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.

(The Raw Story)   Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume is 'puzzled' by these strange polls from battleground states showing a persistent lead for Obama. How could this have happened?   (rawstory.com) divider line 348
    More: Obvious, Brit Hume, Fox News, obama, swing states, political analyst  
•       •       •

5733 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Nov 2012 at 6:05 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



348 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-04 07:45:19 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: DamnYankees: Up 60-39 with early voters 12 minutes ago

If that number is even close to accurate then Romney is farked given photos like this.


That's what happens when your response to changing demographics with SUPPRESS ALL THE VOTES!!!1!

You just scare the people you're trying to stop from voting into making sure to vote.
 
2012-11-04 07:46:26 PM  

randomjsa: I do have another question however.

I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support


Did you forget?

3.bp.blogspot.com

It's extremely difficult to challenge a sitting president in the middle of a major war, even if that war isn't going at all well.

Even more so, in fact, because any criticism of the President means that the speaker "wants the terrorists to win," and the challenger has to avoid any hint of insufficient support for the troops.
 
2012-11-04 07:47:53 PM  

DamnYankees: randomjsa: I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.

I think Obama is highly unlikely to win a Presidential election in either of those years.


That's JUST what he wants you to think!

Gingrich supporters warned of a third Obama term
 
2012-11-04 07:48:30 PM  

Smelly McUgly: That's what happens when your response to changing demographics with SUPPRESS ALL THE VOTES!!!1!


To be fair, that's their response to every election.
 
2012-11-04 07:50:05 PM  
If the Redskins Rule is to be believed, Obama will either lose outright or win the EVs and lose the popular, which is a possibility given some of Nate's blog posts. In fact, if one believes the Redskin Rule and Nate's polling, it is now a very likely scenario.

MAXIMUM BUTTHURT AHEAD: 50 hours
 
2012-11-04 07:50:36 PM  
i159.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-04 07:53:30 PM  

Altitude5280: The Freeper threads on the polls are quite amusing.


Oh, man...haven't been there in a while...do I dare...?

www.wolfhazmat.de

I'm going in!!
 
2012-11-04 07:53:49 PM  

jso2897: thomps: GAT_00: thomps: cameroncrazy1984: Interesting fact: Of 21 state polls released yesterday, Romney had a lead in 2 of them.

Anyone who thinks this race is a tossup is an idiot at this point.

saturday polls have a known liberal statistical bias, given the under-sampling of college football fans.

Actually, published Saturday would have finished sampling mostly on Friday, so the under-sampling is of high school football fans.

even worse news for obama then.

Aren't you a little old to be writing letters to Santa Claus?


Dear Father Christmas.

All I want for Christmas is pease go away.
 
2012-11-04 07:54:29 PM  

Death Eats a Cracker: I may have to unblock FNC on election night. It's going to be awesome watching a bubble being popped on live TV.


I advise EVERYONE that just before the Prez gets to 270, to switch over to Fox, and have the great pleasure of watching them have to announce Barack Obama as the winner. 😝
 
2012-11-04 07:57:32 PM  

Altitude5280: The Freeper threads on the polls are quite amusing.


They're going to have some sort of psychotic break when Obama wins. They isolate themselves in a right wing media bubble where they only hear news that says what they want to hear. They truly believe Romney is ahead in all the polls. How are they going to react when reality breaks through?
 
2012-11-04 07:57:54 PM  

Skleenar: theknuckler_33: randomjsa: if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years

Get it though your thick skull... not 'reporting' the right-wing nonsense you hear on AM radio is not 'covering' for the president. It's not reporting whack-job conspiracy theories and abject nonsense. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin are pushing your ridiculously partisan buttons and you are buying it hook, line, and sinker. How many 'libs are stoopid' books have you bought?

Modern Conservatism is a Con game played against the base.


Gee, right-wing sites are nothing more than money making schemes for people trying to take advantage of intellectually-challenged conservateatards?
 
