A prediction !
 

Late next week after the landslide win by Romney,
Obama resigns making Joe (The Buffoon) Biden acting president for the remainder of his term.
President Biden's first Oder of business, gives Obama a pardon aboiding prosecution for the Bengazi cover up !

I truly think Obama is going to win
it was close but he is getting good press from the hurricane and will come out ahead. O - 52%, R - 48%

I predict Obama wins a narrow electoral victory. A lot has to go right for Romney to pull it off, he needs just aout all of the swing states.

Benghazi should have doomed his re-election. 4 Americans are dead, and at least 2 of them would still be alive had McCain won in 2008. I have never, ever, not once, seen the media bury a story like they buried this.

I don't get it. But I'm glad as hell I didn't have to serve under this incompetent Bolshevik jerk.

Monkeys Fly Out My Butt-Waynes World - YouTube

It might even be closer than RIJ's prediction....Shades of Bush-Gore

Let's see how the electronic voting machine smell game works out. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That dead issue which was a story in 2011.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

271, 269 - NH swings the vote to -----

To be honest I just want the damn thing over with.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lets not count Mitt out yet....even tho the liberal pollsters have Obama ahead by 7 or 8 points it is said that they have called more dems then repubs....also keep in mind that gun enthusiast have purchased over 4 million guns just this year because of obama wanting to band certain guns and obama is for the U N to control guns of U S citizens...could be gun owners in the states that put Mitt in the oval office

Also I really do not think that obama, going to jersey helped him that much if at all....it is about time that he is doing his job...there will be a lot of people that can not rebuild....they will not be able to afford 2 mortgages...they that have a mortgage will not be able to carry 2 mortgages especially they that R elderly...why do U think Louisiana is still not rebuilt from Katrina....remember the government will give low interest loans...can U afford 2 mortgages?

X2

Mitt Romney is going to win by a big margin.
Those of you who say Obama will win,
Show me 1 person who voted for McCain last election and plan to vote for Obama this time.
The media is bias for Obama.
They use data from democratic turnout of 2008, not going to be close to that same turn out this time.
Every poll the numbers are scewed of more dema polled compared to repubs.
It's going to be a landslide win for Romney
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lots of us want this to be over but with the right results !
Too much on the line to just say we want this over.
My kids, your kids ect... futures depend on it !





QUOTE=The Dad Fisherman;966934]X2[/QUOTE]
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ronnie, I dont get your post. McCain lost so why would it matter if those people will vote for Obama? I dont think Romney will sway independents in the swing states. He doesnt have the momentum, he is still not popular. I dont see a Romney win and I am ignoring polls.

Never said i didn't want the Right Results....just said I want it to be over.

Agreed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My point.
Millions and millions of voters drank the Obama Cool aid of Hope& Change the last time.
Those millions & millions are out of work, making less , certainly not better off 4 years later, add in this Bengazi cover up, those people are saying screw Obama and will vote for Romney.
How many voted republican last time and say I'm better off today than 4 years ago and will jump on the Obama wagon ?
Unless you are on the hand out bus , no one will be switching to Obama.





Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

One thing is for sure.
I highly doubt any or many of the people looting the stores in NY will be Romney supporters !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

cant argue with that logic

I too predict a large Romney win.

This commentary contains my sentiments exactly!

---------------------------------------------------


November 1, 2012

Obama's Loss: Inevitable for Years

By C. Edmund Wright

<some snipping done ( . . . )>

Do not be seduced by the disproportionate emphasis on recent events with regard to Barack Obama's pending landslide loss. I submit that a more sober analysis indicates that November 2012 has been inevitable for at least four years. In some ways, it's been inevitable for even longer than that.

You see, Barack Obama and his statist agenda have failed because they could not possibly succeed. In a way, electing Obama was liberal America's dash off a cliff -- and the 2012 election is merely the day they officially make contact with the ground. There has been no other outcome possible. . . .

The next thud you hear will be the unhappy realization of this fact from many on the left. Their philosophy works only in theory and never passes the reality of human nature.

Obama has been like Wile E. Coyote in animation -- sort of running in place, with no foundation underneath him since his '08 campaign. Only the David Axelrod cartoon world of astroturfed events and issues, supported by a fawning media, has kept him suspended this long. The crash will happen because it has to happen.

Why? Consider:

Everything Obama and his cohorts in the media, academia, union halls, Congress, and the crony capitalist world believe in is fraudulent. There was never going to be any economic recovery on their watch because they haven't the foggiest how an economy works. There was never going to be any newfound love of America overseas because they have no clue what it is about America that has made us the shining city on a hill in the first place. There was never going to be any job-creation because no one in Obama's bubble has ever created one. There was never going to be any racial reconciliation because Obama was a post-racial fabrication of perverted white guilt and black rage. There was never going to be a pristine future powered by windmills and solar panels because neither the business nor the scientific model for such technologies shows any possibility of success. There was no way Obama would do a good job, because he's never had a real job. . . .

