The Results of Nov 6, 2012 as predicted by Carnac Coyle

[Eddie Coyle]

               Here 'Tis...Coyle hasn't been wrong since 2000. And technically, I wasn't.

             Barack Obama 347
             Mitt Romney    191

          Obama
           CA 55     MI 16    MD 10  IA 6  NH 4
           NY 29     NC 15   MN 10  NV 6  VT 3
           FL  29     NJ 14     WI 10   NM 5   DE 3
           PA  20     VA 13    CO 9    ME 4    DC 3
           IL   20      WA 12    OR 7   RI  4
           OH  18      MA 11    CT 7   HI  4

         Romney
           TX 38    MO 10  OK 7  NE 5   MT 3
            GA 16   AL 9     KS 6   WV 5   ND 3
            IN 11     SC 9     AR 6    ID 4     SD 3
            AZ  11    KY 8     MS 6   AK 3
            TN  11    LA 8     UT 6  WY 3

                           
         In essence, Romney is very popular in states with very few people. That's probably an issue the GOP should work on. Election will be "called" by the networks by 9:15 in the East.

[The General]

I do hope you're wrong. 
Romney is the slower train to hell.  I want the slower train.

[Eddie Coyle]

I do hope you're wrong. 
Romney is the slower train to hell.  I want the slower train.

The bland, ineffectual Romney campaign reminds me of Dole in '96 or even Mondale in '84. It's like they know they can't win.

[The General]

      The bland, ineffectual Romney campaign reminds me of Dole in '96 or even Mondale in '84. It's like they know they can't win.

Or, more recently, McCain.

[MV/Liberace!]

      The bland, ineffectual Romney campaign reminds me of Dole in '96 or even Mondale in '84. It's like they know they can't win.

i agree.  it's as if the power behind the republican party got together in a small room with soft leather chairs and said, "ok... look... this fucking romney asshole is going to keep poking his dumb mormon nose into this shit every four years unless we finally let the country formally tell him to fuck off.  romney it is.  2016 is only a few short years away."

[Eddie Coyle]

Or, more recently, McCain.

      McCain still had a slither of a chance due to "The Bradley Effect" that some pundits were convinced still existed. But he too ran an awful campaign that had no real message, and it was almost like he got the short straw in being nominated. That the old tired insider McCain handled Romney so easily in early '08 should really speak volumes about Romney.

[Eddie Coyle]

i agree.  it's as if the power behind the republican party got together in a small room with soft leather chairs and said, "ok... look... this fucking romney asshole is going to keep poking his dumb mormon nose into this shit every four years unless we finally let the country formally tell him to fuck off.  romney it is.  2016 is only a few short years away."

Yes. Those "Rubio 2016" bumper stickers are being made somewhere in a monsoon-leveled southeast Asian hellhole right now.

[MV/Liberace!]

That the old tired insider McCain handled Romney so easily in early '08 should really speak volumes about Romney.

This statement pretty much encapsulates the 2012 campaign.

[MV/Liberace!]

          Yes. Those "Rubio 2016" bumper stickers are being made somewhere in a monsoon-leveled southeast Asian hellhole right now.

It certainly won't be a "Ryan 2016" bumper sticker. Of that I'm sure. Just as was the case after 2008, when Romney loses because he's a weak candidate with no convictions, the vice presidential candidate will be blamed despite the fact that, as in 2008, the VP pick was the ONLY thing that made me consider the GOP candidate for more than 5 seconds.

[Eddie Coyle]

It certainly won't be a "Ryan 2016" bumper sticker. Of that I'm sure. Just as was the case after 2008, when Romney loses because he's a weak candidate with no convictions, the vice presidential candidate will be blamed despite the fact that, as in 2008, the VP pick was the ONLY thing that made me consider the GOP candidate for more than 5 seconds.

Ryan will be a Fox News contributor, A Hoover Institute wonk and "writer" by 2016.

          I always hope for that Martin Sheen at the end of "The Dead Zone" scenario though.

