Obama threw it away in Denver...There's grousing and blaming in the offing if this iffing is happening.
The Bush economy killed him...
It was the second-term vision thing...
Citizens United, the super PACs and the Koch Brothers did it...
He lost for a noble cause: national health care...
It all comes back to race...
What they'll never say: Mitt Romney was a fine candidate.
He was a fine candidate — and so was Ryan — even with the media spinning everything they could against him. And if R&R win, their victory will be spun as negatively as possible. Politico is giving you a peek of what they will be doing if you people don't get a clue and vote they way you're supposed to. We're going to pummel you with stories of your racism and Obama's martyrdom until you expiate your sins by voting for whomever the Democrats present for your obeisance in 2016. Look out... or rebel.
Posts
393 comments:
1 – 200 of 393 Newer› Newest»Ann,
I would be curious to hear your thoughts on the state of the media once this election has been wrapped up (regardless of outcome).
Old vs New, Objective vs Non... Etc...
I think the Romney people know exactly what will happen and they will be ready for it. I don't believe that they will be as passive as Dubya was with all of this.
Pfffft!
I tend to avoid conspiracy theories, but I have to wonder if the closeness of the publicly released polls is by design.
Race is too close to call at this point, so a loss by Obama would be attributed to Republican voter suppression efforts, a loss by Romney would be attributed to Democratic voter fraud.
Someone will be accused of stealing the election, no matter what happens.
Seems like you've pre-assembled some excuses of your own: "the media [were] spinning everything they could against him."
He was so very wonderful in 2008; there's no way so very many so very smart people could have been so very wrong. So there must be some other, very sinister reason.
Romney ran a reasonably good campaign in this age of hyper-scrutiny. That said, I believe he will be defeated and this will be the political end of him.
The media did a reasonably good job. I especially liked the fact checking. (I know there are those who think Obama was given a pass on Benghazi, but I put those people in the same tank with the 9-11 truthers and birthers.)
Brendan McManus
Alan markus,
"Race is too close to call at this point"
It's NEVER too close to call race!!
I actually think we'll have a different outcome if (and, in my opinion, when) Obama loses.
This is all silly. Of course Obama is going to win.
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!
Is it Wednesday yet?
At this point it's all about voter enthusiasm, or more specifically fear. Has Obama stoked up enough fear and hatred of Mitt Romney amongst his base so that they'll actually drag their demoralized asses to the voting booth? I don't believe so.
I would be curious to hear your thoughts on the state of the media once this election has been wrapped up
TUCKER CARLSON AND NEIL PATEL: Wave goodbye to the Obama media
I thought that covered it pretty well. I know that no matter what happens, to paraphrase Michael Moore & MoveOn.org, I'm ready to help "set the motherf***ing legacy media on fire". It's what Breitbart would want us to do.
I want to see the "Excuses"that the Romney camp will have if Mitty loses
Vicki from Pasadena
Ryan must've been a fine candidate, but the lefty media did their level best to keep him off the air. I don't recall the last time a VP candidate got less face time. Obviously contrasting him against Biden was political dynamite for the Dems, so they kept the fuse as wet as they could.
2000 - Al Gore
2004 - Kerry/Edwards
2008/12 - Obama/Biden
2016 - ?
One shudders to think of who they will come up (or rather, down) with next!
If Obama wins on Tuesday, it will be a much more historic win than his first win.
In his first win, he became the first black POTUS. But if he wins again, he will do so against a set of fundamentals (e.g. loss of independents, unemployment rate, gas prices, unfavorability numbers being under 50% for months before the election) that no other incumbent has survived. History will mark him as either one incredibly lucky feller or an incredible campaigner.
We're going to pummel you with stories of your racism and Obama's martyrdom until you expiate your sins by voting for whomever the Democrats present for your obeisance in 2016. Look out... or rebel.
The most accurate description of Democrats' intentions you've ever written. I hope my saying so doesn't cause you to recant.
God forbid it's a close Romney win with some big controversy somewhere. I wouldn't want to be a Korean grocer if that happens.
I don't recall the last time a VP candidate got less face time.
The Romney camp is keeping him out of sight, for obvious reasons.
Democracy may require some assembly.
Tools required: Screwdriver. Other mixed drinks are acceptable.
Remove President and Vice-President.
IMPORTANT! Shut off power.
Insert tab Romney into slot P.
Insert tab Ryan into slot VP.
Turn on power.
Limited use preferred.
After 4 years, consider replacing P and VP units, as they often fail.
Racism! (Because of course there's no conceivable reason to vote against someone many call a failed President, other than race. Obamacare's unpopularity, Benghazi, high long-term unemployment, high gas prices, extremely high black unemployment and youth unemployment, etc. would be downright beneficial to a white candidate. That's it.)
and
It's Bush's fault! (Because, if the economy had bounced back in early 2010, Obama and the Democrats generally would have been lauding Bush's great work in creating such a great foundation for recovery. Yeah.)
More people voted for the other guy.
That excuse works all the time.
That's great, Pogo.
First we can ignore any explanation that smacks of reflection or humility. Second, whatever explanation we settle on, we must tack racism onto the end (even if racism is the explanation we settle on, "bunch of racist racists!")
Here's mine: Americans aren't smart enough to understand or patient enough to withstand the hard choices and solid foundation building Obama did on our economy and foreign policy.
The real shame is that the next president will get all the credit when Obama's brilliant work comes to fruition. And racists.
Gee I wonder what excuse Rove and gang will come up with for coming up short. If I had to pick one candidate I would rather be right now, it would be Obama. Better slightly ahead than slightly behind. Of course with Republicans rigging the elections in Ohio and Florida would knows what could happen, regardless of polls.
Gee I wonder what excuse Rove and gang will come up with for coming up short. If I had to pick one candidate I would rather be right now, it would be Obama. Better slightly ahead than slightly behind. Of course with Republicans rigging the elections in Ohio and Florida would knows what could happen, regardless of polls.
God save us from a close election. Democrat outrage in 2000 didn't do them any good, but it sure hurt the nation. If, say, Romney loses the EC while winning the popular vote, let's hope he has the good sense to submit to the primacy of the constitution and admit defeat. Of course, if the opposite were to happen, we know Democrats will flog it for the next eight years, and damn the consequences.
