How Selfish Can Omama Be

[Antitrust32]

I dont get this "every swing state" stuff.


I mean, Romney might have a better chance in Florida than Obama at this point.

Or is Florida not a swing state now?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I dont get this "every swing state" stuff.


I mean, Romney might have a better chance in Florida than Obama at this point.

Or is Florida not a swing state now?

The only definition of a swing state I ever heard was from Carville and he said that a swing state is a state the candidate can't win the election w/out taking. So Ohio would be a swing state for both, Florida more for Romney, Michigan is one for Obama, etc..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

The only definition of a swing state I ever heard was from Carville and he said that a swing state is a state the candidate can't win the election w/out taking. So Ohio would be a swing state for both, Florida more for Romney, Michigan is one for Obama, etc..

a swing state is a state with no clear party majority-in an election, it can 'swing' either way. some states vote purely demo or rep, regardless of candidate. swing states, you never know til the votes are counted.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I dont get this "every swing state" stuff.


I mean, Romney might have a better chance in Florida than Obama at this point.

Or is Florida not a swing state now?

Swing states are states that are not "safe" for a candidate. Illinois is obviously "safe Obama" and Texas is "safe Romney".

There are 10 swing states, now only eight. The eight left, that will determine the election, are OH, NH, FL, PA, NC, IA, NV, CO. All those states are now leaning Obama in aggregate polling except NC, which should be pretty sure for Romney.

Obama started with more "safe Obama" states than Romney had "safe Romney" states. Obama was always over 270 electoral votes. Romney was always in the position of having to win votes to get to 270, and still is.

Obama only had to win 1 or 2 swing states to assure victory. Romney always had to win virtually all of them to win.

Florida has had overwhelming (greater than 2008 numbers) early turnout, nearly all Democratic. Florida is in "likely Obama" column.

TPM.com has a good polling page, where they aggregate the polls, and an excellent reputation for accuracy. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ click on "polls" in the header

Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com page also has excellent, accurate analysis of swing states. www.fivethirtyeight.com

[dellinger63]

with Romney donating his own money and asking for donations from his supporters for the Red Cross while Obama ate his free sandwich from the Red Cross and donating taxpayer money today made my point!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

with Romney donating his own money and asking for donations from his supporters for the Red Cross while Obama ate his free sandwich from the Red Cross and donating taxpayer money today made my point!

Do you know what most liberals think? I'm not making this up. I am serious. Granted I'm talking in general. It's not true for all liberals but in general liberals think that they don't need to give money to charity. They think that simply voting democrat is enough. They feel like they have done their part by voting democrat. They think that if they vote democrat that makes them a good person and no further action is necessary. It's actually kind of funny. They think that if they vote democrat and are vocal about how evil they think republicans are, this makes them a good person and no further good deeds are necessary.

I bet I could do a great job on this site of predicting which people are the least generous when it comes to donating money to charity. I'm not going to mention any names but I would say that in general, if you look at the most outspoken and angry liberals, it would be a safe bet to say that these people gave little or no money to charity.

[alysheba4]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Do you know what most liberals think? I'm not making this up. I am serious. What I'm about to say is a generalization. It's not true for all liberals but in general liberals think that they don't need to give money to charity. They think that simply voting democrat is enough. They feel like they have done their part by voting democrat. They think that if they vote democrat that makes them a good person and no further action is necessary.

I bet I could do a great job on this site of predicting which people are the least generous when it comes to donating money to charity. I'm not going to mention any names but I would say that in general, if you look at the most outspoken and angry liberals, it would be a safe bet to say that these people gave little or no money to charity.

.....they are complete fcking whack jobs.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Do you know what most liberals think? I'm not making this up. I am serious. What I'm about to say is a generalization. It's not true for all liberals but in general liberals think that they don't need to give money to charity. They think that simply voting democrat is enough. They feel like they have done their part by voting democrat. They think that if they vote democrat that makes them a good person and no further action is necessary.

I bet I could do a great job on this site of predicting which people are the least generous when it comes to donating money to charity. I'm not going to mention any names but I would say that in general, if you look at the most outspoken and angry liberals, it would be a safe bet to say that these people gave little or no money to charity.