[Sardondi]

Eddie, I'm afraid that by using HuffPo and Daily Kos whistling-past-the-graveyard projections you're going to be spectacularly surprised. I'm thinking Romney will pick up FL, OH, IA, CO, NV and WI, as well as VA and NC. There's a reasonable chance for Romney in MN and PA, and even the delicious possibility of IL, but let's leave those with team Obama for the moment. Tally: Romney 317 to Obama 221. 

While you're right about heavy population states...a sizable majority of that population must be in urban areas. Because in states with a huge proportion of population in urban areas, there is not only overwhelming natural support, but the near certainty that miracles will abound on election day, as the dead rise, walk and vote in unprecedented numbers. But not enough in other states to counter the mass of those voters in a nation in which many voters feel so betrayed that they are just one disastrous presidential choice away from near rebellion in some areas.

[Eddie Coyle]

Eddie, I'm afraid that by using HuffPo and Daily Kos whistling-past-the-graveyard projections you're going to be spectacularly surprised. I'm thinking Romney will pick up FL, OH, IA, CO, NV and WI, as well as VA and NC. There's a reasonable chance for Romney in MN and PA, and even the delicious possibility of IL, but let's leave those with team Obama for the moment. Tally: Romney 317 to Obama 221. 

While you're right about heavy population states...a sizable majority of that population must be in urban areas. Because in states with a huge proportion of population in urban areas, there is not only overwhelming natural support, but the near certainty that miracles will abound on election day, as the dead rise, walk and vote in unprecedented numbers. But not enough in other states to counter the mass of those voters in a nation in which many voters feel so betrayed that they are just one disastrous presidential choice away from near rebellion in some areas.

My tallies were not influenced by Huff Post nor Daily Kos, but come clearly from within. Real Clear Politics is the only guide I'll occasionally check, and they're still way off from making concrete selections. They have about 25 states in the leaning/undecided category. Romney's idiotic comments today are another nail in his coffin. A state like Ohio was lost officially. There's no chance of him getting 300 electoral votes. None. Obama isn't Carter, and Romney isn't Reagan and I feel no "silent majority" push for Romney. This thing is over. The press must keep it alive, in a Lou Holtz building up Western Kentucky's trip into South Bend circa 1988 fashion.

          North Carolina's black population was a crucial difference in '08. I'm assuming they're not going for Romney. I may give you Nevada, but Florida is no chance, unless Iran wipes out Israel and Obama yawns...then maybe Mitt wins. But even then...
         
              Illinois? Please. Minnesota and Iowa as well. Colorado isn't a frontier state anymore, they've got more "Easterners" by the year who bring their Dem leaning ways with them.
     

[Sardondi]

          My tallies were not influenced by Huff Post nor Daily Kos, but come clearly from within....

Then you, as I,  have used the time-honored combination of SWAG method (scientific wild-ass guess) and hopelessly buggered optimism. It's as valid as any at this point!

[Eddie Coyle]

Then you, as I,  have used the time-honored combination of SWAG method (scientific wild-ass guess) and hopelessly buggered optimism. It's as valid as any at this point!

A bit of historical model and hell of a lot of SWAG. I factor in things like "Obama-hatred/actual Romney support" and I keep arriving at 2004. The Bush hatred was immense, but Kerry was an enervating pick and candidate.

          I use this as anecdotal evidence. In 2004, I had a professor, a truly doctrinaire liberal, who confided to me that due to her personal dealings with John Kerry as a fellow resident of Beacon Hill in Boston, she would not vote for him(she said Kerry was the ultimate NIMBY/limo liberal). She despised Bush, and voted across the board for Dems...and voted for Ralph Nader.

          In 2012. My aunt worked for Romney when he was governor of MA. She's a right winger and has never voted for a Democrat in a national election. But the way Romney fled his job, and his abandonment of his Lt Gov Kerry Healey while she ran against Deval Patrick in '06, has guaranteed that my aunt will not vote for the GOP in a national election for the first time since she started voting in 1976. She'll probably sit it out, and won't contribute to the GOP until after the elections.

[PB the Deplorable]

...  Colorado isn't a frontier state anymore, they've got more "Easterners" by the year who bring their Dem leaning ways with them.