This was all true on November 5 of 2008, and not a thing has changed about the reality of it in the past four years. It is what it is. Obama was preordained to install radical feminists, hardcore communists, environmental wackos, and anti-business activists into positions of power. Meanwhile, the Congress of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid was equally destined to pass legislation that destroys freedom and rewards cronies and armies of bureaucrats. We were certain as a nation to suffer the cataclysmic effects of misguided liberalism as a result. It does not matter a whit that the specifics of ObamaCare, the suit against Boeing, the Gulf moratorium, Dodd-Frank, and the canceling of Keystone were not known at the time. It is not relevant that names such as Van Jones, Cass Sunstein, and Anita Dunn were not familiar in 2008, either. Every one of these policies, and every one of these people, was utterly predictable. . . .

This is who Obama is. These people are who Obama is. There is no way around it, and there never has been. . . .

And the ironic thing is, as the inevitability of Obama's defeat seeps in a little deeper each day, certain recent events are pointed to as the reasons. These recent events are important, but they are not causal. To buy into this analysis is to confuse the symptom with the disease. Obama did not lose the election in the Denver debate. He did not lose the election in Roanoke with the "build that" speech. He did not lose the election with the disaster in Libya. Denver, Roanoke, and Libya all happened because of who Obama is. They are not events that happened "to him." If it hadn't been these specific events, it would have been others. He is who he is, and after four years in office, there was never going to be any escaping that. The real Obama, exposed, would never be accepted by a majority of Americans.

He never really was. There were signs of buyers' remorse immediately. Obama started losing this election in late '08, before he was inaugurated. Business owners, knowing Obama better than conservative pundits, shed 2 million jobs in 90 days starting in November of 2008. Those jobs are still gone, and they still matter today. Georgians, fearing a liberal Senate, gave Saxby Chambliss an overwhelming ideological victory in a special election in December of '08 -- days after we supposedly saw the end of conservatism. Those were both anti-Obama developments. Every development since his election has been anti-Obama. Let those who have eyes to see....

In 2009, Obama lost surrogate elections in New Jersey and Virginia. In early 2010, he lost a big one in Massachusetts, and late in 2010 he lost almost a thousand total elections nationwide. In 2011 he lost in Wisconsin -- again. Obama and the liberal statists have been hurdling towards a giant thud almost since the day they won in 2008. Yet they have refused to recognize it even as they have hit all kinds of bumps on the way down.

To many of us, this has been obvious for years. Maybe the only viable alternative -- the end of America -- was just too painful to contemplate. Or perhaps, living in reality and not inside the isolated world of Washington, we just get it. At any rate, Obama has been a dead candidate walking since he won election. Tuesday is merely the unavoidable conclusion.



American Thinker

http://i1289.photobucket.com/albums/...ps749512bc.gif

Good points Fly Rod. I keep hearing that all the polls are over-sampling democrats. And yu knwo what? i have not heard one of those polls deny that charge. Here's a good analysis by Karl Rove, who predicted an Obama electoral rout 4 years ago...

Rove: Sifting the Numbers for a Winner - WSJ.com

Jimmy, I htink you're off a bit...Romney is doing well with independents (maybe not well enough) and Romney has a lot of momentum. He has gained ground in every poll since the first debate.

How would you know?

We have been told here that Dems. have more $ than Repubs. so I'd like to hear your logic for that statement.

Here's how he knows...because conservatives almost never resort to violent anarchy. That's what liberals do when they aren't getting their way, not conservatives. PaulS, if you owned a restaurant, who would you want setting up camp acros the street - the Tea Party, or Occupy Wall Street.

And liberals do have more money than conservatives. Look where the liberal strongholds are - west coast and new england. Conservatives are mosty middle America and the rural South.

Romney 300+

UUUUU RRRRRRR correct Dems have more....barry complains about the rich...........he is rich........He is a bull crapper

seen a silver pickup truck, on 290

that had NO BAMA SPRAYED ON THE BACK

I WANTED TO SHAKE HIS HAND!

I don't know that anybody is going to "win" this one. May make Bush/Gore look like a walk in the park. You know, it is possible to tie the electoral college, but I think Romey just booted Ohio with his Jeeps in China fiasco.

Paul, good to see you back on line. Somebody said to look for you here. Let me know if you need anything down there. May be down to see my brother later today since he is still without power.