Clinton wrote off used underwear.

Biden gave less than $500 on $500K

And Riot is looking for someone to subsidize her insurance.

Of course she cares so much about womens' right to abortion and contraceptive coverage she ignores the lifetime ramifications of a gang rape by saying 'she'll be OK!'

Generally they are the epitomy of hypocrites no doubt!

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

hes saving his money to fix the mug on that dog ugly wife of his..

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

hes saving his money to fix the mug on that dog ugly wife of his..

She'll leave him.

BTW He's on the down low. That's why Bubba can't stand him.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Do you know what most liberals think? I'm not making this up. I am serious. Granted I'm talking in general. It's not true for all liberals but in general liberals think that they don't need to give money to charity. They think that simply voting democrat is enough. They feel like they have done their part by voting democrat. They think that if they vote democrat that makes them a good person and no further action is necessary. It's actually kind of funny. They think that if they vote democrat and are vocal about how evil they think republicans are, this makes them a good person and no further good deeds are necessary.

I bet I could do a great job on this site of predicting which people are the least generous when it comes to donating money to charity. I'm not going to mention any names but I would say that in general, if you look at the most outspoken and angry liberals, it would be a safe bet to say that these people gave little or no money to charity.

quite scientific. And you know this how? all of your worldly travels? all of your liberal friends that make up an accurate cross section?

I know conservatives that are extremely generous and i know liberals that are extremely generous. This isn't quite as stupid as your quote about keeping a baby when you are raped by someone you know but it is still pretty dumb.

How old are you anyway?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

quite scientific. And you know this how? all of your worldly travels? all of your liberal friends that make up an accurate cross section?

I know conservatives that are extremely generous and i know liberals that are extremely generous. This isn't quite as stupid as your quote about keeping a baby when you are raped by someone you know but it is still pretty dumb.

How old are you anyway?

First of all, every poll that measures this has shown that conservatives are more charitable. You can look it up.

In terms of personal life experience, most of the angry liberals that I have met over the years are not very charitable. Of course there are some very charitable liberals. I was speaking in general. By the way, should I ignore my life experiences? We all make observations based on life experience. If something happens once or twice, it could be random. But when you see something fairly consistently for 20 years, you can usually draw some pretty accurate conclusions.

How old am I? I am in my 40s.

With regard to the rape thing, you are totally twisting my position. You totally misunderstood what I said. I explained my position thoroughly in a later post.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

First of all, every poll that measures this has shown that conservatives are more charitable. You can look it up.

Study: Conservatives and liberals are equally charitable, but they give to different charities
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ent-charities/

Who Really Gives? Partisanship and Charitable Giving in the United States
Conservatives and liberals are equally generous in their donation habits. This pattern holds at both the individual and state level, and contradicts the conventional wisdom that partisans differ in their generosity.
http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/1...united-states/

Exploding the myth that conservatives give more to charity than liberals
A few years ago, several of our Applesauce regulars cited a study authored by Syracuse University Professor Arthur C. Brooks to support their argument that political conservatives donate more to charity than their liberal counterparts.

But now there’s a NEW STUDY showing not only that charitable contributions are roughly equal among liberals and conservatives but also that Brooks’ methodology was faulty.

Related posts:
Exploding the myth that Romney pays more of his income in taxes and charity than does Obama
Study shows that conservatives are more fearful than liberals
Research suggests that liberals have thicker brains than conservatives
Why are liberals so much better than conservatives at political satire?
Study: Higher levels of education affect minds of liberals and conservatives differently

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

First of all, every poll that measures this has shown that conservatives are more charitable. You can look it up.

In terms of personal life experience, most of the angry liberals that I have met over the years are not very charitable. Of course there are some very charitable liberals. I was speaking in general. By the way, should I ignore my life experiences? We all make observations based on life experience. If something happens once or twice, it could be random. But when you see something fairly consistently for 20 years, you can usually draw some pretty accurate conclusions.

How old am I? I am in my 40s.

With regard to the rape thing, you are totally twisting my position. You totally misunderstood what I said. I explained my position thoroughly in a later post.