2012-11-04 07:59:05 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Altitude5280: The Freeper threads on the polls are quite amusing.

Oh, man...haven't been there in a while...do I dare...?

[www.wolfhazmat.de image 300x548]

I'm going in!!


Godspeed!
 
2012-11-04 07:59:22 PM  

Notabunny: Stock up on ammunition, water, canned food and batteries. Board your windows and doors. When Obama wins on Tuesday, the neocons are going be entirely blindsided and are going to contemplate an alcohol-fueled 2nd Amendment solution.


Given the number of Teabagging nutjobs out there, I wouldn't be surprised if a few of them completely go off the deep end after the election. It's more than a little scary.
 
2012-11-04 07:59:54 PM  

Phins: Altitude5280: The Freeper threads on the polls are quite amusing.

They're going to have some sort of psychotic break when Obama wins. They isolate themselves in a right wing media bubble where they only hear news that says what they want to hear. They truly believe Romney is ahead in all the polls. How are they going to react when reality breaks through?


Second amendment solutions tempered with religion and bitterness. Oh, and bigotry, can't forget that.
 
2012-11-04 08:05:38 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: Well, I have to hand it to the stupid farking press - they managed to turn this into a horse-race after all, when it should have been over months ago because of Romney's repeated efforts to shoot himself in the foot.

I'm completely disgusted with my country and its election process.


Seconded.

Let's move to our own planet.
 
2012-11-04 08:06:27 PM  
Nate Silver, Dr. Wang, and all the other aggregator types literally stake their reputation as mathematicians and statisticians on their various poll aggregation and tracking.

I've read most of what they've written, they look more interested in truth than bias. They'd report Romney (and did) being up if he were.

So I trust their findings.

A lot more than some plasterbrain reporter at FOX.
 
2012-11-04 08:07:01 PM  
Romney can win 80% of the vote in Arkansas, but he only needs 50.1% of the vote to win its Electoral Votes. But National Polls continue to count that remaining 29.9% in their total, even though it has no impact on who wins. I don't know why this is so difficult for people to understand.
 
2012-11-04 08:08:27 PM  

Generation_D: Nate Silver, Dr. Wang, and all the other aggregator types literally stake their reputation as mathematicians and statisticians on their various poll aggregation and tracking.

I've read most of what they've written, they look more interested in truth than bias. They'd report Romney (and did) being up if he were.



Not only that, but 538 accurately predicted how much of the House the GOP would take over in 2010. Of course, no one on the right was questioning Silver's math then.
 
2012-11-04 08:08:44 PM  

randomjsa:
I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


What the hell, I'll answer.

Why Bush won 2004:
* Americans always re-elect Presidents in the middle of wars (even Lincoln).
* 9/11.
* Multi-state bills banning gay marriage motivated conservative base.
* Liberals, enraged by popular opposition president, drove away moderate support with partisan vitriol and in an attempt to woo them back chose a unlikeable and indecisive blue-blood candidate from Massachusetts, thus alienating minority and working class voters (does this sound familiar?).
* Reagan-era Baby Boomers had not yet reached median life expectancy.

What might happen 2014 and 2016:
* It's projected that the 2012 Senate elections will yield 53 Democratic-leaning seats and 47 Republican-leaning seats. Republicans will consider this another defeat.
* 2014 Senate Election: 20 Democratic and 13 Republican seats (class of 2008, Hope & Change era)
Link
* Likely a switch of 4 seats (AK, CO, MN, NH) leading to slim 51-seat GOP majority.
* 2015-2016: Republican revolt against Obama. Artificial scandal, possible impeachment, shutdown, etc.
* 2016 Senate Election: 10 Democratic and 24 Republican seats (class of 2010, the Tea Party)
Link
* Possibly a total Republican collapse, Democratic supermajority and end to the Tea Party.

So yeah. Good luck with the future, GOP.
 
