FARK.com: (7090316) NYT debuts their new interactive electoral map, complete with paths to victory for both candidates. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, most of his paths are akin to Indiana Jones on the rope bridge in "Temple of Doom"

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		NYT debuts their new interactive electoral map, complete with paths to victory for both candidates. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, most of his paths are akin to Indiana Jones on the rope bridge in "Temple of Doom" (elections.nytimes.com)		194
		More: Interesting, Mitt Romney, NYT, Walter Mondale, Senate race, South Florida metropolitan area, John McCain, swing states, Rocky Mountain West

• • •

4412 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 May 2012 at 4:38 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7090316

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

194 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

ecmoRandomNumbers		2012-05-06 06:09:15 PM

Nadie_AZ: Mrtraveler01: That and Maricopa County is populated by idiots

Blue hairs and mormons.

I honestly think it is a pack mentality at this point. Our state just rammed through a sh*t ton of conservative crap through the legislative anus and Brewer put her wand to many of them. As redistricting is coming, I think this will change. Already some of the tea baggers aren't running for re-election.

Arizona voted Clinton. It could vote Obama. We just need our Governor to provide a massive fail as only she can. Her shutting off funding to PP is, I hope, a huge blast in that direction.

Arizona votes Republican. That's been the trend since Reagan, but we did vote for Clinton, probably because of convenience. Nobody wanted to rock the boat in a decent economy. The 90s were awesome here.

80 Reagan
84 Reagan
88 Bush
92 Bush
96 Clinton
00 Bush
04 Bush
08 McCain
12 Obama?

Obama could very well win, but it'll be a squeaker. Don't underestimate the power of the Native Americans in the North and East of the state. They didn't turn out in the 2010 elections and Paul Gosar (T-tard, Flagstaff) took the 1st Congressional District. Now they have 2 reasons to come out and vote -- to vote against the Mormon, and to take their district back. The new district lines mean that the Hopis will be voting in the 1st district with the Navajos and Apaches, and not in the squiggly, comically gerrymandered 2nd district. And most job growth in the rural parts of the state have been because of federal projects, and not Arizona's idiotic budget cuts.

Mrtraveler01		2012-05-06 06:10:29 PM

dehehn: [i935.photobucket.com image 600x328]

Wait... Can that happen?

Yep. And if that's the case the House gets to choose which essentially means Romney would win.

eddiesocket		2012-05-06 06:10:32 PM

dehehn: [i935.photobucket.com image 600x328]

Wait... Can that happen?

Yup. And then we could have President Romney (voted in by the House) and Vice-President Biden (voted in by the Senate). It would make the debacle of 2000 look like nothing.

DamnYankees		2012-05-06 06:11:28 PM

dehehn: [i935.photobucket.com image 600x328]

Wait... Can that happen?

Yes - when/if that happens, or we have another situation where the popular vote winner loses the electoral college, expect some bad shiat to go down. Our system has serious, serious flaws in it, time bombs just waiting to go off.

Sabyen91		2012-05-06 06:14:22 PM

Ken VeryBigLiar: Sabyen91: Joliet_Jake: Iowa as a toss-up is really laughable. There hasn't been a poll there since February, which is why it's even on the brink of toss-up status.

I am not sure how Wisconsin is a toss-up either. Most polls show a double digit or close to it lead for Obama.

Only on the assumption that Walker wins and the Democrats have to start doing damage control because the national Democrats are scared the message will become "They wasted X millions on these frivolous recalls- why elect their leader?". It's a feeble narrative but easy to buy into unless you're here.

/By the way, anyone see this? Link
//Someone else submitted it but it didn't get picked up
///At this point we're getting close to "The Daily Scott Walker Thread"

I wish I could say I am surprised.

"In the age of the DNR/Wisconsin Governor being pro-business, why is the DNR giving Herr 5 citations and why can't 2 or 3 be taken away as a show of good faith?" Joel Kleefisch asked, according to Bolha's notes of the meeting.

/farking doucnebags.

dehehn		2012-05-06 06:19:39 PM

eddiesocket: dehehn: [i935.photobucket.com image 600x328]

Wait... Can that happen?

Yup. And then we could have President Romney (voted in by the House) and Vice-President Biden (voted in by the Senate). It would make the debacle of 2000 look like nothing.

That would actually be kind of awesome. Though Biden would have no power. But having a Democrat in major cabinet meetings would be very interesting.