Heard some further confirmation of what I have been suspecting for a while now. Basically the electorate is very split "idealogically" (most significant difference in candidates in some time) and the numbers are so close to 50/50 that no matter who is in the White House the country itself will be very split over the next four years. Split mostly by race says the numbers I have been hearing, but I bet there are some other splits there that the talking heads are loath to discuss (e.g. economic and level of education, and ...etc.).

Are the conserv. allways talking about taking up arms? Is it empty talk?

Are conservatives taking up arms to better their own way of life or others? Or attempting to aide others? How many liberals no voted Afghanistan and Iraq two senators definitely approved the vote Biden and Obama
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm not sure of your point Paul
Obama has been the best thing for gun sales. I have no idea what that means either but it does indicate a loss of trust for the government and in people in general. I'm comfortable with well armed citizens. My neighbors are armed as am I . Crazy but I find myself sleeping better knowing that. I trust my friends and neighbors .
Conservatives tend to look out for them selfs and others. Despite how you would like to paint them
You can trust in the government ...,
I'll be a bit more cynical
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Are the conserv. allways talking about taking up arms?"

One of the more stupid questions i have ever heard...but I'll answer it (unlike you, you dodged my question about who yuo'd rather have across the street from your restaurant).

Conservatives do not talk about "taking up arms" every single time we don't get our way. Look at every single example of civil unrest in this country in the last 25 years. In most cases, you see liberal anarchists aren't getting what they want, and they respond by throwing temper tantrums.

When OJ got acquitted, I don't recall the right-wing law-and-order types staging riots.

Thanks for clearing that up.

You don't recall the liberals rioting? Well, of course they didn't riot after OJ was acquitted, because that was what many liberals wanted. But do you not recall what happened after the Rodney King cops were acquitted? Your recollection needs a tune-up, it would appear.

If Obama wins, there will be no conservative riots, just like there weren't any in 2008. So you just keep making stuff up.

In the final days of this campaign, we see the Obama administration's indefensible reaction to the Libyan attack. And now, we see that unemployment is increasing again. Only 1 network will discuss either of these things, and what they clearly say about the incumbent.

I cannot understand why this is a close election.

I certainly remember the riots - How do you know it was "liberals" rioting? Your just assigning positions based on your views and prejudices. I thought OJ was guilty so that disproves your point that liberals wanted him acquitted.

I thought Raider Ronnie said Romney was going to walk away w/the election?

If Obama wins I think it is b/c Romney threw his lot in w/the most right wing of the party (see Ryan). From abortion to healthcare he has been willing to reverse his previous positions so that they match the party. He apparently will say anything to get elected.

IMHO, the number of people who want free stuff and large Govt to put
their mittens on for them is growing.
What used to be the majority of people who took pride in their independence and
hard work are dwindling.

Jim is trying to make the absurd point that when liberals don't get their way, they resort to rioting. I'm making the equally absurd point that when cons. don't get their way, they talk about taking about arms.

I agree with you Paul that the people who rioted were not liberals they were a product of the liberal agenda though
Your way off base and entirely hypocritical in your analysis of Romney
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"How do you know it was "liberals" rioting? "

I know because I am objective and rational.

I'm not saying that all liberals are anarchists. What I'm saying is that when you see a good riot in the US, it's almost always to advance a liberal agenda (or to protest a conservative ideal)

"I thought Raider Ronnie said Romney was going to walk away w/the election?"

What's your point? Ronie is entitled to his opinion, but it's his opinion, not fact. I sure hope he's right...

"He (Romney) apparently will say anything to get elected"

As opposed to Obama, who said the following:

that he'd close Gitmo
that he'd cut the deficit in half
that unemployment would be less than 6%
that he would be a post-racial president (right!)
that he would be a post-patrisan president
that he would not have lobbyists around
that proposed bills would be online for us to see

Bill Clinton was one of the greatest flip-floppers in the history of the world (he governed like a Tea Partier during his second term). His flip-flopping on economic policy was one of the best things any president has ever done. I'll take a flip-flopper over a liar who abandons troops fighting for their lives (and refuses to discuss it), and who supports the killing of babies after they are born. And people say Romney's position on abortion is extreme...

Excdept I can point to as many recent examples as you'd like, of anarchy taking place when liberals don't get their way.

Race riots, anti-war riots, Wesleyan students throwing condoms at Antonin Scalia, liberal college students storming the stage when Ann Coulter tries to speak at UCONN, liberal college students storming the stage when The Minutemen try to speak at Columbia, rioting when the Rodney King cops were acquitted, the Occupy Wall Street kooks, anarchy outside the 2008 Republican convention (hundreds of arests), rioting every time the economic group G-12 has a conference, liberals rioting in Europe when cuts are announced to entitlement programs...

Where are the examples of equivalent large-scale civil unrest when conservatives want to make a point?

Just because you don't like what I'm saying, doesn't make it false.