The media gladly gave Obama NC, but still holding out on calling Missouri?

Anyone knows what’s going on?

I’d love to see a Native American as president, but not so much that I’d vote for an unqualified person to see it happen.

I would be awestruck to see a Native American (qualifed of course) win the presidency. Now that would be historic!

The numbers don’t lie folks, the farther that the GOP goes to the left, the worse they do and talking about Reagan Conservatism isn’t governing like a Reagan Conservative.

nelsonknows on November 10, 2008 at 4:33 AM

Palin will re-define herself, she will choose the Reagan path, others will also and we will see a surge in conservatives.
Middle or lef of middle is a loser…
You can’t out left the left, they are experts at it.

Lesson #1 — It’s time to scrap the open primary in favor of some sort of political party process (caucus/convention) and/or fuss with the scheduling so that more conservative RED states have an early say in the process.

Lesson #2 — forget debates moderated solely by liberals. They are worthless because tough questions for liberals & RINOs are never raised. Which also turns off the GOP base.

People here tend to be fairly knowledgeable when it comes to politics. We are located very close to the Iowa border, and got to see all the candidates up close and in person during the primaries. McCain and Palin have both made appearances here recently. And many Republicans still chose to vote for Obama. Yikes…now I’m even more depressed about the state of our country.

I understand the feeling of betrayal by the Republican party as McCain wasn’t my first choice either, but I don’t understand the logic of not voting. If you know one of two people are certain to be elected, wouldn’t it be better to vote for the one you hated the least? Is it worth sacrificing the county to make a point? Maybe.

dinobalz on November 9, 2008 at 7:29 PM

I voted for McCain, but I understand the reasoning of conservatives who didn’t. Many know that amnesty will destroy this nation – and amnesty will be as close to irreversible as legislation gets. To those conservatives, the US was destined to ruin, whether BHO or McCain got in, and many even thought that McCain would be more likely to get amnesty passed as Pres. For those folks, it was a question of the US walking off the plank or running.

This is why so many of us said, during the shamnesty fiasco, that the GOP would be DOA if McCain got the nomination.

There were lots of other problems with McCain, but I think his idiotic shamnesty ideas were the root of the low turnout on the right. Then, when the fool couldn’t stop himself from declaring that his shamnesty would be the FIRST thing he did in office, that probably sealed the deal for many.

Personally, I stopped talking about amnesty for the duration of the campaign (only because I consider Marxist thugs to be bigger threats than most anything else) and just figured that amnesty is going to be a major fight for the life of this nation, anyway. But, even in the best of all possible scenarios now, amnesty will probably go through (with Sen. McCain helping to push it all the way, with a grin) and the US will dissolve no longer than 10 years after.

In reviewing the 2008 American elections I am struck by three interlocked sets of issues:

Almost everyone, on both sides, agreed that ACORN was issuing many illegal voter registrations. Democratic side estimates ran to about a million, the more excitable among Republicans saw over twice that many and a rough concensus in the 1.2 to 1.4 million range seemed to emerge.

The major media players, from movie studios and television networks to nationally read newspapers and magazines, heavily favored Obama – and lost market share. Republican movies, print media, and the mostly objective Fox network, in contrast, generally gained market share.

Similarly, crowds at Palin events were huge, energized, and enthused – while Biden couldn’t fill a room and the crowds at Obama events in most of the United States showed small groups of cheerleading enthusiasts along with large numbers of people essentially just voting present.

Election day saw a huge fall off in Republican votes in western states – after the results from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida were announced. In those states, however, every report from people actually at voting places showed the expected huge turnout.

But the actual vote counts showed half a million Ohio Republicans didn’t vote.

The situation in Florida, Pennsylvania, and the DC area showed the same pattern: consistent reports of huge advance votes and turnouts, ballot counts at or below averages.

So here’s how I think it was done:

the purpose and/or effect of the ACORN registrations was to influence the public polls to make an overwhelming Democract victory seem inevitable.

How that works is simple and comes as a combination of two related parts: to get 800 valid responses polling companies facing 85% hangup rates had to generate about 9,000 phone numbers and connect to about 5,400 people. If 1% of the population (i.e. about the ACORN membership) preferentially answered polls, they would have shifted the raw results by about 3.5% in Obama’s favor.

polling companies compare the demographic data gathered from the interviewees in their actual sample to population demographics and make any indicated corrections before handing the data over for analysis. Thus if they believe that there are about 2% more democrats in the population then they find their sample, they’ll adjust the raw numbers to match – before passing them on as the sample output for analysis.