Wyalt Derp		2012-05-06 06:19:42 PM

kukukupo: It really doesn't matter. Obama and Romney are basically the exact same candidate.

"Both Sides Are The Same So You Might As Well Not Bother Voting" is the new "Both Sides Are Bad So Vote Republican".

balloot		2012-05-06 06:20:10 PM

ejecteject: balloot: ejecteject: cameroncrazy1984: ejecteject: 4 years of Obama, have killed more jobs than Reagan created in 8 years

Um. No they haven't.

I made notes for the slow dem's

[i1156.photobucket.com image 640x437]

Ah yes...now that the Unemployment rate is inconveniently going down every month, let's find some measurement, no matter how obscure, that looks bad. Never mind that never once before Obama have I ever heard of "participation rate", now it is the only thing that matters!

good question.. How do we know labor participation hasn't dropped off significantly because of baby boomer retirements?

Well... Facts help

The available data goes back to 1948. No other President has had a significant and consistent drop like Obama. Kennedy had a drop. Even Carter had a gain.

-------------------------

Yes, those are facts. It's just that participation rate doesn't matter at all and is never used by anyone as a measure of economic progress. The biggest factor in participation rate changes are birth rates from decades ago. Yes, Obama has totally failed at creating a time machine, going back to the 40's, and committing mass baby genocide. Thus, there are a lot of baby boomers and they are retiring now that they are old. This is a totally idiotic metric to use when judging the economy, which is why nobody has ever used it before Republicans starting 6 months ago.

kmmontandon		2012-05-06 06:22:13 PM

ejecteject:

good question.. How do we know labor participation hasn't dropped off significantly because of baby boomer retirements?

Well... Facts help

The available data goes back to 1948. No other President has had a significant and consistent drop like Obama. Kennedy had a drop. Even Carter had a gain.

It ... but ... the boomer retirement wave is happening now, because now is when they're retiring. They weren't retiring when Carter was President, they were in college. They weren't retiring when Kennedy was President, they were in diapers.

Your comparison, like all your posts, makes no sense.

Hobodeluxe		2012-05-06 06:22:36 PM

ejecteject: cameroncrazy1984: ejecteject: 4 years of Obama, have killed more jobs than Reagan created in 8 years

Um. No they haven't.

I made notes for the slow dem's

[i1156.photobucket.com image 640x437]

so Obama was responsible for 2008 too? Man that guy is good. And there's absolutely no residual effects from the 8 years of Bush either? That's simply amazing.

cameroncrazy1984		2012-05-06 06:22:52 PM

ejecteject: The Labor Force Participation Rate shows what percentage of people are working, looking for a job and not looking for a job

No it isn't

The labor force participation rate is the ratio between the labor force and the overall size of their cohort (national population of the same age range

DamnYankees		2012-05-06 06:23:01 PM

dehehn: eddiesocket: dehehn: [i935.photobucket.com image 600x328]

Wait... Can that happen?

Yup. And then we could have President Romney (voted in by the House) and Vice-President Biden (voted in by the Senate). It would make the debacle of 2000 look like nothing.

That would actually be kind of awesome. Though Biden would have no power. But having a Democrat in major cabinet meetings would be very interesting.

The Vice President is not a member of the cabinet.

Hobodeluxe		2012-05-06 06:26:00 PM

cameroncrazy1984		2012-05-06 06:27:15 PM

ejecteject: you do know that Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama?????

BEST PART....FOREVER?????????

TFerWannaBe		2012-05-06 06:27:43 PM

kmmontandon: ejecteject:

good question.. How do we know labor participation hasn't dropped off significantly because of baby boomer retirements?

Well... Facts help

The available data goes back to 1948. No other President has had a significant and consistent drop like Obama. Kennedy had a drop. Even Carter had a gain.

It ... but ... the boomer retirement wave is happening now, because now is when they're retiring. They weren't retiring when Carter was President, they were in college. They weren't retiring when Kennedy was President, they were in diapers.

Your comparison, like all your posts, makes no sense.

That all those people are hitting retirement age during Obama's regime is just proof of his conspiracy to make the jobs numbers look good so he can get reelected.

Hobodeluxe		2012-05-06 06:28:30 PM

Obama is winning the jobs war despite the GOP killing over a half million public sector jobs with their "austerity measures"

thinkprogress.org

Dusk-You-n-Me		2012-05-06 06:29:29 PM

Polls show Obama leading everyone of those "toss up" states. But yeah, sure. It's going to be a close election.

