• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Why Obama's going down in November

Larrry

Well-known member
Why Obama's going down in November
Exclusive: Erik Rush cites myriad factors pointing to solid Romney win

The rhetoric of the left continues to grow increasingly caustic, and exchanges on social-media venues and the blogosphere occasionally reach murderous tones. Although some high-profile commentators on the left are beginning to exhibit episodes of definite unhingedness, other liberal journalists have been going against the grain, calling their brothers and sisters-in-arms on their outrageous calumnies and misrepresentations against GOP nominee Mitt Romney.

Perhaps some of them take their journalistic credentials more seriously that I thought.

I indicated earlier that I am decidedly skeptical when it comes to polls that show President Obama in this supposed dead heat with Romney. I predicted that biased polling and duplicitous respondent data would substantially affect poll results, and that the press was going to report Obama as ahead up until Election Day, even if Romney winds up winning by a landslide. Some of these factors have been challenging to members of the conservative base and newly galvanized independents, who understand how vitally important it is that Obama is defeated in November. Considering the decades of plotting and subterfuge in which the far-left machine has engaged, they tend to perceive it as a juggernaut that could run roughshod over the electorate, ensuring another term for this dangerous and criminal administration.

Despite this, I find myself more hopeful than ever with regard to Obama’s defeat, and the “juggernaut” as more of a foundering pirate ship. Yes, it was well-constructed, but it’s taking on water now, the captain is insane, and half the crew is blind drunk, leaving a few officers and frustrated sailors wondering what to do as they scurry about, firing wild cannon volleys in the general direction of the enemy.

One of the reasons for my sense of hopefulness is the success of conservative scholar Dinesh D’Souza’s film, “2016: Obama’s America.” This is not because I believe it’s going to sweep the nation like a blockbuster action flick – but because I believe it was so masterfully executed that any fence-sitting or uninformed voters who view it will know without equivocation that Obama has got to go. D’Souza presents his case for Obama’s aversion to the entire Western paradigm with far more cogency and tact than I would have, making his a message that will be – I believe – far more convincing to the coveted independents and swing voters who are conscientious, but less mired in political minutiae than some of us.

The film has become a factor; that it ranked eighth last week among nationally released features should not be underestimated. As much as they would like, the liberal press has not been able to simply ignore it; a column on the leftist website Media Matters this week entitled “Fear and Loathing in ’2016: Obama’s America’” reads like a bad LSD trip in its disjointedness.

The mobilization of certain military organizations (no pun intended) could also become a significant factor in Obama’s defeat. The widespread derision of 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry among former military personnel following the release of “Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry” (by John O’Neill and WND’s Jerome Corsi) was an integral component in the failure of Kerry’s presidential bid. Recently, OPSEC, a group of former military and intelligence operatives, released a political ad blaming President Obama for a series of national security leaks; the president has also been roundly criticized by former military personnel for taking undue credit for the operation that dispatched terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and for his habit of bowing to foreign leaders. Another book by a former Navy SEAL, due to be released next week, further challenges the administration’s account of the raid that killed bin Laden.

Then, there are the general demeanor and comportment of President Obama and his Cabinet during this campaign thus far. The administration announced earlier this month that Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar, will be leaving the White House to return to academia. Such departures usually represent untoward developments within administrations, and even more so during a re-election campaign.

And where is Michelle Obama? We can presume that the couple’s two daughters are occupied with their schooling, but the first lady has been conspicuously absent during her husband’s recent campaigning. While few irregularities concerning the inner workings of this White House have ever been reported by the establishment press, it is common knowledge among members of the conservative press that the atmosphere has been turbulent at times, and that Obama can be difficult to work with on a personal level.

On the road, Obama has waxed testy, and even shrill. His campaign speaking venues – like his expensive fundraising stops – have been packed with the faithful, but they’re also smaller than during the 2008 campaign; organizers and Secret Service have been unable to prevent the insinuation of some embarrassing hecklers. Obama’s tone is diametrically opposed to that of the previous campaign, wherein he was the inspiring, messianic figure. Now, he’s a paternalistic, admonishing autocrat, focused solely on the evil of the retrograde Republican machine conspiring to supplant him and the imperative of its defeat.

This might play well to the carefully chosen audiences of aforementioned faithful, but it lacks the vision Obama cultivated in 2008 (though that was clearly pie-in-the-sky). Short of widespread and effective voter fraud, his chances of even making an impressive showing in November appear to be dwindling daily.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/why-obamas-going-down-in-november/

I still don't know, with martial law as a trump card for him.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
http://electoral-vote.com/

I've followed this site thru the last 12-15 years of elections- and his analysis and predictions using all of the different polls have been spot on...

