Posted on 07/13/2012 9:00:22 PM PDT by techno
The complete Virgil Goode rundown:
The ten most asked questions about Virgil Goode and why he matters:
1) Who is Virgil Goode?
He is a former GOP Congressman from Virginia who was defeated in the 2010 election. He is now the presidential nominee for the Constitution Party, a third party.
2) How long has the Constitution Party been around?
About 20 years.
3) I hear that Virgil Goode is NOT yet on the Virginia presidential ballot. Will he fail to get on the ballot.
To give you some perspective, in 2004 and 2008 the Constitution Party presidential nominee was on the Virginia presidential ballot. As Goode is a resident of Virginia and a former Congressman, do you really think he would not know the ins and outs of getting on the ballot, which requires him to get 10,000 signatures with at least 400 from each congressional district. As of June 6, 2012 via the Martinsville Bulletin, a local newspaper, Goode had already collected 4000 signatures. And the article concluded that the Constitution Party had as of that date already collected enough signatures to be on the ballot in 17 states.
4) Third party presidential candidates don't normally a cause a ripple through the process. What's different about Virgil Goode?
Let's put it this way, if the presidential election were decided by popular vote, Goode wouldn't matter. But presidential elections are decided in the electoral college.
5)What do you mean Techno?
There are certain states which are called battleground or swing states in which either the Democratic presidential nominee could win but by the same token the GOP presidential nominee could prevail as well. There are ten or so states in the 2012 electoral college which could be considered battleground states based on recent presidential elections and current polling. Virginia is one of those states. And it is not out of the ordinary for the winner of a battleground state to win by a margin of less than 2%.
6) So again why is Goode important to Romney's chances to become president?
Because Goode apparently is far more popular in Virginia than any other state. A Public Policy poll (PPP) in May found that Goode would garner 5% of the vote in Virginia in the presidential election against Obama and Romney. And now a couple of days ago, Goode increased his share of the vote to 9% with Obama collected 49% of the vote and Romney 35%. Without Goode in the mix it would be Obama 50% and Romney 42%. And for those not schooled in the electoral college, the winner of the popular vote in the presidential race in Virgina earns Virginia's 13 electoral votes in 2012. And that now appears to be Obama and not Romney.
7) Are you saying Techno that Goode is taking away way more voters away from Romney than he is Obama?
Exactly, that is what I am saying, But I am NOT the only one saying that. Local Virginia pundits are saying that as well. And PPP in its summary of the poll found that too. If you don't believe me, go over to the PPP web site and read it for yourself.
8)Techno, I'm lazy. I don't want to go over to PPP and read their s*it. Could you give me a brief synopsis?
Alright brother and sister. Under the Obama--Romney--Goode scenario in Virginia here is how the vote breaks down in four demographics: very conservative voters, somewhat conservative voters, Republicans and independents:
----------------------OBAMA--------ROMNEY-----GOODE
VERY CONSERVATIVE-------7-----------84----------7
SOMEWHAT CONSERVATIVE---19----------55----------14
REPUBLICANS-------------9-----------78----------9
INDEPENDENTS------------45----------26----------17
It doesn't take a genius to figure out Goode hurts Romney way more than he hurts Obama.
9) But don't third party bids eventually fizzle out?
Yes, that is the rule of thumb nationally. But in Virginia Goode ahs gained 4% in support since May and he's not even on the Virginia ballot yet. Even if he drops back to his previous level of support of 5% that would still be enough to sink Romney's ship in Virginia in a close contest.
10) Techno, could you explain why Virginia is so important?
It comes down to the number of electoral votes (EV) in the electoral college. The general consensus among the folks who do it for a living is that President Obama currently sits at 247 EV when you include all the safe blue states and those states leaning to Obama (likely to win). If Obama wins VA, a battleground state, that takes him to 260 EV and therefore only needs 10 more EV to hit the 270 EV threshold to win re-election. And here are the four swing states which Obama must win these 10 votes again based on a consensus of experts: Iowa (6), NH(4), Nevada (6) and Colorado (9). Obama is currently enjoying a small margin in the polls in every state but Iowa and is running neck and neck with Romney there.
Of course the dynamic of the race could shift in the next three months or so but it appears Obama has the edge in winning Colorado and its 9 EV. If he did that he would reach 269 EV and would only need to win one of the remaining three states to get a second term.
As for Mitt Romney if he loses Virginia, assuming he wins the other huge 4 swing states of Ohio, NC, Indiana and Florida and reaches 253 EV, Romney would be forced to win Colorado to have any chance of winning the presidency in the electoral college. The best he could hope for otherwise is a tie (269-269) in which case the contest goes to the House of Representatives.