I've lived on the West Coast my whole life.  We used to be free out here - the Libs and the establishment R's were mostly in the Northeast, far far away.  It wasn't that long ago.

Little by little, the Easteners and everyone else came out here - tired of crime, taxes, lawyers, bad schools, too many of laws and rules, lousy weather, crowded dirty cities and suburbs, crummy factory jobs.  So people move here to get way from all that, yet just couldn't wait to try to change things to the way they were used to back home - high taxes, more govt programs, new laws (for our safety of course.  And the childern, the environment, the poor).  They told us businesses are bad and only unions and government are good.  Police are bad and criminals are good.  People that do well are bad and the poor are good.  People that go to church are bad and people that don't are good. 

First to states like Oregon, Washington, California.  When those states became high crime, high taxes, too crowded, lousy governments - just like back home, these same Libs moved on - New Mexico, Colorado, Montana, Nevada.  Nevada!  That used to be such a great state.  They're still on the move, infecting Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, even Arizona.  It's sick and sad.

Maybe this should have gone to the What Annoys You thread.

[PB the Deplorable]

               Here 'Tis...Coyle hasn't been wrong since 2000. And technically, I wasn't.

             Barack Obama 347
             Mitt Romney    191

It will be interesting to see if there is a bounce either way after the debates.  For all the talk of Obama being 'the smartest person in the room' and all that, have you seen him when he gets off the teleprompter?  There are whole websites dedicated to his gaffes.  Sometimes he says what he really thinks - things that are usually kept carefully hidden from view - like 'you didn't build that' or 'the private sector is doing fine' and basically it's the state and local govts that are hurting. 

Remember Navy 'Corpse-man' for Corpsman? - that was Nooryesque.  I dare him to do that in a debate where the Phony Media can't filter it for their viewers and readers.

On the other hand, the chance of an establishment-type R like Romney to really go after his opponent and to come up with some reasons for people to vote for him just seem foreign to these people.  They think that's 'risky'.   Have to wait and see.  Sadly, the people that will determine the outcome - the 'undecideds - mostly don't even know who's running yet.

[McPhallus]

Eddie, I'm afraid that by using HuffPo and Daily Kos whistling-past-the-graveyard projections you're going to be spectacularly surprised. I'm thinking Romney will pick up FL, OH, IA, CO, NV and WI, as well as VA and NC. There's a reasonable chance for Romney in MN and PA, and even the delicious possibility of IL, but let's leave those with team Obama for the moment. Tally: Romney 317 to Obama 221. 

I much prefer your scenario over that of Major Ed Coyle, and pray that he has underestimated the erosion of Maobama's support.

[Juan]

Florida's in play for reasons other than the presidential race.  The US Senate race between incumbent Bill Nelson (D) and Congressman Connie Mack (R) is attracting a lot of attention.  I think that race will draw people to the polls.  I also know at least a dozen people here who say they consistently lie to pollsters and say they will vote for Obama when they will not.  I think the polls will prove to be less and less reliable.

[Sardondi]

Florida's in play for reasons other than the presidential race.  The US Senate race between incumbent Bill Nelson (D) and Congressman Connie Mack (R) is attracting a lot of attention.  I think that race will draw people to the polls.  I also know at least a dozen people here who say they consistently lie to pollsters and say they will vote for Obama when they will not.  I think the polls will prove to be less and less reliable.

I think you're exactly right about polls, and here's why. This is the statistically reviled anecdotal information, but I've run an informal poll of my own with conservative acquaintances. I've asked what they do when called by political pollsters. Of about two dozen conservatives, every one, EVERY ONE, said they refused to participate. The reasons they gave were interesting. Some said they assumed every such call was really a disguised campaign ad, or a"push poll" with the questions framed in such a way that they demonize Romney in an attempt to move the person to vote Obama.