Insert tab Romney into slot P.
Insert tab Ryan into slot VP.
Turn on power.
Limited use preferred.
After 4 years, consider replacing P and VP units, as they often fail.
The biggest problem, Pogo, is that people constantly forget to remove the previous drivers before installing the new hardware.
Oh, and is there anyone idiotic than Ryan? Sarah Palin was raked over the coals for saying the same things as Pauly and he is a self appointed Genius. But how does a diciple of Ayn Rand, an Arch Atheist, still yammer on about religion? Oh, that is right, lying and inconsistancy is not a roadblock when it comes to politics. He will lose tomorrow and Rove and his billionaire boys will be out a lot of cash. hehe
In 1994 when the Republicans won big Peter Jennings was so upset that he accused the voters of throwing a temper tantrum. This time they will be so angry they'll accuse us of being racist. Of course, all the liberal females in newsrooms all across the country will be crying and I mean literally, not figurative.
What they'll really never say (a.k.a. the truth): The Obama economy killed him...
Pew is D+6? CNN D+11?
Funny, I don't see "trillion dollar deficits" or "billions in crony capitalism to his supporters" on the list. I don't see "told us he world work with Republicans and reach across the aisle, but passed Obamacare without a single Republican vote," on the list, either. I don't see "watched while our men died valiantly in Benghazi, waiting for help that was never sent."
Seems like Politico has a bit of a blind spot there. They should be damn careful when they back their cars up.
It's Bush's fault!
I heard from one resident leftizen that not only did Bush hand off a big shit sandwich to Barry, but he also undid all of the good things that Clinton did.
Yea, you won't hear that the reason was Romney/Ryan was a good candidate, and you also won't hear that the real reason that matters is that Obama/Biden was a terrible decision four years ago. If not for that mistake, it wouldn't matter who was running this time.
But that's OK, we can keep it on the down low for ya.
IF Obama loses, I will be watching MSNBC on Wednesday morning. I'll file a report.
What they'll never say: Mitt Romney was a fine candidate.
No, what they'll never admit is that Obama is a lousy president (and a narcissistic asshole).
Obama is not going to lose.
All the hoopla and pre-celebration will be for naught. Chief Justice Roberts will declare Obama a tax, and that'll be that.
Pragmatist, you do realize that proofreading your comment before hitting "Publish" might make YOU look less like an idiot, right?
--I heard from one resident leftizen that not only did Bush hand off a big shit sandwich to Barry, but he also undid all of the good things that Clinton did.---
Barry wanted the challenge, asked for their trust.
If Obama wins, I'll turn off the TV and rake the leaves.
"I heard from one resident leftizen that not only did Bush hand off a big shit sandwich to Barry, but he also undid all of the good things that Clinton did."
I heard that Bush not only made a tear in the fabric of space-time, thus condemning the entire universe to eventual implosion, but also was the key factor behind the Twilight series of books and movies.
The Democrat's appeal is becoming more selective.
President Obama is going to lose because his policies are dramatically out of touch with the core values of the American voter.
His balkanization strategy isn't one of unity. It's one of division. He will be sent back to the dumpster from whence he came - Chicago...through Oahu though.
Seems premature.
Someone will be accused of stealing the election, no matter what happens.
...unless a 1980s-style Reagan blowout happens, and I think it will.
Of course with Republicans rigging the elections in Ohio and Florida would knows what could happen, regardless of polls.
See what I meant @ 10:43?
The excuses will be music to my ears.
Actually, I take that back. When President Obama loses tomorrow the reason will be because he didn't find the title as "enchanting" anymore.
Actually, there should be an All of the Above, plus people were unfair about:
Benghazi
Sandy
First Gay President
Ann Althouse said...
What they'll never say: Mitt Romney was a fine candidate.
He was a fine candidate — and so was Ryan
They do make your heart go pitty-pat just a little, don't they?
(it's OK, you're human...; hey, I'm the biggest sucker in the world for a pretty face)
bwebster said...
I actually think we'll have a different outcome if (and, in my opinion, when) Obama loses.
Excellent post to which he links, but I disagree Andy Cuomo is the winner.
Between screwing up Sandy and buying the votes for same sex marriage, he hasn't got a prayer.
Andy R. said...
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!
Hatman's going to be waiting a long time.
PS George Will thinks MN will go Romster because same sex marriage is going down.
I think we all will know why Romney loses, if that happens. What explains why its even close at this point? We can understand why Obama won in '08, in spite of his inexperience and lack of accomplishment.
Now there is no mystery, another four years is a very specific choice.
For Andy R.'s benefit, here is a collection of quotes from Iraqui Information Minister Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf aka "Baghdad Bob" that you can edit and use after the forthcoming Romney landslide. (It will be rich humor to watch you deny it ever happened.)
Insty just posted that Slate posted their editors' votes - 13% defected.
Obama threw it away in Denver...
The Bush economy killed him...
It was the second-term vision thing...
Citizens United, the super PACs and the Koch Brothers did it...
He lost for a noble cause: national health care...
It all comes back to race...
The one excuse they won't come up with is the majority in this country is tired of paying and paying and paying taxes for nothing that benefits them. it's the one thing the left doesn't get or want to understand.
Yes, much screeching about "racism" will ensue. Already happening.
FB correspondents are sending me electoral maps, showing the strength of Romney's support in the south, with the suggestion that this "proves" that Romney would like to resurrect the Confederacy, and probably supports the racist policies of the Confederacy.
It's been proven!
I'm watching MSNBC tomorrow night. It is going to be a meltdown of epic proportions! Chris Matthews will call everyone a racist and cry like that guy telling people to LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!! Maddow will agree but say really it is all about the Republicans stealing the election. Bob's head will just explode as he won't be able to process how anyone could vote for that LIAR!! Romney.
In the end, I really do think that this is the last election that the MSM will even be able to pretend to have power. Clearly their stranglehold has been broken and in 4 years the process will be even further down the road.
What they'll never say:
Obama blew the stimulus on government workers.
People didn't like having Obamacare shoved down their throats.
Constantly floating trial balloons for tax hikes was stupid.
Being anti-business is stupid.
