Romney may have lost the presidential race today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney stood up for america while obama apologized to terrorists.

+1

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney stood up for america while obama apologized to terrorists.

+1

When exactly did Obama apologize for terrorists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney stood up for america while obama apologized to terrorists.

+1

AHAHAHAHAHA!

When? You mean when he said Obama didn't act fast enough in taking out Qaddafi? Or when he swung around and said we were too hasty going military on him? Or when he called Obama's decision to go after the guy a strategic failure? Or when after he was gone, saying "the world is better off" without him?

I don't know any other way to put this. When the FUCK is Romney going to pick a side in Libya? He had four different positions and there are only two major sides. Jeez!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...aaaand Romney was hosting a fundraiser in FL. What's your point?

Um......one is President one is not? Not that hard to figure out.

And for the record, Carter was up in the polls at this point too.

[Anonymous]

That's why he is up five points in the polls over the past 24 hours.

You must not have seen the new Fox News poll which has Romney five points BEHIND Obama among likely voters, and 14 points behind in women voters.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2012/09/12/fox-news-poll-obama-tops-romney-in-post-convention-poll-most-say-country-still/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...aaaand Romney was hosting a fundraiser in FL. What's your point?

Um......one is President one is not? Not that hard to figure out.

And for the record, Carter was up in the polls at this point too.

Maybe you are too young to remember.

But the polls had 10% undecided and another 20% going to John Anderson. This isn't a 3 way race, and there are only 6% undecided. So sorry this is not remotely the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney stood up for america while obama apologized to terrorists.

+1

AHAHAHAHAHA!

When? You mean when he said Obama didn't act fast enough in taking out Qaddafi? Or when he swung around and said we were too hasty going military on him? Or when he called Obama's decision to go after the guy a strategic failure? Or when after he was gone, saying "the world is better off" without him?

I don't know any other way to put this. When the FUCK is Romney going to pick a side in Libya? He had four different positions and there are only two major sides. Jeez!

Will the REAL Mitt Romney please stand up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...aaaand Romney was hosting a fundraiser in FL. What's your point?

Um......one is President one is not? Not that hard to figure out.

And for the record, Carter was up in the polls at this point too.

Maybe you are too young to remember.

But the polls had 10% undecided and another 20% going to John Anderson. This isn't a 3 way race, and there are only 6% undecided. So sorry this is not remotely the same.

Not too young. He was already fading (below 20% at this stage) and many polls showed Anderson voters second choices split between Carter and Reagan. It wasn't a 3 way race. Hadn't been for months. Even if all those voters broke for Reagan a lot of Carter voters broke for him too to make it the landslide it was. Regardless, debating polling is useless. Voters are fickle.

[Anonymous]

*cough* Nate Silver *cough*
www.fivethirtyeight.com

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...aaaand Romney was hosting a fundraiser in FL. What's your point?

Um......one is President one is not? Not that hard to figure out.

And for the record, Carter was up in the polls at this point too.

Maybe you are too young to remember.

But the polls had 10% undecided and another 20% going to John Anderson. This isn't a 3 way race, and there are only 6% undecided. So sorry this is not remotely the same.

Not too young. He was already fading (below 20% at this stage) and many polls showed Anderson voters second choices split between Carter and Reagan. It wasn't a 3 way race. Hadn't been for months. Even if all those voters broke for Reagan a lot of Carter voters broke for him too to make it the landslide it was. Regardless, debating polling is useless. Voters are fickle.

No, Anderson was well into the double digits at that point. He ended with 7% of the vote. That's 7-8 points right there. And there are another 5=6 points in undecideds. That adds up to 12-14 points of swing on top of the undecideds in this election.

Sorry but your math is wrong. This is not 1980.

[Anonymous]

Romney leads with independents. Since the country is divided I thought the independents chose the president

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...aaaand Romney was hosting a fundraiser in FL. What's your point?

Um......one is President one is not? Not that hard to figure out.

And for the record, Carter was up in the polls at this point too.

Maybe you are too young to remember.

But the polls had 10% undecided and another 20% going to John Anderson. This isn't a 3 way race, and there are only 6% undecided. So sorry this is not remotely the same.

Not too young. He was already fading (below 20% at this stage) and many polls showed Anderson voters second choices split between Carter and Reagan. It wasn't a 3 way race. Hadn't been for months. Even if all those voters broke for Reagan a lot of Carter voters broke for him too to make it the landslide it was. Regardless, debating polling is useless. Voters are fickle.

No, Anderson was well into the double digits at that point. He ended with 7% of the vote. That's 7-8 points right there. And there are another 5=6 points in undecideds. That adds up to 12-14 points of swing on top of the undecideds in this election.

Sorry but your math is wrong. This is not 1980.

Still... I was so proud to vote for Anderson in the first presidential election I could vote in. Good times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It was a rash, knee-jerk reaction by Romney, is terrible taste, jingoistic, and badly timed. It was an attempt to look tough on foreign policy after a week of being tortured, rightfully so, for not mentioning the war in Afghanistan ONCE in his acceptance speech. Instead, he just looked like the stupid Ken doll that he is, an opportunistic loser who makes George W. Bush look like a seasoned statesman.

Now, now. That's just silly. NOTHING could make W look like a seasoned statesman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney leads with independents. Since the country is divided I thought the independents chose the president

Go back to civics class. Retake the class about the Electoral College.

Right now Obama is leading 312-212 in the Electoral College, based on state-by-state polls.

I don't even think you're right that Romney leads the independents.

Look, you can continue to delude yourself all you want. But no matter how you slice it, Romney is going to lose. Even my Republican friends know this. Even the speakers at the Republicans convention knew this, which is why they spent all that time talking about themselves and not their candidate.

[Anonymous]

Romney and his team are just incompetent. It is just one mistake after another. Where are the professionals on his staff. This mistake will cost him. He is now Palin with a tie.