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor		2012-05-06 06:31:15 PM

How great would it be if this election ended up in the House? The hysteria would be tremendously entertaining.

Lunchlady		2012-05-06 06:33:24 PM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: How great would it be if this election ended up in the House? The hysteria would be tremendously entertaining.

Well it would guarantee the Democrats would take the house in 2014 anyway.

ArcadianRefugee		2012-05-06 06:33:25 PM

ejecteject: you do know that Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama?????

Oh, you disingenuous farkbag:

"a 70% increase from 2007."
"the number of people receiving the benefits, commonly known as food stamps, would continue growing until 2014."

Unless Obama is working that time machine overtime, stfu.

LazarusLong42		2012-05-06 06:34:03 PM

cameroncrazy1984: eddiesocket: DamnYankees: So every single 'toss up' state is one that Obama won last time around, some winning handily. PA is a tossup? Really? Come up now.

realclearpolitics has a far more accurate map with polling numbers to back it up. NYT is trolling for page views. The media loves a close contest.

RCP cherry picks its polls. NYT uses that idiot over at 538. He's not real reliable, is he.

Except these charts aren't from Nate Silver. He doesn't even have charts up on 538 yet. This chart is from someone else at NYT.

Also, yes RCP does cherry-pick. They're best known for leaning slightly Republican last time around, and ever since. Them having Obama up substantially is like reading a Rasmussen poll that has Romney up by 2%.

RyogaM		2012-05-06 06:34:20 PM

ejecteject: you do know that Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama?????

That's not true. You are either lying or ignorant or trolling. Or all three.

eddiesocket		2012-05-06 06:34:39 PM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: How great would it be if this election ended up in the House? The hysteria would be tremendously entertaining.

Would there be hysteria? I think the GOP would quite calmly vote in Romney.

ArcadianRefugee		2012-05-06 06:35:19 PM

Smelly McUgly		2012-05-06 06:36:12 PM

RevCarter: I'm pretty surprised that they consider VA and PA as tossups.

PA won't be close - Obama's winning it.

I figured that VA and NC will be legit toss-ups into the near future, or at least until the relocating Northeasterners can reshape the electorate enough to turn them into light-blue states in a decade or two.

TFerWannaBe		2012-05-06 06:36:47 PM

RyogaM: ejecteject: you do know that Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama?????

That's not true. You are either lying or ignorant or trolling. Or all three.

I'm starting to believe he's a parody.

balloot		2012-05-06 06:38:07 PM

Hobodeluxe: Obama is winning the jobs war despite the GOP killing over a half million public sector jobs with their "austerity measures"

[thinkprogress.org image 500x373]

Yeah that's the unreported story here. Obama is the first president EVER to have a decrease in government jobs under his tenure. He's been tasked with adding jobs while Republicans constantly undermine him by getting rid of hundreds of thousands of government employees.

link

El Pachuco		2012-05-06 06:39:06 PM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor		2012-05-06 06:39:08 PM

eddiesocket: Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: How great would it be if this election ended up in the House? The hysteria would be tremendously entertaining.

Would there be hysteria? I think the GOP would quite calmly vote in Romney.

The implication was not simply whether the House GOP would vote for Romney. The entertainment would arise from the innumerable court proceedings, protests and anguish.

RobertBruce		2012-05-06 06:40:26 PM

Guidette Frankentits: [i1097.photobucket.com image 546x347]

RyogaM		2012-05-06 06:41:02 PM

TFerWannaBe: RyogaM: ejecteject:
I'm starting to believe he's a parody.

Yeah, yeah, I think you're right. I dun been trolled.

dennysgod		2012-05-06 06:41:31 PM

ejecteject: cameroncrazy1984: ejecteject: 4 years of Obama, have killed more jobs than Reagan created in 8 years

Um. No they haven't.

I made notes for the slow dem's

[i1156.photobucket.com image 640x437]

How about instead of notes you supply something more useful like citations on where this graph came from and how the data was collected.