Fun quote in the article: "Obama adviser David Axelrod has long pointed to George W. Bush’s policies to explain the bulk of Obama’s struggles"
True, in a sense. He and Obama have repeatedly pointed to the words "George W. Bush's policies," but not any of the actual policies that were so damn catastrophic.
You know what could have saved Barry? Maybe pointing to any of his own policies -- policies that he championed as senator -- that would have averted the crisis. Where are those?
I have the faintest of hopes that a big Obama loss might just inspire some Democrats to become introspective of the Snark Deathspiral their party has been in since Bush II got elected.
And immediately after the excuses they will switch to how Romney hasn't fixed things yet. You know, things that weren't really broken before. Except when Bush was president.
I could be wrong, but I believe Romney is going to win and in a very big way. And so I look "FORWARD!" to tasting the sweetness of liberal tears when he does.
MN has a voter ID law up as well. The ad was good. Grab a utility bill out of someone's box, go to the bank, withdraw that person's funds. What if MN banks were run like elections? LOLOLOL
I didn't vote for Obama last time, but I appreciated the romance of his election. It really was a sea change in electoral politics, and the night of his victory was a fine moment. It validated the processes of democracy and fulfilled the hopes of a lot of people......Well and good, but it's four stagnant years later. His reelection will not be the achievement of some ideal but the completion of a cynical bargain. I would greet news of his reelection with the same sinking feeling that I greeted that of Ray Nagin and Sharpe James.
Bitter tears or lamentations of their vaginas?
Obama wanted to fundamentally alter our very successful American way of life out of revenge for our defeating his noble Communist Murderers.
How could that not be noticed? How blind must we be to avoid being rude to our executioner?
IMO Benghazi became the last straw for the see no evil crowd.
"Andy R. said...
This is all silly. Of course Obama is going to win.
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!"
You should take it up with Politico, a major lefty website. Funny how they are having this discussion, but you won't see that on conservative websites.
Why do you suppose that is?
Dumping Churchill's bust gave it away as to what Obama was and is. He is a pure expression of resentment. He's UGLY. But not ugly enough for all those in terror that their acknowledgment of his ugliness would be even uglier, make THEM ugly. As usual if falls to the benighted to save the beautiful people from themselves.
Dark Eden said...
I have the faintest of hopes that a big Obama loss might just inspire some Democrats to become introspective of the Snark Deathspiral their party has been in since Bush II got elected.
Perhaps a few of them will but likely not. They'll just say that the American voters are a bunch of racist idiots for not reelecting "No Clothes" Obama.
What really did him in was, "I won".
If he'd made his bills bi-partisan, he'd have some cover and the bills might have actually been effective.
He thought he was still in Chi-Town, but he wasn't and the rules are very different.
The empty suit has no clothes.
There is an ad running here in California against Prop 32 (a proposition which would disallow automatic deductions from union paychecks for political donations) - it hits all the current Democratic boogeymen. "Karl Rove!" "Arizona!" (AZ is the new Texas I guess) "Koch Brothers!" "Dick Cheney!" "Big Oil!" and "Corporations!"
So.....lets see...the Dims bench depth ranges ALL THE WAY from Hillery on one end to Cuomo at the other? Helluva a depth-chart.. Yeah, that'll work..
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!
The better question is "what is the Republican narrative going to be when Romney wins". The answer for me is twofold, first I'll enjoy rubbing it in to the jackasses who have had nothing but insults for people honestly discussing matters for the last year. My next reaction will be "don't muck this up". This could be the best chance this century to demonstrate to an unaware public that free markets and sanity beat government control and hate speech.
Do what we hired you for Romney, get people into the budget and start cutting out those making 150k opine on whether our banks have enough black lesbian credit analysts. Get people in charge who understand that in hard times we can accept lower customer service threshholds. Promote people who say "can we afford this" instead of "of course we have to spend this $8 million on internet availability, I found three people in Nebraska who absolutely can't get this service any other way".
Cut spending and people will notice it has virtually no impact other than on the taxes required to pay for government.
I'm a big fan of Ayn Rand and I'm a believer.
So stick it up your ass prag. What a despicable little bitch you are.
I used to be an atheist, but man, ya gotta be around so many insufferable assholes.
The Dems' excuses are always the same, and none of them ever touching upon the wrongness of their ideology.
The Republicans stole the election by racist voter suppression and other nefarious means. This started becoming a favorite excuse ever since Florida 2000.
It was a problem of messaging. The Republicans were simply better at getting their message out -- largely by lying and corporations controlling everything -- while Dems simply were unable to get people to see the self-evident truth of their superior message due to the incompetence of certain individuals. I've heard this excuse ever since I became politically aware with the 1980 election -- they said it of Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Algore, Kerry, and their respective campaign staffs.
WLS news just statedwhere each of the candidates is and Barry's in Madison trying to protect Wisconsin.
LOLOLOLOL
The evil rethuglican mind rays who convince voters to vote against their own self-interest.
Alan Markus said:
"Race is too close to call at this point, so a loss by Obama would be attributed to Republican voter suppression efforts, a loss by Romney would be attributed to Democratic voter fraud."
Insty just had an article that pointed out that on Monday in 1980 the media was still saying "too close to call"
One day before Reagan took 44 states from the incumbent.
Don't forget who pays the bills at the media, the advertisers. If either side is running away with the race they will see less reason to spend money on ads and people will pay less attention to them. (Do you watch a football game that is 40-6?)
Ditto the other side will see running ads as futile.
They have to keep it close to keep up the revenue.
In a close election, Rasmussen et al can sell daily tracking polls. In a blowout, not so much.
Is there a conspiracy? I don't know. I do know that a lot of people benefit by the perception that it is close.
John Henry
@donald,
Do you ever wonder just how messed up someone has to be before one says something like "If you say you're influenced by a thinker, you've got to agree with EVERYTHING they say".
Because, of course, economics & theology just follow each other right along, right?
Why am I hearing the theme from the Twilight Zone playing in the background?
I know many of you people want Obama to lose, but why do you actually think he is going to lose?
You realize there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?
Precious Token is favored by something like 80% of the rest of the world. His is truly a charmed life. After January 20, he will travel the world hobnobbing with the rich and famous and being paid tens of millions of dollars a year to do what he would gladly do for free-trash America to the rest of the world. He is going to make the post-presidency Jimmy Carter look like Yankee Doodle Dandy in comparison....
"Yea, you won't hear that the reason was Romney/Ryan was a good candidate, "
Um.... Because he's not.
Against a sitting President with a lagging economy, a problematic signature legislative accomplishment in ObamaCare, and less than stellar foreign policy record, Romney should be doing sooooo much better. A good candidate would already have this election wrapped up. Should have it in the bag.
What can be said is that Romney was the best out of a wretched selection offered by the current GOP. This is a wretched election all around. Both major party candidates deserve to lose. Either way, it's the American people who are the losers here.
If it weren't for "Fall Back" time, we'd be one hour closer to knowing how this all turns out.
Geraldus Maximus said...
I'm watching MSNBC tomorrow night. It is going to be a meltdown of epic proportions! Chris Matthews will call everyone a racist and cry like that guy telling people to LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!! Maddow will agree but say really it is all about the Republicans stealing the election. Bob's head will just explode as he won't be able to process how anyone could vote for that LIAR!! Romney.
The best will be Ed Schultz.
Next best will be Beckel on Fox. For once, he may actually be speechless.
Larry J said...
Dark Eden said...
I have the faintest of hopes that a big Obama loss might just inspire some Democrats to become introspective of the Snark Deathspiral their party has been in since Bush II got elected.
Perhaps a few of them will but likely not. They'll just say that the American voters are a bunch of racist idiots for not reelecting "No Clothes" Obama.
11/5/12 11:25 AM
You know the old saying: the first time is bad luck, the second time is coincidence and the third time is enemy action. Until the dems get their butts kicked good and hard in three election cycles they ain't gonna get a clue that maybe they need to ditch the far left. But then again you can't cure stupid so who knows if they will ever get a reality check.
AndR if the election is such a slam dunk as you say it is then be smart and lay as many bets as you can on the outcome while you still can.
"You realize there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?"
But, but, but, what if tomorrow EVERYONE turns into an angry bitter insane right-wing nutjob? It's possible. And if so, you can blame Barry for it. With some left over for Biden, Reed and Pelosi.
"...there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?"
Erewhon?
"... the night of his victory was a fine moment. It validated the processes of democracy..."
While it did validated the processes of democracy, and clearly the power that wields, it did not make a great case for it as a method for choosing leaders, but like the old wisdom teaches, it's better than anything else we ever came up with. Unfortunately power without information or wisdom is a baby with loaded gun. Hopefully, the baby has grown a little in four years.
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!
If it happens that way, I'll say people are idiots personally.
I think it's a Romney year though. Just based on atmosphere.
"Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses?"
I'll say the voters are stupid but, hell, I already think that.
Andy R. said...
I know many of you people want Obama to lose, but why do you actually think he is going to lose?
You realize there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?
11/5/12 11:37 AM
You know AndyR, even the gays need jobs and there sre still more people unemployed today than when Zero took office. here is a clue: thats why he is known as Zero. As in Zero net jobs gain. You also do realize there is a whole country that doesn't want it's income redistributed to pay for other people's child support, birth control, cell phones and so on. Nothing bitter or insane about wanting to keep one's own money.
Andy,
This is why Barry is going to lose. Change happened, just not the kind those who voted for him wanted and expected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qlkk-mwJ5hc#!
Ann, if Obama loses tomorrow there will be two major responses from the media and the Left (oops, redundancy is redundant).
First will be the charges of how Romney exploited racist tendencies of the nation through a series of "code words". CNN will probably publish a list of those "code words" the top of which will be "47%".
Second, the Left will turn on Obama. It won't be immediate, but it will happen. It will likely first show up with the press actually reporting on Benghazi.
The reason they will turn on Obama is that they would rather do that than admit that their progressive agenda is at fault. Nobody, not Barack Obama, nor Bill Clinton, as worshiped as they are, can take precedence over the raw lust for statist control over the nation that is the true goal of the modern Leftist.
I am hoping for a Romney win, but I frankly have lost hope that this nation is rational and serious, and an irrational and unserious nation could very well vote again for this disastrous empty chair.
"As in Zero net jobs gain."
I didn't realize this until a couple of days ago. Incredible.
Well, we can derive what Andy R's excuse will be: The majority of the country are angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs,
The critics of FEMA response point to a failure to prestage water and generators at needed sites during the week's warning.
But the Media Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) is hard at work prestaging its narrative before Tuesday night's "unexpected" landslide.
"Andy R. said...
You realize there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?"
Of course. Some people are homesexuals who call everyone who doesn't agree with them "bigots" or "nutjobs." They are also "bottoms", meaning they like cock up their ass, and share that fact with strangers on the internet.
What's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses?
Actually, a good proportion of that narrative will mirror that of the Dems, that is to say, the establishment will blame the Tea Party and conservatives, especially social conservatives, and they will use that as an excuse to become more like the Dems. The seeds of this excuse have already been planted in the posts here.
Julie C said...
There is an ad running here in California against Prop 32 (a proposition which would disallow automatic deductions from union paychecks for political donations) - it hits all the current Democratic boogeymen. "Karl Rove!" "Arizona!" (AZ is the new Texas I guess) "Koch Brothers!" "Dick Cheney!" "Big Oil!" and "Corporations!"
11/5/12 11:28 AM
Does this proposition actually have a chance of winning in CA? If it does pass, this would be almost as momentous as a Romney win nationally. If this passes in CA then it can pass elsewhere and in the next election cycle especially if the TEA Party types stay jazzed up this proposition could be on the ballot in a number of states, including blue ones.
"Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses?"
No excuses. We ran a moderate who is competent. That should have been enough.
WHAT THEY WILL THINK, BUT NOT SAY ON RECORD, IF OBAMA WINS:
1. Thank God our liberal and progressive Jewish allies over in the media covered up Benghazi for us. It was great they decided to be on our side of the White House stonewall. They love us more than they hated Nixon.
2. Of course, the liberals and progressive Jews of the media have served us ably since 2007, acting as Democrat surrogates of the Black Messiah. Overlooking all other examples of laziness and incompetence and socialist ideology in the Messiah since 2007. Pity they lost any reputation of objectivity, pity we can't pay them! But we can hold parties where they are all invited to meet other celebs.
3. Stupid young single twats! Hahhaha! They actually bought our "war on women" message appealling to their hearts rather than their brains! Thank God for those Fundie idiots as well, especially the two running for Senate. For reinforcing the dumb twiffle's weak minds belief Republicans wanted to control their lady parts.
We are pleased and Harry Reid is absolutely dancing with delight!
4. God bless the government unions, for being smart enough to know they only way they keep their lavish pay, benefits, complete job security is with a Democrat Administration that gives them bucks borrowed from China.
5. Of course, who can forget, until the election is over, our slavishly loyal black Base??? Blind racial loyalty is a great thing..especially when black unemplyment has gone from 8% to 14.3% and the immigrants we want in as future Democrats are taking jobs blacks once did. 98% loyalty. They all deserve a pat ob the head.
"Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses?"
That the majority of people like government cheese? Too bad that path ends in ruin.
Andy R. said...
You realize there is a whole country of people out there that aren't angry bitter insane right-wing nutjobs, right?
The insanity of lecturing others on "tolerance" while vilifying them in this manner never seems to occur to our fair Andy!
The narrative from the Republican establishment will be the same whether Romney wins or loses. Either way social conservatives will lose.
Romney has very carefully run a campaign where he has not invoked social conservative issues. There are lots of PACs and some self-motivated attempts to mobilize religious voters, but Romney has not done that.
In much the same way that Obama has run to the left of the country's center so he can ignore them if he wins, Romney has done the same with the "Christian right".
So win or lose, the religious right will lose.
Now, as a rational conservative, I actually think that's a good thing. I don't like being associated with people who claim evolution is a fraud, or who claim that God sends hurricanes to punish the wicked.
But the reality is that even though this is the result, the real problem Republicans face remains the demographics of minority growth vs the decline of the white majority.
If Republicans can't start making inroads into the Hispanic population, a Mitt Romney victory could well be the Republican's last stand.
-- Romney should be doing sooooo much better. A good candidate would already have this election wrapped up. Should have it in the bag.--
We'll find out tomorrow, if the pollsters were wrong by 2-3%, Romney might have had it in the bag, it's just that the gatekeepers didn't want us to know.
"What's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses?"
I will only have one cause - stupidity due to: 1) lack of effort to inform ourselves, including overcoming our lame media, and 2) letting trivia overpower real issues.
Regardless, if Obama wins, I have work to do, and I'll just have to find a way to muster the enthusiasm and optimism that I really won't feel, and won't be justified. I'll find a way. He only gets 4 more long years, unless Benghazi or something else makes a better case than the 4 years of failure did.
Seeing as we're still seeing D+11 polls the week before the election, I think it is safe to say no one is really taking doing the polls serious.
If Obama looses, the left will be unconsolable on wednesday.
If Obama wins, the right will get up and go to work on wednesday.
But the truth is that Romney has not run a very good campaign. Given the state of the nation, Obama should be down by 20 points at least. However, time and again Romney has failed to drive a stake into Obama's heart, and he has often implicitly given Obama support.
A major mistake has been the common assertion by Romney that Obama is a nice guy, a good guy, but he simply isn't up to the job.
Along those lines, is another major mistake, and perhaps the number one reason for failure of Romney to have a commanding lead, is the failure to use as his number one argument -- "Obama made things worse."
Instead, Romney again gives support to Obama, repeatedly referring to the current economy as being in "recovery," even if he thinks he's criticizing Obama with "this is the weakest recovery ever" argument. This really is foolishness by Romney. Recovery is recovery. When people hear about "recovery," that is the only thing many people hear, and it actually boomerangs on Romney.
Of course, the entire Dukakis-esque strategy of "competence, not ideology" by Romney is also a major reason why this is as close as it is. Again, it implicitly gives approval to Obama's extreme leftist ideology rather than rightly showing them to be the cause of our teetering on bankruptcy.
The real reason if Obama loses tomorrow:
He throws like a girl.
OK, the real reason if Obama loses tomorrow:
He's a very poor leader and is bad at his job. Who besides the dead-enders and grievance group members would follow this guy anywhere he wants to lead?
Well, besides Joe Biden, who'd follow Other Barry into the 7-11 to see the store clerk from India.
Romney was a very good political candidate. One of the best I have seen. He was the most shameless political liar I have followed closely, with the possible exception of Bill Clinton. He seemed to function entirely without any core principles, a true salesman.
As Clinton recognized early in the cycle, no doubt from personal experience, that this is not a bad quality for a presidential candidate. Swing voters seem remarkably comfortable with politicians who lack any and all conviction.
For reasons known only to themselves, the Democrats love Clinton, I doubt Romney will ever get the same love. He seems to be reviled by the people within the party who know him personally or have dealt with him as a political rival.
Ryan was largely a non-factor in the election, possibly a slight negative. His relatively low profile was no doubt by design, since he is clearly a liability with the broad electorate.
How about all the above and much much more. All except the politics of low expectations being a missing link in that entire chain.
Blame Bush. That is all he did for the past four years. Why stop now?
Look, plain and simple: if the media was truly speaking truth to power and balanced as they should be, Obama would be way down, and it would not be close. I hate that they have such influence, but they do.
I know lots of smart people who know nothing of Benghazi, Fast and furious or the rest, and also know nothing positive about Romney. I talked to some last night about Romney and his life story and history of charity, and they were completely surprised. They had lots of stories about how "slimy" Romney is, but on all the positive stuff they kept saying: "Why haven't we heard about this?" Good question.
Well, AR, that's 1 interpretation.
"Ryan was largely a non-factor in the election, possibly a slight negative."
-- Putting WI into play is known as a "positive." Not only that, but choosing Ryan made the election a clear referendum on Obama's policies and showed that the Republican party was a party of ideas that were able to work with Democrats. Ryan was not a "master stroke" or some genius move, it was an excellent, obvious tactical move that a lot of people saw as a huge possibility because it gave the Romney campaign a strong message, shored up the fiscal conservatives who were hesitant about Romney's past history, and expanded the number of battleground states.
Ryan was a safe, solid pick.
Thanks, ARM. It's nice to know what stupid people are thinking.
Darrell said...
It's nice to know what stupid people are thinking.
I have yet to hear you say something, much less something smart.
Romney ran a pretty good campaign, particularly given the incessant hostility of the media.
