1 posted on
10/18/2012 8:46:13 PM PDT by
Arthurio
To: Arthurio
Charlie Cook’s info is dated - every one agrees FL, NC, VA, CO are now solid Romney states.
He’ll probably win OH, WI and IA as well.
Its not going to be close at all.
Sorry, Charlie - you’re dead wrong!
2 posted on
10/18/2012 8:49:58 PM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: Arthurio
Not really. It’s going to be a landslide. Romney is already ahead of where Reagan was in 1980. Mitt would have to praise Hitler to lose this at this point.
To: Arthurio
President Obama won the second debate
No, he didn’t. Next...
To: Arthurio
The article was written on October 11th. It is crap.
5 posted on
10/18/2012 8:52:22 PM PDT by
kabar
To: Arthurio
Charlie Cook wrote this article to try to convince himself as much as anyone else that his Obamessiah still has hope. Fail.
6 posted on
10/18/2012 8:56:20 PM PDT by
kevao
(Is your ocean any lower than it was four years ago?)
To: Arthurio
Every election they say this.. But it never happens.
16 posted on
10/18/2012 9:29:32 PM PDT by
Hildy
(F"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates)
To: Arthurio
Nope, Romney by a landslide..
To: Arthurio
The race seems destined to be a close onea good political outcome predictor you are not
22 posted on
10/18/2012 10:30:00 PM PDT by
paul51
(11 September 2001 - Never forget)
To: Arthurio
Charlie’s drinking again....
27 posted on
10/18/2012 10:48:23 PM PDT by
Nifster
To: Arthurio
I don't know why people find a popular/electoral split disturbing. In the 1997 World Series, Cleveland won games two, four, and six by 5, 7, and 3 points respectively. Florida won games one, three, five, and seven by 3, 3, 1, and 1 points respectively. Florida appropriately won the Series because they won more games than Cleveland, even though Cleveland outscored Florida by 44 to 37 overall. Games and elections have rules, and no sensible person would argue with an outcome that follows the rules.
Unfortunately, liberals are neither sensible nor decent; they want the rules rewritten after the fact. I expect them to riot if they win the popular vote but lose the election (they'll riot no matter what, but that excuse will be like the trashy movie in Libya, their justification for the violence that thugs initiate simply because they are thugs). Conversely, if they lose the popular vote but win the election, the split outcome will not concern them at all - hypocrites. Personally, I find the popular vote an interesting footnote to history, but I do not want that statistic considered at all in deciding the election.
34 posted on
10/19/2012 2:48:15 AM PDT by
Pollster1
(Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
To: Arthurio
Charlie stop smoking that stuff! You are making a fool of yourself.
35 posted on
10/19/2012 2:56:28 AM PDT by
jmaroneps37
(Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
To: Arthurio
More and more evidence that the looney left is giving up on winning the popular vote. An EV rabbit out of the hat trick is about all they have left.
38 posted on
10/19/2012 4:31:30 AM PDT by
catfish1957
(My dream for hope and change is to see the punk POTUS in prison for treason)
To: Arthurio
All these stories, ie New Hampshire important, tight race, and this one are all trying to re-inflate the popped balloon. The preference cascade is just starting to roll. The wave is building, water's coming through the dam, bandwagon is rolling down hill, pick your metaphor, IT AIN'T GONNA BE CLOSE.
My long prediction is that Obama will be lucky to get 40%.
39 posted on
10/19/2012 4:57:27 AM PDT by
Jabba the Nutt
(.Are they stupid, malicious or evil?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson