good about making analogies himself.

eh, if you follow sports where silver gets most of his methodology from it's not that hard to get`a grasp on

that's why all the pained attempts to overexplain it are funny!

it's like if you put 7 obamas and 3 romneys into a bag....oh nevermind.

if daily elections were held in one hundred alternate universes, the reverse vampires would elect romney πx7 times