Try to remember that the media has spent the last six months trying to manufacture a "gaffe" from every Romney statement.
And, the media has been carrying Obama's water in the "Romney's a corporate vampire" BS.
Another bonus of picking Ryan; yet again, Obama was constantly being compared to the -bottom- of the Republican ticket. Ryan bested Obama in the Affordable Care Act meeting; when Obama called Ryan out while thinking he wouldn't be there to respond, Ryan was able to call Obama out on his amateurish handling of it; etc.
Ryan was a good choice (and really, a fairly obvious choice.) If you want to see someone who has been a negative to his campaign, look at sticking with Joe Biden. Of course, the problem there is that the Democrats do not have a well-developed bench from which to pull.
He was never ahead in the first place. That was a façade erected by pollsters.
Cookie defecates this atrocity into our midst from the execrable rag, Counterpunch:
Politics in the Land of the Serfs and Wage-Slaves!
Fuck you, Cookie. This is the United States. Shove it up your ass. I'm a free man, and I sell my labor at a fair price.
You may be an incompetent, but I'm not.
Pre-assembling the excuses for Obama's defeat tomorrow.
Did they include Got hates Democrats?
The forecast is for rain through the day in Milwaukee. Part of the day in Madison.
All the speculation aside, we will find out tomorrow what the electorate thinks--It will be interesting. This tripe on the blog is of no relevance--On Wednesday morning, we will know.
"He was so very wonderful in 2008; there's no way so very many so very smart people could have been so very wrong. So there must be some other, very sinister reason."
Sure there is: he lied and his supporters were willing dupes.
Of course, the same is true of Mitt and his supporters.
Whichever candidate "wins" tomorrow, we the people lose.
As for polling: Some polling firms are still using D+11 samples the week before the election. This year's polls have been all kinds of wonky and weird. The general trend has been that Romney seems to be doing better and better with independents (winning them by 22% in one poll!), Romney's favorability continues to climb, and Obama's support is soft and among groups unlikely to vote.
In short: A pretty standard D- vs. R- turn out election.
"I'm a free man...."
Hahahahaha!
Whichever candidate "wins" tomorrow, we the people lose.
The "people" hate your commie bullshit, Cookie.
Another thing the Dems will never say:
"We misread 2008 as a gushing, wet-kiss endorsement of an ultra-progressive, socialist agenda.
2010 should've been more of a wake-up call for us, legislatively, but at that point we were either on a roll or in a rut; your choice."
"Romney was a very good political candidate. One of the best I have seen. He was the most shameless political liar I have followed closely, with the possible exception of Bill Clinton. He seemed to function entirely without any core principles, a true salesman."
Althouse, I think you've been proven wrong (w.r.t: "What they'll never say: Mitt Romney was a fine candidate")
Romney has run a very good campaign. How good will only be revealed tomorrow. His strategy has been to run to the center and to avoid giving the media any more material than possible to turn into "gaffes." This is why the media has had to run with "Binders of Women" as a "gaffe" to the everlasting amusement of intelligent people everywhere. Romney is depending on the sheer overwhelming evidence of Obama's incompetence to sway independent voters. By most polls I've seen, that strategy appears to have worked.
The other aspect of Romney's campaign is tactical, and that's where the election will be decided. Romney made some early critical tactical decisions about getting out the vote and diverting Obama's resources to areas Obama can't afford to defend.
Romney's team believes today (at least publicly) that their tactical approach has also been successful. They believe that they have matched the early vote effort by Democrats, but that they have done so by mobilizing less likely voters. Republicans tend to vote more on election day and Romney's team believes that Obama has focused so much effort on getting an early lead that he has cannibalized his election day turnout, which will mean even larger Republican gains in tomorrow's election day voting.
If Romney is right, he wins. If not, he loses.
Cookie, you are the dumbest fucking asshole in America.
You must have worked very hard at it.
Bender,
"But the truth is that Romney has not run a very good campaign"
Romney is signiifcantly limited by how the media will portrays his campaign tactics. Overall, he has done a very good job.
Shouting Tom, you're as free as they let you be...so how free can that be?
Shouting Tom, you're as free as they let you be...so how free can that be?
I've been able to do precisely what I've wanted to do my entire life, Cookie.
Evidently, you're too weak and stupid to accomplish that. That's on you. The commie bullshit is probably the reason.
Matthew Sablan said...
"Ryan was largely a non-factor in the election, possibly a slight negative."
-- Putting WI into play is known as a "positive."
Currently on RCP Wisconsin is +4.2% for Obama, it was +0.4% for Kerry and +0.2% for Gore. Those numbers don't make Ryan look like a positive to me, but maybe we are using different definitions of the term.
" Blogger Robert Cook said...
"He was so very wonderful in 2008; there's no way so very many so very smart people could have been so very wrong. So there must be some other, very sinister reason."
Sure there is: he lied and his supporters were willing dupes.
Of course, the same is true of Mitt and his supporters.
Whichever candidate "wins" tomorrow, we the people lose."
---------------------
What's with the 'we'? You got a mouse in your pocket?
I have yet to hear you say something, much less something smart.
You don't know how the internet works, do you? You have to read comments, not listen to them--unless you use software. Even then, that was a response that proved my point. Thanks! You can switch names now, like Lefties commenters seem to think is clever. That'll fix my wagon.
"Currently on RCP Wisconsin is +4.2% for Obama, it was +0.4% for Kerry and +0.2% for Gore."
Those last two are actual results, right?
Anna, LOL!
The RCP poll is an average of polls; the polls have been all over the place and infested with bad methodology that I see no reason to believe them without someone taking the time to go through and verify each poll.
All you have to do, though, to know that WI is in play is to see the fact that Obama is acting like it is in play.
Original Mike said...
"Currently on RCP Wisconsin is +4.2% for Obama, it was +0.4% for Kerry and +0.2% for Gore."
Those last two are actual results, right?
I assume so.
The "we" shit Cookie the Commie keeps spouting is the common "false consciousness" BS of the Marxists.
We don't really know what we want because we haven't been properly indoctrinated.
Cookie is a Marxist Jesus, who alone sees the light. He understands what we all really need and want, even though we appear to hate it.