Azlefty		2012-05-06 06:42:43 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: Obama could very well win, but it'll be a squeaker. Don't underestimate the power of the Native Americans in the North and East of the state. They didn't turn out in the 2010 elections and Paul Gosar (T-tard, Flagstaff) took the 1st Congressional District. Now they have 2 reasons to come out and vote -- to vote against the Mormon, and to take their district back. The new district lines mean that the Hopis will be voting in the 1st district with the Navajos and Apaches, and not in the squiggly, comically gerrymandered 2nd district. And most job growth in the rural parts of the state have been because of federal projects, and not Arizona's idiotic budget cuts.

I don't think you are taking into consideration of recent events in AZ that will give Obama some Maneuvering Room. First you do have a changing demographic, thanks to intel and some others moving into the state AZ is getting Young educated people who tend to be more moderate than Brewer the Hun. Additionally AZ GOP has taken some big hits recently with Pearce getting tossed, their idiotic attacks on the IRC, Thomas and his minions getting disbarred and Babeu being drug out of the closet by his Hispanic boyfriend that is here under questionable circumstances, also don't forget that Romney is Anti-gun.. Coupled with the the lack of enthusiasm for Romney by the GOP voter and Obama does not have a half bad chance to take AZ. Then there is the added Bonus of JT Ready and his atrocities while linked to prominent Republicans in the State. They are even sounding desperate on Sonorian Alliance with several predicting an Obama win due to "Voter Fraud."

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor		2012-05-06 06:44:12 PM

Azlefty: ecmoRandomNumbers: Obama could very well win, but it'll be a squeaker. Don't underestimate the power of the Native Americans in the North and East of the state. They didn't turn out in the 2010 elections and Paul Gosar (T-tard, Flagstaff) took the 1st Congressional District. Now they have 2 reasons to come out and vote -- to vote against the Mormon, and to take their district back. The new district lines mean that the Hopis will be voting in the 1st district with the Navajos and Apaches, and not in the squiggly, comically gerrymandered 2nd district. And most job growth in the rural parts of the state have been because of federal projects, and not Arizona's idiotic budget cuts.

I don't think you are taking into consideration of recent events in AZ that will give Obama some Maneuvering Room. First you do have a changing demographic, thanks to intel and some others moving into the state AZ is getting Young educated people who tend to be more moderate than Brewer the Hun. Additionally AZ GOP has taken some big hits recently with Pearce getting tossed, their idiotic attacks on the IRC, Thomas and his minions getting disbarred and Babeu being drug out of the closet by his Hispanic boyfriend that is here under questionable circumstances, also don't forget that Romney is Anti-gun.. Coupled with the the lack of enthusiasm for Romney by the GOP voter and Obama does not have a half bad chance to take AZ. Then there is the added Bonus of JT Ready and his atrocities while linked to prominent Republicans in the State. They are even sounding desperate on Sonorian Alliance with several predicting an Obama win due to "Voter Fraud."

Your cunning plan has one flaw: Mesa. So. Many. Mormons.

Smelly McUgly		2012-05-06 06:46:40 PM

The thing about AZ is that I'm sure the Republicans in Maricopa County are hard at work figuring out how to disenfranchise Hispanic and American Indian voters. If someone could just sort of get rid of all the voters from Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Peoria, Sun City, and all the outlying areas in the West Valley like Goodyear, Surprise, etc., and GOTV for the minorities, MAYBE Obama could take the state.

Unfortunately, AZ isn't even a purple state...yet. The great old person die-off set to happen in a decade or two might get it there, but I don't see it here in 2012.

kmmontandon		2012-05-06 06:47:11 PM

ejecteject:
Actually in 2011 they started to turn 65

That does not explain the first 2 years of constant dropping numbers under Obama

According to your own chart, the current trend started in 2007.

Idiot.

Hobodeluxe		2012-05-06 06:47:12 PM

ejecteject: El Pachuco: ejecteject: balloot: ejecteject: cameroncrazy1984: ejecteject: 4 years of Obama, have killed more jobs than Reagan created in 8 years

Um. No they haven't.

I made notes for the slow dem's

[i1156.photobucket.com image 640x437]

Ah yes...now that the Unemployment rate is inconveniently going down every month, let's find some measurement, no matter how obscure, that looks bad. Never mind that never once before Obama have I ever heard of "participation rate", now it is the only thing that matters!

good question.. How do we know labor participation hasn't dropped off significantly because of baby boomer retirements?

Well... Facts help

The available data goes back to 1948. No other President has had a significant and consistent drop like Obama. Kennedy had a drop. Even Carter had a gain.

The Baby Boom started when? A little over 65 years ago, you say?

