Scientific Model Predicts Obama Reelection

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2012 11:47 PM GMT
    http://m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/blogs/signal/obama-poised-win-2012-election-303-electoral-votes-202543583.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=us&.lang=en-us


    More bad news for the Repubs!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2012 11:50 PM GMT
    This is why Republicans dont believe in science. Science keeps disproving all their talking points.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:01 AM GMT
    catfish5 saidThis is why Republicans dont believe in science. Science keeps disproving all their talking points.

    Not to leave out common sense! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:05 AM GMT
    I do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:08 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:09 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Maceys window.





    LOL
    I'd stop by Macy's to see that.

    But there's little chance you'll have to bare ass for the crowds in Herald Square.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:13 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif


    Can we get a preview of that ass?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:18 AM GMT
    [quote][cite]Ex_Mil8 said[/cite]I do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.[/quote]

    Ha ha! THIS!

    In the mean time, I enjoy watching the Republican cannibalization. It's quite a show!

    I can hardly wait to see their faces when the Democrats control the White House, the Senate, AND the House of Representatives again! Maybe this time the Dems will USE the levers of despite any Republican cries for bipartisan cooperation.

    I am SO enjoying this show!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:29 AM GMT
    catfish5 said
    Christian73 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif


    Can we get a preview of that ass?


    Of course.

    Santorum4.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:34 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    catfish5 said
    Christian73 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif


    Can we get a preview of that ass?


    Of course.

    Santorum4.jpg





    LOL

    I have a hunch that your ass looks a hell of a lot better than that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:35 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    Ex_Mil8 said
    catfish5 said
    Christian73 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif


    Can we get a preview of that ass?


    Of course.

    Santorum4.jpg





    LOL

    I have a hunch that your ass looks a hell of a lot better than that.


    Rick, I nearly collided with you getting to that joke. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 12:36 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    catfish5 said
    Christian73 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    That's the first reason I've had to wish for Obama's defeat. icon_wink.gif


    Can we get a preview of that ass?


    Of course.

    Santorum4.jpg


    Damn. Your ass looks like Rick Santorum. Sorry for the disappointment but i was expecting a hot bubble butt.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 3:22 AM GMT
    GAMRican said[quote][cite]Ex_Mil8 said[/cite]I do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    Ha ha! THIS!

    In the mean time, I enjoy watching the Republican cannibalization. It's quite a show!

    I can hardly wait to see their faces when the Democrats control the White House, the Senate, AND the House of Representatives again! Maybe this time the Dems will USE the levers of despite any Republican cries for bipartisan cooperation.

    I am SO enjoying this show![/quote]



    We still have months of fun to look forward to!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 3:48 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI do not think we need a scentific model to tell us Obama will win by a landslide. Given the economic recovery, the Bin Laden effect and the most unelectable Republican candidate in a generation, if Obama does not win, I will come over to NYC and show my ass in Macys window.


    Quoted for record, on the very off chance you are wrong. icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 3:52 AM GMT
    The whole spectacle of this year's GOP offerings - save for Ron Paul - leaves me /facepalmed.

    It's as if they are actually trying too hard to lose.

    This may well be my first time ever voting for a democrat for POTUS.

    icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 3:56 AM GMT
    I'm probably not gonna vote. The Republicans that have a chance of getting the nod are terrible, and Barack Hussein Obama II's views go against the libertarian principles this country was founded upon.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 4:37 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    Firebrand saidI'm probably not gonna vote. The Republicans that have a chance of getting the nod are terrible, and Barack Hussein Obama II's views go against the libertarian principles this country was founded upon.

    Newsflash:
    The country was not founded on "libertarian" principles.
    If any of the Founders actually were alive to hear the 'principles' of the libertarians, they'd never stop choking with laughter.


    icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 6:07 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    Firebrand saidI'm probably not gonna vote. The Republicans that have a chance of getting the nod are terrible, and Barack Hussein Obama II's views go against the libertarian principles this country was founded upon.

    Newsflash:
    The country was not founded on "libertarian" principles.
    If any of the Founders actually were alive to hear the 'principles' of the libertarians, they'd never stop choking with laughter.


    LOLWUT?

    The Founders were very much for liberty. Well, a good many of them, at any rate.

    Of course, this is relative to what a voter in the late 18th century United States was - liberty was for white (nominally) Christian males who owned a certain amount of land or other real property.