I thought the NYT/Quinnipac poll had Romney up in WI?
iF he loses it will be beause he didn't pivot to the center, like Clinton did. And so had nothing to offer when the economy continued to flounder.
OH, and he was never that good a politician to begin with.
Romney is signiifcantly limited by how the media will portrays his campaign tactics.
I gave specific examples of what Romney has expressly said and what he has not said, but should have. These major errors are his own, they are not the creation of our hyper-partisan MSM.
But address those specifics directly:
How is calling Obama a nice guy and the economy being in recovery -- combined with a ho-hum, lukewarm campaign that has failed to argue any need for urgency (don't need to set our hair on fire) despite the country being in the craphole -- a good campaign strategy?
The Romney Campaign is being told over and over, "You Didn't build that..."
OK, who built it then?
How about, "Romney had an accident."
In my opinion, Romney has done absolutely as well as he possibly could have the last few months. I've been watching him since his first Senate race loss to Fat Teddy years ago. Mitt sucked then. He's light-years beyond that now. He surprised me with his new-found stump skills. To wit, when he first chose Ryan, some people questioned who should be at the top of the ticket. Now, that is never discussed. Mitt's pissed out his territory as top dog.
I'd say the reason it's close isn't that he's run a bad campaign. I don't think he should be clobbering Barry because regardless of Barry's performance, there are at least 50 million people who voted for Barry and have a huge personal investment in his success rather than admit they misread him. There are enough of those rubes who'd rather roll the dice with Barry the next four years rather than get the country back on track now. They're still holding out hope to be proven right.
Matthew Sablan said...
All you have to do, though, to know that WI is in play is to see the fact that Obama is acting like it is in play.
WI is unquestionably a swing state, but that has been true for quite a while. It has nothing to do with Ryan.
Well, it is true. Obama was doing poorly and WI may have been in play (much like recently PA has somehow gone back to being in play), but no one could have known Benghazi and Denver would happen to utterly knock Obama's campaign down and prop Romney's campaign up. Choosing Ryan when he did moved WI from simply being something that Obama might have to deal with later to forcing Obama to early (and often) assign resources to. The fact Obama screwed up on two critical, high-profile issues (Libya and the first debate) later on ended up mitigating the value of a strong VP pick, but Ryan was still a strong pick. It is just less important now that Obama's competence is seriously in question.
"I assume so."
Uh-huh.
iF he loses it will be beause he didn't pivot to the center, like Clinton did. And so had nothing to offer when the economy continued to flounder.
OH, and he was never that good a politician to begin with.
Can Althouse, or anyone else say with a straight face that racism no longer exists in America? Of course some people will not vote for him because he is black.
Althouse writes with the naïveté of being a part of the white majority.
"More people voted for the other guy.
"That excuse works all the time."
Not really. In 2000, more people cumulatively voted for Gore than Bush, even assuming for argument's sake that Bush really did have more votes in Florida than Gore.
I'm not much into the "this is the most important election since..." rhetoric... but...
There is an essential difference between the two candidates that is quite interesting. I'm waiting with some excitement to see what the voters choose.
On one side, Obama, who is focused just about entirely on issues of "fairness."
On the other side, Romney, who is focused mostly on "what works."
In discussions with people on both sides, I've found this to be the crucial issue. "What works," in my opinion is not always that which is "fair." And, what is "fair" is not always "what works."
The "fairness" meme has dominated politics in the U.S. for decades, often to the detriment of pragmatism. The collapse from the boom has reintroduced issues of cost that we had thought no longer mattered.
I'm interested in seeing how this issue is resolved.
Bloomberg's screwed up handling of Sandy may have hurt Obama more if NJ/NY weren't complete and utter blue locks. But you bet some folks in VA and PA are looking at Staten Island and wondering. So, Obama might be lucky that the election is happening tomorrow, and not next week once we have pictures of people freezing to death while Bloomberg leaves generators at a marathon that never happened.
Currently on RCP Wisconsin is +4.2% for Obama
so much for that Paul Ryan pick.
"iF he loses it will be beause he didn't pivot to the center, like Clinton did. And so had nothing to offer when the economy continued to flounder."
So, if Obama loses you think it's because he didn't move left?
"Can Althouse, or anyone else say with a straight face that racism no longer exists in America? Of course some people will not vote for him because he is black."
-- Unless you think that the majority of those racists were Obama supporters who voted for him in 2008, it doesn't matter how the % of racists vote. Their votes were never up for grabs, and Obama clearly won despite them. Unless you think Obama has somehow heralded in a New Racist Age, this is nonsensical. Racism will have no truly measurable impact on this election.
"so much for that Paul Ryan pick."
-- Civility! New Tone!
"Can Althouse, or anyone else say with a straight face that racism no longer exists in America?Of course some people will not vote for him because he is black.
Althouse writes with the naïveté of being a part of the white majority."
Even more people, black and white, will vote for him solely because he is black.
So, yeah, there is racism in America.
Rachel Maddow has been looking back to the 2008 McCain Palin... looking for tell tale signs that the Romney camp is facing defeat...
Instead of events closer in time.
Like an inconvenient 2010
btw.. I went to the CNN 2010 Election Results and they seem to have scrub it... I say seem because I hadn't gone to check their 2010 Election results until today... and even if I did, I dont remember.
But maybe this is what they published that night.
Here's one argument that might get made. Obama just wasn't hateful enough or he was lazy or something.
If Romney wins, I don't want to hear any excuses out of you whiney Obama supporters!
If Obama wins, it was the media's fault!
To continue with my screed...
In some way, Obama's political philosophy is that the Civil Rights era that began in the 60s is a sort of eternal quest, and that nothing can be done to improve our lot until all issues of fairness are perfectly resolved.
On the other side, Romney's political philosophy is starkly pragmatic, with a certain acceptance that the world can't be entirely fair and we should make the best of things anyway.
"I've been able to do precisely what I've wanted to do my entire life, Cookie."
So have I, but I know that's because I haven't done anything to rouse the enmity of the state. I don't make the mistake of thinking I'm any freer than they allow me to be.
This may be"freer" in an overt sense than is allowed in many other countries, but it is less free than we believe.
Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?
"Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?"
-- Why do you ask questions that have no relationship to the discussion we're having?
Squirrel!!
Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?
Can anyone say with a straight face that murder no longer occurs?