Thus ACORN’s combination of fake registrations plus real enthusiasts could shift poll results by up to twice the ACORN percentage: or something in the 5% to 7% range across the board.

In operation these factors produced huge variability in polls, tremendous uncertainty among pollsters (making them more likely to adjust public reports to meet public expectations) and a 5 to 7 percent polling error in Obama’s favor.

Step two was direct vote surpression in critical, early voting, areas and consequent indirect vote surpression in western states as Republicans, told by the media that they had already lost, simply stayed home.

Specifically how the thefts were carried out must have depended on the technologies and processes in place in each county or state, but the key process steps and criteria for success are clear: prepare ballots and auditable documents in advance, report the fake counts early, then later replace the real ballots and auditable materials with the fakes – and the critical condition for success, of course, is access to the reporting process first and materials transportation later.

To a Republican electoral crime on this scale is unthinkable, but it’s in scope for Democrats in general and ACORN in particular – and if you don’t think it happened, try to explain the contradiction between a huge turnout at the polls in the east/central states, and the below average vote total later reported in any other way.

With all the reasons not to support Obama, it’s hard to imaging his winning, even with all the disgruntled conservatives. I was amazed that he took Virginia especially.

By all logic, with such a small increase in the number of voters, it should have easily been a McCain landslide.

dinobalz on November 9, 2008 at 5:28 PM

White guilt, (pseudo)historic vote, superficial reasoning, all in all nobody brought their brain to the polls.

Many keep harping how this election is historical because of the color of a candidates skin. Weak. MLK would be cringing right now. We have just watered down his message.

The history of Obama is going to be the next four years, not an election where people voted someone in because of his skin color. I say that because they certainly did not vote for him with his thin resume. Right?

“The GOTV effort was redoubled in 2008 compared to 2004, but it did not seem to make that big of a difference.”

It is a fact that many Republicans stayed home. It is a fact that the polls were correct in regard to Obama’s lead.

Stop with the excuses of the GOTV effort and blaming the media for the lack of enthusiasm. McCain was the problem, and the other failed RINO’s were the problem.

The libs/Dems picked our candidate in the primaries. It was said not to talk about the negatives of McCain before the elction or it will hurt his chances. So now it is AFTER the elction and you still won’t allow a reality check or discussion on the pathetic McCain.

Can talk about him before or after the election? Can’t point the blame on @$#% Republicans before of after, then when?

Unfortunately there is more talk about having just the right “moderate” “across the aisle” candidate, just better than McCain. You morons will never learn.

I don’t blame anyone for not voting for the despicable McCain and having no faith in the corrupted lying GOP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVoJZEdM0K4

Is that accurate? Only 3.5% increase? If you adjust for population increase, one would think the increment would be pretty close to flat, wouldn’t it?

dinobalz on November 9, 2008 at 5:28 PM

Yep and yep. Here are the raw Pres vote totals (millions):

1980   86
1984   92
1988   91
1992   104
1996   96
2000   104
2004   121
2008   125

The MSM can’t do basic arithmetic, either …

progressoverpeace on November 9, 2008 at 5:10 PM

Is that accurate? Only 3.5% increase? If you adjust for population increase, one would think the increment would be pretty close to flat, wouldn’t it?

Dale in Atlanta on November 9, 2008 at 4:49 PM

With all the reasons not to support Obama, it’s hard to imaging his winning, even with all the disgruntled conservatives. I was amazed that he took Virginia especially.

By all logic, with such a small increase in the number of voters, it should have easily been a McCain landslide.

% inc in total Pres votes

1980-1984 +7%
1984-1988 -1%
1988-1992 +15% (Perot runs in 92)
1992-1996 -8%
1996-2000 +9%
2000-2004 +16%
2004-2008 +3.5%

This year was not the worst year for growth in Presidential voting, but not even close to the best. And in 1992, Ross Perot did more to bring in new actual voters than anything done by BHO and his criminal ACORN cronies. And if Palin hadn’t been on the ticket, the growth this year might not have even existed.

But … this seems to be how BHO has made his way through life, having sycophants try and convince people that a 3.5% increase this year is somehow bigger than Bush’s 9% and 16% increases in both of his elections. I guess I forgot to adjust for affirmative action (3.5% —> 35%).

McCain is not only a tool and a fool and buffoon; but he’s never been a “Republican”!

Dale in Atlanta on November 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM

You can thank acorn & msm for this.