Today he has a comparison of the race today- compared with the race on this same date in 08-- and actually Obama is ahead of what he was back then in the polls after the Repub convention... According to his analysis of all the polls- the Repub convention did not give Romney the bounce it gave McCain in 08...

And in the votes that count- the states electoral vote- Obama leads 332-206...
 

flounder

Well-known member
Larrry said:
Why Obama's going down in November
Exclusive: Erik Rush cites myriad factors pointing to solid Romney win

The rhetoric of the left continues to grow increasingly caustic, and exchanges on social-media venues and the blogosphere occasionally reach murderous tones. Although some high-profile commentators on the left are beginning to exhibit episodes of definite unhingedness, other liberal journalists have been going against the grain, calling their brothers and sisters-in-arms on their outrageous calumnies and misrepresentations against GOP nominee Mitt Romney.

Perhaps some of them take their journalistic credentials more seriously that I thought.

I indicated earlier that I am decidedly skeptical when it comes to polls that show President Obama in this supposed dead heat with Romney. I predicted that biased polling and duplicitous respondent data would substantially affect poll results, and that the press was going to report Obama as ahead up until Election Day, even if Romney winds up winning by a landslide. Some of these factors have been challenging to members of the conservative base and newly galvanized independents, who understand how vitally important it is that Obama is defeated in November. Considering the decades of plotting and subterfuge in which the far-left machine has engaged, they tend to perceive it as a juggernaut that could run roughshod over the electorate, ensuring another term for this dangerous and criminal administration.

Despite this, I find myself more hopeful than ever with regard to Obama’s defeat, and the “juggernaut” as more of a foundering pirate ship. Yes, it was well-constructed, but it’s taking on water now, the captain is insane, and half the crew is blind drunk, leaving a few officers and frustrated sailors wondering what to do as they scurry about, firing wild cannon volleys in the general direction of the enemy.

One of the reasons for my sense of hopefulness is the success of conservative scholar Dinesh D’Souza’s film, “2016: Obama’s America.” This is not because I believe it’s going to sweep the nation like a blockbuster action flick – but because I believe it was so masterfully executed that any fence-sitting or uninformed voters who view it will know without equivocation that Obama has got to go. D’Souza presents his case for Obama’s aversion to the entire Western paradigm with far more cogency and tact than I would have, making his a message that will be – I believe – far more convincing to the coveted independents and swing voters who are conscientious, but less mired in political minutiae than some of us.

The film has become a factor; that it ranked eighth last week among nationally released features should not be underestimated. As much as they would like, the liberal press has not been able to simply ignore it; a column on the leftist website Media Matters this week entitled “Fear and Loathing in ’2016: Obama’s America’” reads like a bad LSD trip in its disjointedness.

The mobilization of certain military organizations (no pun intended) could also become a significant factor in Obama’s defeat. The widespread derision of 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry among former military personnel following the release of “Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry” (by John O’Neill and WND’s Jerome Corsi) was an integral component in the failure of Kerry’s presidential bid. Recently, OPSEC, a group of former military and intelligence operatives, released a political ad blaming President Obama for a series of national security leaks; the president has also been roundly criticized by former military personnel for taking undue credit for the operation that dispatched terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and for his habit of bowing to foreign leaders. Another book by a former Navy SEAL, due to be released next week, further challenges the administration’s account of the raid that killed bin Laden.

Then, there are the general demeanor and comportment of President Obama and his Cabinet during this campaign thus far. The administration announced earlier this month that Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar, will be leaving the White House to return to academia. Such departures usually represent untoward developments within administrations, and even more so during a re-election campaign.

And where is Michelle Obama? We can presume that the couple’s two daughters are occupied with their schooling, but the first lady has been conspicuously absent during her husband’s recent campaigning. While few irregularities concerning the inner workings of this White House have ever been reported by the establishment press, it is common knowledge among members of the conservative press that the atmosphere has been turbulent at times, and that Obama can be difficult to work with on a personal level.

On the road, Obama has waxed testy, and even shrill. His campaign speaking venues – like his expensive fundraising stops – have been packed with the faithful, but they’re also smaller than during the 2008 campaign; organizers and Secret Service have been unable to prevent the insinuation of some embarrassing hecklers. Obama’s tone is diametrically opposed to that of the previous campaign, wherein he was the inspiring, messianic figure. Now, he’s a paternalistic, admonishing autocrat, focused solely on the evil of the retrograde Republican machine conspiring to supplant him and the imperative of its defeat.