Or that adultery lives in the hearts of men?
Or that lying and cheating and stealing have not been eradicated from the face of the earth?
Currently on RCP Wisconsin is +4.2% for Obama
Obama only came here today for fresh cheese curds, I suppose.
Today NPR is running a segment on what people in other countries think of the US election. Apparently people in Europe are much better informed about US politics than Americans. The proof, of course, is they favor Obama by something like 90/10.
"Obama only came here today for fresh cheese curds, I suppose."
-- Good enough reason as any.
This is your discussion? I thought is was open to anyone...
I was responding to Althouse's original post, which was ridiculousness.
Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?
You should start your search by looking in the mirror.
It's looking more and more like the Navy will stay afloat, Israel will survive, energy independence will begin and Fascism will retreat in the USA.
Why can't the media find something good in all of that?
Robert Cook said...
Stirring words and true....
For you and your fellow commiecrats? To be sure. I'm sure you wiped a few crocodile tears from your eyes. Bravo on the maudlin.
The point is that your question has no logical bearing on thinking that racism will have no impact on the election. Instead, you hope to conflate the fact there are some white racists with the fact that Obama will lose because of white racists. That's simply not rational; the votes for whites split in such a way (and across such ideological grounds) that the candidate's race is a minimal to non-factor in the race. It doesn't matter how many racists there are; Obama won in 2008, so clearly, unless you feel Obama has fostered a New Racist Age, racism will not hurt his chances.
So, that's the point. Your question is built on a bunch of awkward, faulty assumptions that makes answering it the equivalent of treating your straw man like a real person, which I see no reason to do.
AReasonableMan said...
Romney was a very good political candidate. One of the best I have seen. He was the most shameless political liar I have followed closely, with the possible exception of Bill Clinton. He seemed to function entirely without any core principles, a true salesman.
==================
Look at all the lies and deceits of Obama before slinging mud at Romney.
1. A uniter not a divider?
2. Purple America?
3. Close down Gitmo and end "illegal extrajudicial assassinations"?
4. Will cut the deficit and unemployment in half?
5. 5 million "exciting and well-paying" Green Jobs?
6. Will reach across the isle to work with all foes on common issues... and run the most transparent Administration in history.??
Even Obama's core values are suspect.
The true core values of the man, of course are pointed out, buy heatedly denied by Obamites and Obama himself. Socialist? Redistributionist? Loves blacks, hispanics - but only those that graduate from Yale or Harvard Law? Cares about "due process for terror suspects"?
Nah...no core values there.
Just a gum-flapping BS artist with a knack for reading off a TelePrompter.
Romney is willing to lie and flip flop across the finish line and this may give him just another cheating boost in Ohio:Fitrakis and his attorney Cliff Arnebeck are filing a lawsuit for an immediate injunction against Husted and ES&S to "halt the use of secretly installed, unauthorized 'experimental' software in 39 counties' tabulators".
reasonable: "Ryan was largely a non-factor in the election, possibly a slight negative."
LOL
Romney's selection of Ryan was the point at which conservatives looked up for the first time and truly believed Romney was going to fight this battle on terms conservatives have wanted for years.
Ryan's pick completely solidified the base of the Republican party, brought back in disaffected conservatives and improved Republican standing in the catholic midwest communities.
Other than that of course, he didn't do very much for the ticket....
LOL
Thanks for your "insight" "reasonable"....
Also, what's the Republican narrative going to be when Romney loses? I can't wait!
Probably something along the lines of watching out for flexibility and the Russians.
"Obama only came here today for fresh cheese curds, I suppose."
If Obama limited himself to states that he both needed to win and didn't have a solid lead in, he would have nowhere to go.
Glad to hear it, too many swing states voters who want to vote for Romney and keep coming up Barry.
I liked the 1 explanation, Barry's space was bigger.
Why is Barry's space bigger?
If Romney loses, the narrative is pretty simple: The voters picked the incumbent. Romney did not make his case persuasively enough. Done.
The reason for not picking the new guy is often simpler than why you tossed the old guy.
r/v: "Romney is willing to lie and flip flop across the finish line..."
LOL
So tell me, is today a day where obama has "created millions of jobs", or is today a day where the "president really doesn't have much control over the unemployment rate"?
You lefties change your memes as often as sandra fluke changes her underwear...
Romney is willing to lie and flip flop across the finish line...
R/V, you really will never understand.
Fixed opinions on issues are very important to you, because you are a leftist and that is the essential core of being a leftist.
Romney is a pragmatist and businessman. As such, fixed opinions about things just aren't that important to him. Competently managing the situation as it evolves in front of him is the method of the pragmatist and businessman.
"Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?"
Wow! That straw man is big enough to eat Kansas.
Of course some people will not vote for him because he is black.
So? Plenty of others have and will vote for him only because he is black.
r/v: "..this may give him just another cheating boost in Ohio:Fitrakis and his attorney Cliff Arnebeck are filing a lawsuit for an immediate injunction against Husted and ES&S to "halt the use of secretly installed, unauthorized 'experimental' software in 39 counties' tabulators".
LOL
Can someone tell me when we are going to have an investigation as to why the voting machines that were stored in harry reid's sons warehouse keep showing an obama selection when the voter tries to vote for Romney?
"Can anyone say with a straight face, that there is not one white person in America who is racist?"
Well, we certainly know that Robert Byrd was a Grand Kleagle kind of a racist in an area where blacks were killed.
But that never bothered the left.
At all.
In the slightest.
The prediction is rain showers in Chicago on election day.
Obama won, so therefore racism is no longer a factor? I am sorry, but that makes no sense. Obama won because there were not enough racists out there to cost him the election. But there are still racist out there.
Just look at the current national electoral map. Does it look familiar? It is the same map in your history book, how the nation was divided during the Civil War, the Confederate States are voting for Romney. And that is not a coincidence.
Latest "white racist" democrat to refuse to support obama's relection: Douglas Wilder, first black elected Governor in American history:
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/nov/04/wilder-chooses-not-endorse-president-ar-2335331/
Maybe Wilder is a "white" black, you know, in the same way that Zimmerman is a "white" hispanic.
Seeing Red: "The prediction is rain showers in Chicago on election day."
My election day prediction?......
.......pain...........
Post a Comment