The Goat Pen

Obama's Achilles heel, and Romney's ace in the hole, is voter turnout.

There are millions of R's who would crawl across a field of broken glass to vote against Obama (not FOR Romney, but AGAINST Obama).

The Dem's aren't nearly as energized as they were 4 years ago. They are deeply disappointed that Obama did not lower the sea levels, close Gitmo, free Khalid Sheik Muhammad, arrest Bush, impale Cheney, waterboard Rush Limbaugh, ban the internal combustion engine, impose reparations for slavery, confiscate privately-owned firearms, abolish heterosexual marriage, tax income over $250K at 100%, etc.

"Not a North/South thing but a dependant person vs a non dependant person thing."

Pretty funny "insight" coming from you, the biggest parasite on the boards...

Prof, point of order. I think your posting of the entire lyrics of CBCS was bad form. We all know the words. By heart. We all think we can sing it perfectly when we're singing along with the volume turned way up. Don't get me wrong, your gist was right on. But I think it would've been more effective if you'd quoted BOJ and then replied with:

The preacher man says it’s the end of time
And the Mississippi River she’s a goin’ dry...

Nod and wink, dude, nod and wink...

hedge wrote:"Not a North/South thing but a dependant person vs a non dependant person thing."

Pretty funny "insight" coming from you, the biggest parasite on the boards...

Prof, point of order. I think your posting of the entire lyrics of CBCS was bad form. We all know the words. By heart. We all think we can sing it perfectly when we're singing along with the volume turned way up. Don't get me wrong, your gist was right on. But I think it would've been more effective if you'd quoted BOJ and then replied with:

The preacher man says it’s the end of time
And the Mississippi River she’s a goin’ dry...

Nod and wink, dude, nod and wink...

LMBO yeah sure I'm a parasite. Just exactly how would that be BTW?

It's pretty clear to everyone...

hedge wrote:It's pretty clear to everyone...

No, don't think so. Must be your delusion.

Latest report through Friday for Ohio early voting. If I'm reading it right, doesn't include Saturday's voting.

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/mediaCen ... 11-03.aspx

As of Friday, 1,622,272 have already voted. That's about 100,000 votes shy of the number that voted early last year.

There's a difference in the early voting between this year and 2008. In 2008, the polls were open on 5 weekends. This year only once, and the state Republicans tried to have that blocked too. But they wanted the military to be able to vote this final weekend and the courts said if you allow it for them, you have to allow it for all citizens.

So there was an expectation of heavy turnout. It'll be interesting to see the SecofState's numbers tomorrow and monday. I think the statewide total will end up equaling or slightly edging 2008

There's no justification for cutting early voting days in half is there? Seriously.

bluetick wrote:There's no justification for cutting early voting days in half is there? Seriously.

They basically offered no justification. They said election boards need the final weekend to simply prepare for Tuesday. AFederal judge said they were full of shit and the US Supreme Court agreed with him. There's really no reason to do away with it unless you want to discourage voters. Certain voters in particular.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

Dr. Strangelove wrote:To believe Mr. Barone, who does no polling himself, is to believe that every single polling company in America has no clue what the fuck they are doing

So Barone is now a hack?

Really?

Three simple questions:

1) Early vote totals in Ohio show a net swing of about 260k that favors R's. Lat numbers I saw where about 181k fewer D early voters/absentee requests and 75k more for Rs compared to 2008. I'm sure the D number will go down before election day, but the R number will also go up. If that margin remains similar, that is Oprama's entire MOV in 2008

2) R's are far more energized to vote than D's are and R's are expected by all just about everyone to actually vote more than D's on election day.

3) Independents are for Romney big time.

I don't see how that adds up to Oprama ahead and a sure thing to win Ohio.

I don't see the D's having the turnout adv they had in 2008 (or better as some polls model).

Maybe I'm wrong we'll see.

NYD news...

Our choice for America’s future: The Daily News endorses Mitt Romney for president
Four years after endorsing Obama, News finds the hopes of those days went unfulfilled



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/choi ... z2BGmdw4IW

Ahh unions..salt of the earth...

4 men arrested in Perrysburg for stealing Romney signs while driving sheet metal union truck

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ss ... er_default

NAACP Takes Over Houston Polling Station, Advocates for President Obama

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavli ... g_location

HOUSTON, TX - Friday afternoon at an early polling place located at 6719 W. Montgomery Road in Houston, NAACP members were seen advocating for President Barack Obama according to volunteer poll watchers on location at the time.

According to Eve Rockford, a poll watcher trained by voter integrity group True the Vote, three NAACP members showed up to the 139 precinct location with 50 cases of bottled water and began handing bottles out to people standing in line. While wearing NAACP labeled clothing, members were "stirring the crowd" and talking to voters about flying to Ohio to promote President Barack Obama.

After watching what was occurring, Rockford approached Polling Supervisor Rose Cochran about what she was seeing.

"I went to the polling supervisor and let her know that it was not appropriate that they were in the building handing out water. She ignored me. I repeated my statement. She told me that she would handle it. She did nothing. I then went to the assistant supervisor and he stood up, walked over to another table and then sat down. I then walked into the waiting room and they were reloading another dolly with more cases of water," Rockford said in a True the Vote incident report.