This might play well to the carefully chosen audiences of aforementioned faithful, but it lacks the vision Obama cultivated in 2008 (though that was clearly pie-in-the-sky). Short of widespread and effective voter fraud, his chances of even making an impressive showing in November appear to be dwindling daily.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/why-obamas-going-down-in-november/





Larrry said:
I still don't know, with martial law as a trump card for him.





:lol: :lol: :lol2: :liar: :disagree:
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
http://electoral-vote.com/

I've followed this site thru the last 12-15 years of elections- and his analysis and predictions using all of the different polls have been spot on...

Today he has a comparison of the race today- compared with the race on this same date in 08-- and actually Obama is ahead of what he was back then in the polls after the Repub convention... According to his analysis of all the polls- the Repub convention did not give Romney the bounce it gave McCain in 08...

And in the votes that count- the states electoral vote- Obama leads 332-206...

I don't want to burst your warm and fuzzy feeling, but I know of no one that is planning on voting for Husaine in 2012 that didn't in 2008, but I know many that will not make that mistake again.

:tiphat:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
flounder said:
Larrry said:
Why Obama's going down in November
Exclusive: Erik Rush cites myriad factors pointing to solid Romney win

The rhetoric of the left continues to grow increasingly caustic, and exchanges on social-media venues and the blogosphere occasionally reach murderous tones. Although some high-profile commentators on the left are beginning to exhibit episodes of definite unhingedness, other liberal journalists have been going against the grain, calling their brothers and sisters-in-arms on their outrageous calumnies and misrepresentations against GOP nominee Mitt Romney.

Perhaps some of them take their journalistic credentials more seriously that I thought.

I indicated earlier that I am decidedly skeptical when it comes to polls that show President Obama in this supposed dead heat with Romney. I predicted that biased polling and duplicitous respondent data would substantially affect poll results, and that the press was going to report Obama as ahead up until Election Day, even if Romney winds up winning by a landslide. Some of these factors have been challenging to members of the conservative base and newly galvanized independents, who understand how vitally important it is that Obama is defeated in November. Considering the decades of plotting and subterfuge in which the far-left machine has engaged, they tend to perceive it as a juggernaut that could run roughshod over the electorate, ensuring another term for this dangerous and criminal administration.

Despite this, I find myself more hopeful than ever with regard to Obama’s defeat, and the “juggernaut” as more of a foundering pirate ship. Yes, it was well-constructed, but it’s taking on water now, the captain is insane, and half the crew is blind drunk, leaving a few officers and frustrated sailors wondering what to do as they scurry about, firing wild cannon volleys in the general direction of the enemy.

One of the reasons for my sense of hopefulness is the success of conservative scholar Dinesh D’Souza’s film, “2016: Obama’s America.” This is not because I believe it’s going to sweep the nation like a blockbuster action flick – but because I believe it was so masterfully executed that any fence-sitting or uninformed voters who view it will know without equivocation that Obama has got to go. D’Souza presents his case for Obama’s aversion to the entire Western paradigm with far more cogency and tact than I would have, making his a message that will be – I believe – far more convincing to the coveted independents and swing voters who are conscientious, but less mired in political minutiae than some of us.

The film has become a factor; that it ranked eighth last week among nationally released features should not be underestimated. As much as they would like, the liberal press has not been able to simply ignore it; a column on the leftist website Media Matters this week entitled “Fear and Loathing in ’2016: Obama’s America’” reads like a bad LSD trip in its disjointedness.

The mobilization of certain military organizations (no pun intended) could also become a significant factor in Obama’s defeat. The widespread derision of 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry among former military personnel following the release of “Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry” (by John O’Neill and WND’s Jerome Corsi) was an integral component in the failure of Kerry’s presidential bid. Recently, OPSEC, a group of former military and intelligence operatives, released a political ad blaming President Obama for a series of national security leaks; the president has also been roundly criticized by former military personnel for taking undue credit for the operation that dispatched terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and for his habit of bowing to foreign leaders. Another book by a former Navy SEAL, due to be released next week, further challenges the administration’s account of the raid that killed bin Laden.

Then, there are the general demeanor and comportment of President Obama and his Cabinet during this campaign thus far. The administration announced earlier this month that Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar, will be leaving the White House to return to academia. Such departures usually represent untoward developments within administrations, and even more so during a re-election campaign.

And where is Michelle Obama? We can presume that the couple’s two daughters are occupied with their schooling, but the first lady has been conspicuously absent during her husband’s recent campaigning. While few irregularities concerning the inner workings of this White House have ever been reported by the establishment press, it is common knowledge among members of the conservative press that the atmosphere has been turbulent at times, and that Obama can be difficult to work with on a personal level.