2012-11-04 08:09:27 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Not only that, but 538 accurately predicted how much of the House the GOP would take over in 2010. Of course, no one on the right was questioning Silver's math then.


Sam Wang also PERFECTLY predicted Bush's win in 2004 based on his current methodology. And he certainly didn't want Bush to win.
 
2012-11-04 08:10:33 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Romney can win 80% of the vote in Arkansas, but he only needs 50.1% of the vote to win its Electoral Votes. But National Polls continue to count that remaining 29.9% in their total, even though it has no impact on who wins. I don't know why this is so difficult for people to understand.


Math is on the LOPCATGOPATA. That's why.

Remember, this is the network that said of course Bush beat Gore, it's obvious. Look at all that red on the US map. Why, even most of the blue states were mostly red if you look at the county-by-county returns. God liberals are stupid.
 
2012-11-04 08:14:21 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Romney can win 80% of the vote in Arkansas, but he only needs 50.1% of the vote to win its Electoral Votes. But National Polls continue to count that remaining 29.9% in their total, even though it has no impact on who wins. I don't know why this is so difficult for people to understand.


I think it's more of a case where if the media were to talk about the electoral math in an honest fashion they'd be out of stuff to talk about months ago besides, "What will Obama's second term be like" and "What Cabinet changes are in store for Obama's second term."

Ratings generators those are not. So instead on the front page of ZOMG Librul MSNBC we currently have:
i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-04 08:18:43 PM  

Altitude5280: Death Eats a Cracker: I may have to unblock FNC on election night. It's going to be awesome watching a bubble being popped on live TV.

I advise EVERYONE that just before the Prez gets to 270, to switch over to Fox, and have the great pleasure of watching them have to announce Barack Obama as the winner. 😝


Yeah, that was fun four years ago. I also listened to Rush Limbaugh for the first time the next morning. Gonna have to do that again.
 
2012-11-04 08:19:18 PM  

Notabunny: Stock up on ammunition, water, canned food and batteries. Board your windows and doors. When Obama wins on Tuesday, the neocons are going be entirely blindsided and are going to contemplate an alcohol-fueled 2nd Amendment solution.

 

i.ytimg.com
 
2012-11-04 08:22:03 PM  
I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.
 
2012-11-04 08:23:44 PM  

Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.


What were the polls like at this point in 2004?
 
2012-11-04 08:25:08 PM  
The bubble had to go pop at one point. It's that painful procedure of the GOP reality merging with the actual reality. They should have known by now that actual reality has a well-known liberal bias, and that statistics that run on a proven proces and which are supported by advanced mathematics seem to magically outperform statistics that are "unskewed" by some political hack, which then tries to discredit the former's results based on his skinnyness/effeminate looks.
 
2012-11-04 08:26:52 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?


A pretty clear Bush win. Narrow but clear.
 
2012-11-04 08:28:45 PM  
Here are the latest polls from the battleground states:

Colorado: Obama 48%, Romney 47% (YouGov)

Colorado: Obama 48%, Romney 48% (Reuters/Ipsos)

Florida: Romney 49%, Obama 47% (Zogby)

Florida: Romney 48%, Obama 47% (YouGov)

Florida: Obama 46%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)

Iowa: Obama 48%, Romney 47% (YouGov)

Iowa: Obama 50%, Romney 48% (Public Policy Polling)

Michigan: Romney 47%, Obama 46% (Foster McCollum)

Michigan: Obama 51%, Romney 44% (YouGov)

Nevada: Obama 49%, Romney 45% (YouGov)

New Hampshire: Obama 47%, Romney 43% (YouGov)

New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 48% (Public Policy Polling)

New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 45% (New England College)

North Carolina: Romney 49%, Obama 47% (YouGov)

Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 48% (Columbus Dispatch)

Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 42% (Zogby)

Ohio: Obama 49%, Romney 46% (YouGov)

Ohio: Obama 48%, Romney 44% (Reuters/Ipsos)

Ohio: Obama 52%, Romney 47% (Public Policy Polling)