After handing out water and advocating for President Obama, the NAACP members started handpicking and moving people to the front of a long voting line inside the polling place according to the incident report. After multiple complaints from voters about the line cutting, Rockford received a phone call from downtown telling her to “stand down.”

“All of the sudden one of the clerks, Dayan Cohen, said that someone wanted to speak to me on the phone. It was someone from downtown. I got on the phone and she said she was from downtown and that I needed to stand down and that it was okay for the NAACP to be within 100 ft. and they could hand out water. I told her that the NAACP was inside the building, wearing the NAACP clothing and caps and were handing out water and moving people from the back of the lines to the front of the lines,” Rockford said.

At this point, NAACP members were instructed to turn their clothing inside out, which they refused to do and said they weren’t going to stop their actions inside the polling place. Their behavior and actions to move people to the front of the line continued for the rest of the evening. Texas State Representative Sylvester Turner, a former Texas NAACP leader, was also seen outside the building talking with voters.

“The NAACP basically ran this poll location and the judges did nothing about it,” Rockford said.

puterbac wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:To believe Mr. Barone, who does no polling himself, is to believe that every single polling company in America has no clue what the fuck they are doing

So Barone is now a hack?

Really?

What's easier to believe? That every polling company in America is wrong? Or that Michael Barone is wrong about it being a landslide?

puterbac wrote:Three simple questions:

1) Early vote totals in Ohio show a net swing of about 260k that favors R's. Lat numbers I saw where about 181k fewer D early voters/absentee requests and 75k more for Rs compared to 2008. I'm sure the D number will go down before election day, but the R number will also go up. If that margin remains similar, that is Oprama's entire MOV in 2008

2) R's are far more energized to vote than D's are and R's are expected by all just about everyone to actually vote more than D's on election day.

3) Independents are for Romney big time.

I don't see how that adds up to Oprama ahead and a sure thing to win Ohio.

I don't see the D's having the turnout adv they had in 2008 (or better as some polls model).

Maybe I'm wrong we'll see.

I will point out again that state Republicans shut down weekend early voting this year and the only reason the polls were open this last weekend is because they were ordered open by the Federal courts.

In 2008 there were 8 more days of in-person early voting than in 2012. While the absentee voting is pretty evenly split, in-person voting is overwhelmingly urban and Democrat. So making it harder to vote early and in-person probably has SOME impact on those numbers.

By the way, regarding your complaints about absentee ballots being sent to everyone....I have now read that the R's did that as a type of compromise in exchange for ending the weekend early vote.

Looking at in-house voting in Cuyahoga 2008 vs 2012

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/112012avreports.aspx

The number of people who had voted early in-person at this point in 2008 was 46,325. So far this year it's 39,975. A difference of -6350

But notice that the polls were open an additional NINE DAYS in 2008 versus this year thanks to the state R's shutting down all weekend voting. The total vote on those extra 9 days in 2008 was 9933. Easily the difference between early voting last time and now.

puterbac wrote:Ahh unions..salt of the earth...

4 men arrested in Perrysburg for stealing Romney...

That is as far as any Obama voter got in reading your post.

"I don't see how that adds up to Oprama ahead and a sure thing to win Ohio.

I don't see the D's having the turnout adv they had in 2008 (or better as some polls model).

Maybe I'm wrong we'll see."

Maybe if you got your "information" from different sources, you wouldn't have to worry about being wrong. But you insist on getting your "information" from (ahem) fair and balanced sources, so you will be wrong. I'm sure you'll find something to blame it on besides the fair and balanced sources you depend upon for this "information" that is leading you to form wrong opinions. No way the "information" they're publishing (and you're buying) could be the source of your error, oh no. Has to be something else, it can't be something as simple as that Fox and Drudge and Rush and every other bullshit entertainment channel you watch is not fair and balance, not objective at all and is only creating possibilities out of the thinnest possible premises (and sometimes no premises at all) just to tell you what you want to hear.

No, you'd rather blame it on all those other media sources who don't consistently tell you what you want to hear, you'll whine and bitch about "9:1", but never, ever question that "1" that you hold onto like a life jacket. In short, the reason you will be wrong is because you've been fed bullshit. But you seem to love gobbling it down as fast as they can shovel it into your seemingly insatiable maw, so why should they stop? You'll get exactly what you deserve next week. The real entertainment is going to be seeing how you try to justify Hannity and Co. for the bullshit they shoveled you. I'm sure you'll come up with something to blame somebody else but your buddies at Fox. Seriously, dude, don't get fooled again...

In more news (real news this time, not the pro wrestling commentary most of the clowns in here subscribe to as "news"):

"My argument, rather, is this: we’ve about reached the point where if Mr. Romney wins, it can only be because the polls have been biased against him. Almost all of the chance that Mr. Romney has in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, about 16 percent to win the Electoral College, reflects this possibility.

Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking.

Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the leader in the race is “too close to call.” It isn’t. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you can’t acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.

But the state polls may not be right. They could be biased. Based on the historical reliability of polls, we put the chance that they will be biased enough to elect Mr. Romney at 16 percent."