One other element to consider: In 2008 President Obama won 1 EV in Nebraska who allots it EV by whoever wins the congressional district. Obama actually won this district (Omaha) by 9.77% which is a pretty hefty margin. If Obama could again win this district and on top of it win Virginia and Colorado that would take him to 270 EV on the button and Romney would be denied regardless of what he did in Iowa, NH and Nevada.
A final note: If Romney can win Virginia with Ohio, NC, Indiana and Florida he would then be at 266 EV. He would then not be forced to win Colorado but would only have to be victorious in Iowa to become the new president.
And that folks is why Team Obama has had many sleepless nights over the past 3 years. Virgil Goode is a godsend for Obama and his team.
There was NO Taliban ~ we sided with the Mujahadeen. When we went back in after 9/11 we allied ourselves with the former Mujahadeen called The Northern Alliance.
The Democrats are currently attempting to ally themselves with the Taliban but they are finding that difficult since the Taliban don't like friends.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.The existence of the words "general welfare" doesn't mean the federal government can do whatever it wants, whenever, and however to secure what a few people in Congress happen to consider at any one time or another is their idea of "general welfare." Besides, that is only 5th of the six reasons for establishing the Constitution in order to:
>form a more perfect Union,It looks to me like the liberals (and statist Republicans) and their use of "general welfare" have been seriously eroding every one of the other main purposes of establishing the Constitution.
>establish Justice,
>insure domestic Tranquility,
>provide for the common defence,
>promote the general Welfare, and
>secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.
The Mittbots played to win the game by hook or crook and didn't have any gameplan for what happens next.
Along the way they lost the voters in Virginia, and thousands of Conservatives elsewhere in America.
Virgil Goode has a plan to win and we are all here to help him ~ placed here by the perfidy and shortsightedness of Virginia's GOP-e.
With the election tossed in the House the DC vote won’t count anymore.
They are paid out of the general revenues.
Se are smarter than they are. That’s why they haven’t won the battle.
Oh?
You must be getting your numbers from anti-war sites or something.
Here's a decent chart from last year:
Fact is, the vast bulk of spending is going either on "entitlement" programs, unconstitutional agencies and programs of some sort or another, and the interest we've incurred from spending wildly outside the enumerated powers.
BTW, another 5% of the guys on FR are also partially or totally color blind. They have no idea what you said with that exhibit.
Nevertheless, my point still stands - anyone who doesn't want to touch 18.74% of the budget, especially when much of that amounts to spending on wars we shouldn't even be in and on bases in places we don't need to be anymore, simply is not serious about balancing the budget or reducing spending.
I guess we can start referring to you as Tom "Not a Serious Budget Cutter" Hoefling?
What is Tom Hoefling’s position on ending the unconstitutional Air Force?
SS taxes are collected into and spent from the general revenues too. It's been that way for a very long time.
Both words, "trust" and "fund" have been fictional for years.
The Air Force is constitutional.
The raison d’etre of government is defense.
Not benevolence.
I never said I didn’t “want to touch it.” You’ve invented that.
I said it isn’t the first thing you go after with a meat cleaver, like the Pauls and CPers and apparently Virgil Goode always seem to want.
Deal with the unconstitutional spending and then come talk to me about the most important constitutional things our government does.
It’s a question of priorities.
How do you figure, when I've made it clear that I consider well over half of current spending to be unconstitutional, but your guy, like the other Democrats and Republicans he served with in Congress, has no intention of touching any of that with a ten foot pole?
Hmmm, the term “almost” is key. Almost doesn’t count for squat. Almost is not good enough to beat Obama. As I said, you vote for who you want as that’s your right. But when we get 4 more years of Obama, don’t you bitch once, not once, as you made the bed in which you’re gonna be laying and you will have no one to blame but yourself.
And I agree with James Madison about the constitutionality of such largesse, which robs from one group of Americans, or from posterity, to benefit another more favored group of Americans.
-- James Madison"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
They’re not the same friend. Wouldn’t you like to have SOME chance of saving the America we know and love, rather than NO chance?
The choice is between 8 years of Obama or 4 years of Obama.
That's why any other choice is preferable ~
I went through the five stages of loss decades ago. Our culture has degraded to the point where there is NO chance of saving the America that you refer to. It is good to be old...but never fear, as long as I live I’ll always vote for strict-constructionist conservatives, knowing that their unlikely election will result in anarchy.
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.