Skip to comments.Axelrod Says "We won't win by as much..."
Posted on 11/04/2012 7:24:22 AM PST by gusopol3
W 2004 vs. 2000: vote +12 m; percent change of vote margin +3%
Toon 1996 vs. 1992: vote +2.5 m; percent change of vote margin + 3 %
Reagan 1984 vs. 1980: huge gains
Nixon 1972 vs. 1968: enormous gains
Ike 1956 vs. 1952 : Vote +1.5 m; percent + 4%
Usurper the First : 1940, 1944: declining margins
FDR : 1936 vs. 1932 : +5 m; percent +6 %
Wilson: gained 3 m votes; percentage not calculable due to Bull Moose finishing 2nd in '12
--"Their foot shall slide in due time."-- Deuteronomy 32:35
Lincoln (appended): "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time. But you can't fool all of the people all of the time. Or enough of the people enough of the time."
Yes, Woodrow Wilson.
Axel can take his combover and black socks and go back to acting in retro 1950s porno flicks, flashing young children at the playground, or acting as a B movie Hitler for all I care. I just want him prosecuted and convicted of treason after they lose.
Guess ACORN’s passing was a great loss to the Dims. It’s getting harder to register Mickey Mouse and stuff the ballot boxes these days when everyone can take videos on their phones.
Not by what I see : 1912: 6 million votes, 1916: 9 m; Bull Moose messes up percents as i said.
That’s been the Obama playbook the entire time, to run a defensive campaign good enough to push him over the finish line by a couple points.
You sure about that. Wikipedia says Wilson got almost 3,000,000 more votes in 1916 than in 1912.
to Axlerod I strongly recommend taking up heavy drinking.
And by "as much", the empty suit's aide means "at all"...
And by "as much", the empty suit's aide actually means "at all"...
Teddy Roosevelt played Ross Perot and helped Wilson get elected.
Axelrod- you will win by less, like minus 10. Oh, wait, that is called LOSING!
Romney is going to win like Nixon in 1972, except he will carry Mass, where he was governor.
That is not what Nate Sliver is saying at the NY Times, he says Obama is going to win by 300+ electoral votes
Ignore the polls, watch the action and the rhetoric.
Obama and Romney are both playing on mostly BLUE state turf. Romney is running the sort of campaign winning camps run, optimistic, hopeful, bland. Obama is running the sort of campaign losers run, nasty, desperate and shrill.
Obama is not acting like a candidate whose internal polling is showing him winning.
I’ve not paid any attention to this guy, but I seriously think he has found himself in over his head from left-wing pressure groups to be more of a mouthpiece than a real so-called poll guru.
He has nothing to lose from being completely wrong, which he will be. He will be a hero to the lefties for fighting the fight, and he wont lose his job.
Hey Axelgrease, is that what you guys call “winning from
I’d seen Wilson cited, but it was on the basis of margin of victory, rather than number of votes cast in his favor.
LOL! Axelrod does indeed look like a creep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.