    Indentured servants, renters, females of any social strata, and slaves? Not so much so.

    But the groundwork for free society where government was reserved to the more local communities, then to the states, and lastly the federal government was certainly laid by the Founders in the Constitution and its first 10 Amendments (the Bill of Rights).

    Later improvements were to come as we matured and expanded the suffrage to all US citizens.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 6:13 PM GMT
    AlphaTrigger saidThe whole spectacle of this year's GOP offerings - save for Ron Paul - leaves me /facepalmed.

    It's as if they are actually trying too hard to lose.

    This may well be my first time ever voting for a democrat for POTUS.

    icon_neutral.gif





    You won't be the only one.

    I've had a couple of Repub friends say the same thing to me in the last couple of weeks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 6:30 PM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    AlphaTrigger saidThe Founders were very much for liberty. Well, a good many of them, at any rate..

    What is commonly known nowadays as "libertarianism" has absolutely nothing to do with liberty. What it has to do with is requiring the populace to subsidize police services to protect the private property of those who have a great deal of it.

    If libertarians had any integrity (I know, I know), they'd advocate for all persons of wealth and property to hire their own security services and stop reaching into my pocket to protect their mansions and yachts.


    As with many things, JP... there are extremes on either side of a matter.

    I consider myself to be a paleo-conservative with libertarian leanings.

    But this doesn't mean that I think we should become some sort of hyper-minarchist (or anarchist!) society that devolves into a Somalia-like mess of gangs and warlords controlling their fiefdoms.

    A federal union by necessity must have some powers that override those of states and cities if it is to be effective in the matters of governance for which the many states gave their consent to be governed therein.

    It is the matter of degree of how this governance is extended into domains not constitutionally assigned to the federal government that should be carefully, diligently watched by the people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 7:56 PM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    AlphaTrigger saidThe Founders were very much for liberty. Well, a good many of them, at any rate..

    What is commonly known nowadays as "libertarianism" has absolutely nothing to do with liberty. What it has to do with is requiring the populace to subsidize police services to protect the private property of those who have a great deal of it.

    If libertarians had any integrity (I know, I know), they'd advocate for all persons of wealth and property to hire their own security services and stop reaching into my pocket to protect their mansions and yachts.





    I think some libertarians have integrity.

    Their ideology just lacks consistency rationality and basic common sense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 17, 2012 10:31 PM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    RickRick91 said
    I think some libertarians have integrity.

    Their ideology just lacks consistency rationality and basic common sense.

    I'm not impugning anyone's personal integrity. I'm talking about doctrinal integrity, of which libertarianism has none.

    No libertarian has yet explained to me satisfactorily why taxes levied to pay for a social safety net (that he personally doesn't need) amounts to theft, but taxes levied to pay for police protection (which I may not need) is a basic function of government.

    Protect your own damned yachts. I would remove property protection and property crime from basic police function. They would only exist to keep order and to respond to physical crime.

    Sounds like Somalia? Well, let's be honest here....once you start picking and choosing, you reveal your 'principles' to be a cheap pretext for what really animates you---that you don't want to pay taxes and you don't give a shit about civil society.






    We actually agree.
    It's their ideology that has no integrity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 18, 2012 5:16 AM GMT
    Not disagreeing entirely.

    As I said before, there is a matter of degree - if a workable, sustainable model for a social safety net (thinking more along the lines of welfare/WIC/worker's comp/etc.) that comes at a slight cost to me as a taxpayer, then I've no problem "rendering unto Caesar".

    But at the point where it becomes ridden with fraud and more or less unaccountable to the taxpayers, then it needs to be checked and brought to a short account of itself.

    Constraints and bearing burdens for the sake of progress are necessary, but should be calculated and monitored closely to ensure that the price of the constraint is well worth the inconvenience and the degree of annoyance to the individual because of the constraint.

    To put it into context of JP's police example -

    Police are necessary because a very significant portion of the population are douchebags and generally rebellious people who fear neither the gods nor human authority.

    Private property is worth protecting (and a great many of the Elite in the US employ security services anyway) - but as members of the public, they have an obligation to contribute to the defense and security of public easements and spaces.

    However, the public should have the option to withhold their obligatory contribution (taxes) if the constituted government fails to uphold its end of the power and money exchanged.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 18, 2012 5:47 AM GMT
    Methinks life might be a tad easier if we all spent time with our hands in other guys' back pockets (and not with groping their wallets in mind). icon_wink.gif