On the road, Obama has waxed testy, and even shrill. His campaign speaking venues – like his expensive fundraising stops – have been packed with the faithful, but they’re also smaller than during the 2008 campaign; organizers and Secret Service have been unable to prevent the insinuation of some embarrassing hecklers. Obama’s tone is diametrically opposed to that of the previous campaign, wherein he was the inspiring, messianic figure. Now, he’s a paternalistic, admonishing autocrat, focused solely on the evil of the retrograde Republican machine conspiring to supplant him and the imperative of its defeat.

This might play well to the carefully chosen audiences of aforementioned faithful, but it lacks the vision Obama cultivated in 2008 (though that was clearly pie-in-the-sky). Short of widespread and effective voter fraud, his chances of even making an impressive showing in November appear to be dwindling daily.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/why-obamas-going-down-in-november/





Larrry said:
:lol: :lol: :lol2: :liar: :disagree:

The right and left wingnut extremists , the John Bircher crew, and the conspiracists were all saying the same thing about GW Bush about 4-5 years ago...
Reason I keep buying stock in Kimberly Clark/Depends !! :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Bush did in fact enact an "Executive Order" enabling "Martial Law" during times of national security & catastrophic events. And that order did in fact bristle some feathers with freedom loving right-wingers, but Buckwheat's order took it a lot further:

As folks headed out to happy hour last Friday evening, President Obama signed an executive order that could potentially give him the power to institute martial law in the United States in times of peace or during a national threat.

The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order will give Obama power over “resources and services needed to support such plans and programs.”

Many Americans were shocked to find out that this order gives the president practically unlimited power over US citizens and their property. All in the name of national security of course.

In the order it states, “in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States actions are necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements.”

According to a White House press release, the US “must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment.”

In the order the Secretary of Agriculture can allocate material such as “food resources, livestock resources, and the distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer.”

The same goes for all forms of energy, health resources, transportation, and even water resources.

According to the White House press release the purpose is to “delegate authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the "Act").”

The sneaky tactics couldn’t have come at a worst time, especially after the newly signed HR 347 or the “Trespass bill” and even more terrifying the National Defense Authorization Act that allows the president to detain and torture American citizens without due process.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
electoral vote.com is a leftwingernut site with ties toi the sierra club so a rational person can't take much faith in them.
 

Steve

Well-known member
by their own accounts they count 107 electoral votes as barely dem and 15 as barely GOP...

really?.. is it a democratic cup half empty or a GOP cup half full?

New polls: FL NC
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: IN NC

still looks like Obama could easily lose it.. The site claims no GOP bump form the convention yet today's Rasmussen results show a 6 point bump...

once you start ignoring facts to get a result.. the result is not accurate..

but studies and polls are like grains of sand.. scattered everywhere..
August 23, 2012

A University of Colorado (CU) analysis of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election predicts that Mitt Romney will win the election in November. The model used for the prediction is one that has correctly predicted all presidential elections since 1980, including George W. Bush losing the popular vote but still winning the election in 2000.

The study has predicted that President Barack Obama will only receive 218 electoral votes, far short of the 270 needed to win the election. It also predicts that Romney will receive 52.9% of the popular vote.
 

Steve

Well-known member
something for liberals to consider this election.

The National Popular Vote Bill is Now at Half-Way Point

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the entire United States. The bill preserves the Electoral College, while ensuring that every vote in every state will matter in every presidential election. The National Popular Vote law has been enacted by states possessing 132 electoral votes — 49% of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate it.

1 Maryland 10 April 10, 2007
2 New Jersey 14 January 13, 2008
3 Illinois 20 April 7, 2008
4 Hawaii 4 May 1, 2008
5 Washington 12 April 28, 2009
6 Massachusetts 11 August 4, 2010
7 District of Columbia 3 December 7, 2010
8 Vermont 3 April 22, 2011
9 California 55 August 8, 2011

1-Sentence Description
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia).

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the entire United States.

The bill has been enacted by 9 jurisdictions possessing 132 electoral votes — 49% of the 270 necessary to activate it (VT, MD, WA, IL, NJ, DC, MA, CA, HI).

while it is not in effect yet.. could liberals be falling into a trap?

132 electoral votes up for grabs in a neck and neck national popular vote campaign... and so far they are all liberal states..

could you imagine the look on the liberal states if their vote goes to Romney solely because he has the popular vote?
 
Top