How could you possibly know how charitable people are? Who talks about how much they donate, unless they are trying to impress someone?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Do you know what most liberals think? I'm not making this up. I am serious. Granted I'm talking in general. It's not true for all liberals but in general liberals think that they don't need to give money to charity. They think that simply voting democrat is enough. They feel like they have done their part by voting democrat. They think that if they vote democrat that makes them a good person and no further action is necessary. It's actually kind of funny. They think that if they vote democrat and are vocal about how evil they think republicans are, this makes them a good person and no further good deeds are necessary.

I bet I could do a great job on this site of predicting which people are the least generous when it comes to donating money to charity. I'm not going to mention any names but I would say that in general, if you look at the most outspoken and angry liberals, it would be a safe bet to say that these people gave little or no money to charity.

You're kidding right? I mean, this is you trolling, right?

Has to be.

Because what kind of supporting evidence could you possibly provide to back up your opinion here?

It'd be like me saying I could do a great job predicting who uses the internet to troll for naive pu.ssy. Oh wait, I can do that.

[bigrun]

Who's the boss?

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Riot

Swing states are states that are not "safe" for a candidate. Illinois is obviously "safe Obama" and Texas is "safe Romney".

There are 10 swing states, now only eight. The eight left, that will determine the election, are OH, NH, FL, PA, NC, IA, NV, CO. All those states are now leaning Obama in aggregate polling except NC, which should be pretty sure for Romney.

Obama started with more "safe Obama" states than Romney had "safe Romney" states. Obama was always over 270 electoral votes. Romney was always in the position of having to win votes to get to 270, and still is.

Obama only had to win 1 or 2 swing states to assure victory. Romney always had to win virtually all of them to win.

Florida has had overwhelming (greater than 2008 numbers) early turnout, nearly all Democratic.

TPM.com has a good polling page, where they aggregate the polls, and an excellent reputation for accuracy. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ click on "polls" in the header

Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com page also has excellent, accurate analysis of swing states. www.fivethirtyeight.com

You've been touting this as though it was a fact for some time. It isn't true. I don't know what you have to gain by continuing to spout this. Furthermore, to echo Anti's point, any state that is +/- 2 or less points is hardly "likely" or "leaning" either direction.

Obama has always had no more than 259 EC votes. When he lost FL, he has been hovering around 235. He's currently 237.

This is the fact:

Florida is in "likely Obama" column.

Oh, I see. It's your delusions.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

You've been touting this as though it was a fact for some time. It isn't true. I don't know what you have to gain by continuing to spout this

Nothing. It's just the truth. I'm quoting Nate Silver's long-term electoral college voting chart, which aggregates multiple national polls and state polls (the big guys and the little guys), which never shows Obama below 270 electoral votes.

You can see it, here: www.fivethirtyeight.com

See that top graph? Electoral college vote since June? See the black line down the middle at 270 votes? Obama always above that line, Romney always below that line.

You, on the other hand, appear to be quoting only one poll, not an aggregate of all of them.

What poll are you quoting? You didn't reference who the poll was from, or the date it was taken.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nothing. It's just the truth. I'm quoting Nate Silver's long-term electoral college voting chart, which aggregates multiple national polls and state polls, which never shows Obama below 270 electoral votes.

You can see it, here: www.fivethirtyeight.com

You, on the other hand, appear to be quoting only one poll, not an aggregate of all of them.

What poll are you quoting? You didn't reference who the poll was from, or the date it was taken.

Oh I see, you post the two most left leaning polls in existence as judge others. Got it. You are screwed and you know it.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Oh I see, you post the two most left leaning polls in existence as judge others. Got it. You are screwed and you know it.

Get a grip on reality. Those are not "left leaning polls", they are aggregators. They don't do polling.

Duh.

If you don't understand what "aggregator" means, you'd probably be best to stop commenting and looking silly.

By the way - who did the poll you posted, and what date was it taken? You haven't fessed up yet.

I have put my money where my mouth was, Rude. Obama wins, easily, via electoral vote. Want to bet on it, like Pants and Hooves have?