A surprising number said they do not answer, or even intentionally answer falsely, out of concern that their criticism will be recorded as an admission of racism. They fear expressing themselves openly and honestly because they fear what will happen if Obama wins. They actually think it's possible that pollsters (at least Democrat Party pollsters) record the identities of persons who give negative answers about Obama; and these "enemies lists" will be used to embarrass or humiliate them. Worse, they fear that these lists will be used by government agencies to punish the anti-Obama "answer-ers", by denying benefits or service, even employment, or used to adversely affect the job status of those already employed with the government.

Now these are to a man and woman rational, level-headed, responsible and mature people. All are intelligent and well- and widely-read, and many are professionals of one kind or another. They are not given to conspiracy theories and fringe groups or ideas. But they have seen the Department of Justice turned into Obama's do-boys. ICE and Homeland Security leaders and line personnel are not at all bothered by appearing to be a national police force. We see weekly efforts by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to expand her department's authority by such actions as running checkpoints on local roads; setting up stop-and-frisk zones where they check people for little or no reason. You almost expect to hear them demand, "Your papers!".

This is how a secret police force acts, and it terrifies most Americans. The non-answer-ers are moved to remain silent because they are literally too scared to open their mouths. They really worry that in a second Obama administration the Department of Homeland Security will be transformed into a secret police force.

So I remember their fear and silence when I look at poll results. Their silence and the silence of many others like them would go a long way to explaining why so many political polls question more Democrats than Republicans. Fear is the reason, and silence, as well as unreliable polling, is the result.

That we have come to this point should terrify all of us. 

[PB the Deplorable]

No, Obama's not a Marxist, the Progressives aren't fascists, they just use Marxist-Fascist tactics.

[BigDave]

               Here 'Tis...Coyle hasn't been wrong since 2000. And technically, I wasn't.

             Barack Obama 347
             Mitt Romney    191

          Obama
           CA 55     MI 16    MD 10  IA 6  NH 4
           NY 29     NC 15   MN 10  NV 6  VT 3
           FL  29     NJ 14     WI 10   NM 5   DE 3
           PA  20     VA 13    CO 9    ME 4    DC 3
           IL   20      WA 12    OR 7   RI  4
           OH  18      MA 11    CT 7   HI  4

         Romney
           TX 38    MO 10  OK 7  NE 5   MT 3
            GA 16   AL 9     KS 6   WV 5   ND 3
            IN 11     SC 9     AR 6    ID 4     SD 3
            AZ  11    KY 8     MS 6   AK 3
            TN  11    LA 8     UT 6  WY 3

                           
         In essence, Romney is very popular in states with very few people. That's probably an issue the GOP should work on. Election will be "called" by the networks by 9:15 in the East.

I'd be happy with the Republicans controlling the House and Senate. Obama would get nothing passed what so ever

[Pragmier]

                Barack Obama 347
             Mitt Romney    191

          Obama
           CA 55     MI 16    MD 10  IA 6  NH 4
           NY 29     NC 15   MN 10  NV 6  VT 3
           FL  29     NJ 14     WI 10   NM 5   DE 3
           PA  20     VA 13    CO 9    ME 4    DC 3
           IL   20      WA 12    OR 7   RI  4
           OH  18      MA 11    CT 7   HI  4

         Romney
           TX 38    MO 10  OK 7  NE 5   MT 3
            GA 16   AL 9     KS 6   WV 5   ND 3
            IN 11     SC 9     AR 6    ID 4     SD 3
            AZ  11    KY 8     MS 6   AK 3
            TN  11    LA 8     UT 6  WY 3

                           
 

I think it's going to be a closer, Obama 300 / Romney 239

[PB the Deplorable]

I'd be happy with the Republicans controlling the House and Senate. Obama would get nothing passed what so ever

Except he's been issueing Executive Orders to get what he can't get passed by Congress.  Incredibly corrupt.  Excutive Order is not there for bypasing Congress when the Pres doesn't get his way.  This is what happens when we get someone that 1) has no executive experience working with a legislative body and 2) has distain for our Constitution.

And yes, that be an impeachable offense.

[Pragmier]

Number of executive orders issued by each President according to The National Archives:

Obama 135
Bush2  291
Clinton 364
Bush1  166
Reagan 381
Carter 320

[MV/Liberace!]

Number of executive orders issued by each President according to The National Archives:

Obama 135
Bush2  291
Clinton 364
Bush1  166
Reagan 381
Carter 320

How the XOs were used is more important than the cold hard numbers. I'm not suggesting Obama has abused it more than other presidents, though. I don't know.

[Ben Shockley]

...Of about two dozen conservatives, every one, EVERY ONE, said they refused to participate [in polls].   The reasons they gave were interesting...
[fear that] their criticism will be recorded as an admission of racism. [Shockley: Guilty conscience much?]... they fear what will happen if Obama wins.   Democrat Party pollsters...record the identities of persons who give negative answers about Obama ..."enemies lists" will be used to embarrass or humiliate them  [and] to punish the anti-Obama "answer-ers", by denying benefits... [or]employment...
Now these are...rational, level-headed, responsible and mature people. All are intelligent ... They are not given to conspiracy theories and fringe groups or ideas.

Obvious evidence to the contrary just ignored, huh?

But they have seen the Department of Justice turned into Obama's do-boys. ICE and Homeland Security leaders and line personnel are not at all bothered by appearing to be a national police force. ...This is how a secret police force acts, and it terrifies most Americans. The non-answer-ers are moved to remain silent because they are literally too scared to open their mouths. They really worry that in a second Obama administration the Department of Homeland Security will be transformed into a secret police force.

If Obama is that machiavellian, mephistophelian, and megalomaniacal, how is "simply voting" for The Other Guy going to get rid of him?   Won't he ignore the elections --hell, probably cancel them anyway, merely by his own personal omnipotent fiat?   Indeed, won't the results of the election be the ideal "evidence" of anti-Obama sentiment, and, far more than any mere poll, won't THAT invite death or disappearment or whatever it is they fear during the second term of Hell On Earth?  (Who knew that Satan rules by fixed terms??)
And how is Obama supposed to achieve all this on his own?   Won't he need troops?   Who will pay them?   The Tea Party Congress?  Or just out of Obama's own mind-boggling personal fortune?   Aren't all real Americans unified against Obama, and his "election" in 2008 just a conspiracy of counting dead voters?   So who will his troops be?   "U.N. troops," I guess, from that little-known, arch-evil nation of "U.N."
I mean-- you've raised all these issues with your friends, right?  Just in the interest of due Sanity Diligence...?

That we have come to this point should terrify all of us.

That people as obviously unhinged as those you're describing get to vote should terrify us all.

[Frys Girl]

Or, more recently, McCain.

But do you recall Feb '08? Do you recall December '08? All I heard was Republicans praising Romney, saying that he was the better nominee that he has the youth and energy, etc... ha! Look at him now. Given the chance, all he has displayed are a village of sunspots on his face from too many vacations in the sun. He's terrible, even with Rush Limbaugh's praise of him. I think the Republican party is really fucked. They need major repair. I'm certain Obama will win again. I'm not voting. I may do a write-in for Ron Paul, if the line is short at the polling station. I'd rather wait in line for an iPhone than vote for either of these creeps.

[Juan]

   So who will his troops be?   

Actually, The Affordable Care Act provides for the president to raise his own army after declaring a national emergency.  Said force is answerable to the president, and he decides who will be in it, for the most part.  Obama, when campaigning in 2007 or 2008, said that we need a civilian force as well armed as the military, and Obamacare provides for it.

From the Senate bill
SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS.

Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:

SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.

(a) ESTABLISHMENTâ€"

(1) IN GENERAL.â€"here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.

(2) REQUIREMENT.â€"All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.

(3) APPOINTMENT.â€"Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(4) ACTIVE DUTY.â€"Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.

(5) WARRANT OFFICERS.â€"Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.

(b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS.â€"Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps.

[Juan]

I may do a write-in for Ron Paul, if the line is short at the polling station.

Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson should be on the ballot in your state.

[Pragmier]

I'm considering 3rd party also. On a side note, anyone catch Jesse Ventura live on CNN? I can't see the powers that be allowing him anywhere near a debate mic.