Correct

Actually in 2011 they started to turn 65

That does not explain the first 2 years of constant dropping numbers under Obama

sure it does. some took early retirement. some were turning 65 before 2011. it's not like the baby boom all happened the same year dummy.

farkityfarker		2012-05-06 06:48:55 PM

They seem to place too much emphasis on historical trends. How the state voted 20 years ago is largely irrelevant. It's how it's polling today that matters.

kmmontandon		2012-05-06 06:49:12 PM

ejecteject: RyogaM: Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama

number of food stamp users has jumped 70% since 2007, and shows no signs of stopping, per the CBO.

Facts are funny.

Thanks for admitting it has nothing to do with Obama.

You may leave now.

Idiot.

El Pachuco		2012-05-06 06:49:52 PM

ejecteject: RyogaM: Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama

number of food stamp users has jumped 70% since 2007, and shows no signs of stopping, per the CBO.

Facts are funny.

Obama took the Oval Office in 2007?

Sabyen91		2012-05-06 06:49:55 PM

ejecteject: RyogaM: Food Stamps usage is up 70% under Obama

number of food stamp users has jumped 70% since 2007, and shows no signs of stopping, per the CBO.

Facts are funny.

Yes, recessions DO suck.

Mrtraveler01		2012-05-06 06:50:24 PM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: Your cunning plan has one flaw: Mesa

Mesa is in of itself a flaw.

And seriously, are you guys really arguing with winterwhile? (Not related to the previous post, just wanted to comment)

killershark		2012-05-06 06:51:41 PM

ejecteject: The Labor Force Participation Rate shows what percentage of people are working, looking for a job and not looking for a job.

So that makes the Unemployment rate right now at 11.6% not 8.1%

The Facts please, nothing but the Facts.

If you want real facts, you may want to adjust your chart. Obama took over in '09, not '08. Of course, when you move the line, it means that the major decline started when Bush was in still in office but don't let those facts get in your way.

LikeTheSearchEngine		2012-05-06 06:51:54 PM

Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I was wondering what was causing such a massive dropoff in people who WANT to work. Did the math, went, "Ohhhhhhh..."

i246.photobucket.com

Sabyen91		2012-05-06 06:56:22 PM

ejecteject: LikeTheSearchEngine: Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I was wondering what was causing such a massive dropoff in people who WANT to work. Did the math, went, "Ohhhhhhh..."

[i246.photobucket.com image 600x410]

except they hit 65...... in 2011, You are off by 2 years

Hmm, you can start getting retirement benefits at 62, right? Well, that would be an incredible coincidence given your map, huh?

LikeTheSearchEngine		2012-05-06 06:56:40 PM

Post-World War II baby boom: Years of duration vary, depending on the source (e.g., 1943-1960,[4] 1946-1964[5]).

Hence, "start."

Mrtraveler01		2012-05-06 06:57:33 PM

Sabyen91: ejecteject: LikeTheSearchEngine: Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I was wondering what was causing such a massive dropoff in people who WANT to work. Did the math, went, "Ohhhhhhh..."

[i246.photobucket.com image 600x410]

except they hit 65...... in 2011, You are off by 2 years

Hmm, you can start getting retirement benefits at 62, right? Well, that would be an incredible coincidence given your map, huh?

Wow winterwhile gets proven wrong.

Must be a day that ends in "day".

Bloody William		2012-05-06 06:58:38 PM

Hey, winterwhile has a new alt now? Was he banninated a few days ago or something?

Mrtraveler01		2012-05-06 06:59:36 PM

Bloody William: Hey, winterwhile has a new alt now? Was he banninated a few days ago or something?

No, I think enough people ignored his original account so he made this one because he was desperate for the attention.

Sabyen91		2012-05-06 07:00:58 PM

Mrtraveler01: Sabyen91: ejecteject: LikeTheSearchEngine: Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I was wondering what was causing such a massive dropoff in people who WANT to work. Did the math, went, "Ohhhhhhh..."

[i246.photobucket.com image 600x410]

except they hit 65...... in 2011, You are off by 2 years

Hmm, you can start getting retirement benefits at 62, right? Well, that would be an incredible coincidence given your map, huh?

Wow winterwhile gets proven wrong.

Must be a day that ends in "day".

Weird that someone actually thinks everybody retires on their 65th birthday.

/Wait...winterwhile doesn't think. Nevermind.

Displayed 50 of 194 comments