French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: 2012 Presidential Election 5: Election Day Countdown
I'm only watching CNN if they promise more holograms.
I'm only watching CNN if they promise more holograms.
Even better will be watching The Daily Show and The Colbert Report tonight and in the upcoming days.I'm going to watch either PBS or the BBC. CNN is in the toilet right now as far as analysis goes and no point in watching Fox or MSNBC until after the thing is decided for pure comedy potential.
Even better will be watching The Daily Show and The Colbert Report tonight and in the upcoming days.
Of course, they'll mostly focus on the absurdity at Fox, but it'll still be a nice to way to condense it down for you so you don't have to waste too much time watching those idiots on Fox and MSNBC. Sort of like watching The Soup so you can make fun of whatever stupid shows your wife watches without actually having to watch them.
Remember, though, the good stuff that's happened in 2009-2012 is all to Obama's credit. All the bad stuff is due to what he inherited. And to think some people buy into it!Assuming Obama does win, will he spend the next four years talking about the mess he inherited from whomever was President from 2009 - 2012?
After all, whomever is sworn in next January will have some really daunting challenges to face because whomever was President from 2009 - 2012 did nothing to address them during that time!
*Foolishly takes this seriously*Assuming Obama does win, will he spend the next four years talking about the mess he inherited from whomever was President from 2009 - 2012?![]()
He'll probably just rely on the crutch he's been using for a long time: "It coulda been worse".
In looking at the toss-up states (CO, FL, IA, NH, OH, VA, WI), I can easily imagine Obama only taking OH and NH, which would give Romney the presidency. Maybe I need to actually pay attention to whatever polls are out there for the rest of the toss-up states, but I'm not buying the idea that Obama has that clear of a path to victory. A lot of things need to happen for Romney to win, but they aren't exactly unrealistic things.
*Foolishly takes this seriously*
He'll probably just rely on the crutch he's been using for a long time: "It coulda been worse".
Why is it that the most competitive states seem to have the most problems with their voting systems? It's not like they haven't had many years to improve things.
There are problems in noncompetitive states too. Here in NY we've had really long lines (much worse than four years ago, based on anecdotal evidence anyway) and fairly widespread reports of ballot scanners that aren't working properly. It's just that they aren't really newsworthy in the eyes of the national media because they aren't likely to affect any outcomes like they are in swing states.Why is it that the most competitive states seem to have the most problems with their voting systems? It's not like they haven't had many years to improve things.
They have to compete with MS/NBC News using the rink in Rockefeller Center as a giant electoral map and CBS using a laser to print results on the moon.
V = MOkay, so my friends and I were trying to quantify how much more valuable your vote is depending on whether you live in one state or another. I proposed this formula as a way to describe it numerically:
In a two party presidential race, you cast a vote in a state with "E" electoral college votes. Your state has a voter turnout of "T", and the margin of victory (in perctentage) is "M". Your vote's value "V" then would be valued by this formula (units would end up being electoral college votes per your vote):
V = (2/(MT))*E
Are there any better statistical models for how "valuable" your vote truly is?
Oh, you *******. You're really only calling Vermont and Kentucky?