Pennsylvania: Obama 47%, Romney 47% (Susquehanna)

Pennsylvania: Obama 49%, Romney 46% (Morning Call)

Pennsylvania: Obama 52%, Romney 44% (YouGov)

Virginia: Obama 50%, Romney 44% (Zogby)

Virginia: Obama 48%, Romney 46% (YouGov)

Virginia: Obama 47%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)

Wisconsin: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (YouGov)

Link
 
2012-11-04 08:29:32 PM  

randomjsa: I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


Bush gained more support because there was this event that occurred between the 2000 and 2004 elections that had a pretty significant impact on the electorate. You might have heard of it. 9/11? Ring any bells? Amongst other things, it lead to a sustained period in which the media's coverage of the President was largely supportive.

Obama has lost support for two reasons: The first is that his success in 2008 was absolutely extraordinary, it's almost unimaginable that his support would go up. Many people, young and minority Democrats in particular, had entirely unrealistic expectations for Obama, and thus set themselves up for disappointment. Meanwhile, coverage of Obama's term has been driven by a counter-factual right wing narrative, which has lead to a perception that Obama's first term has generally been less successful than it has been, and which has force blame for the many, many failures of House and Senate Republicans onto the President.

To declare this a "trend" is highly suspect. You have one Republican president who did better in his second term election than his first, and one Democrat who looks on track to have done better in his first term election than his second. That's not nearly enough data points to declare a trend. And if there were a general trend for Republicans to be gaining an ever greater share of the electorate (which there is no evidence for, and plenty against), why did McCain lose in 2008?

/why am I responding seriously to the derp?
 
2012-11-04 08:30:47 PM  

DamnYankees: Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?

A pretty clear Bush win. Narrow but clear.


That's what I recalled too but wanted to make sure (and too lazy to Google).
 
2012-11-04 08:31:33 PM  

Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.


I too have nightmares regarding the Bush years, but the facts on the ground are much, much different today than they were 8 years ago. Hell, the available statistics regarding early voting in Iowa, Ohio, and Nevada alone basically remove any suspense.
 
2012-11-04 08:31:43 PM  

Darth Macho: Why Bush won 2004:
* Americans always re-elect Presidents in the middle of wars (even Lincoln).
* 9/11.
* Multi-state bills banning gay marriage motivated conservative base.
* Liberals, enraged by popular opposition president, drove away moderate support with partisan vitriol and in an attempt to woo them back chose a unlikeable and indecisive blue-blood candidate from Massachusetts, thus alienating minority and working class voters (does this sound familiar?).
* Reagan-era Baby Boomers had not yet reached median life expectancy.


You forgot to mention the Swift Boaters who trashed Kerry for his military service, but praised Bush for transporting tropical plants across the U.S. while Kerry risked his life in Vietnam.
 
2012-11-04 08:32:55 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Here are the latest polls from the battleground states:


Michigan: Romney 47%, Obama 46% (Foster McCollum)


This one seems a bit off. I've never heard of Foster McCollum before, do they have a good rep?
 
2012-11-04 08:33:27 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Here are the latest polls from the battleground states:

Polls


Sadly, I think Romney will win FL, which will scuttle my 332-206 prediction in favor of the president. Too many polls over the last few days show him up there between 1-2 points.

Foster McCollum's MI poll is a major outlier.

VA is President Obama's FL; he's had a 1-2 point lead there for what feels like forever. This race is going to be over fairly early in the night, it seems.
 
2012-11-04 08:33:30 PM  

Darth Macho: * 2016 Senate Election: 10 Democratic and 24 Republican seats (class of 2010, the Tea Party)


Wow, only 10 Dem senators and all of them are from bright blue states. The Repubs will be crushed that year. All we have to do is get through 2014, which will admittedly be difficult. It will probably be a long time before we regain the House, though. What will have to happen first is a Republican president who farks up as much as Bush did.
 
2012-11-04 08:34:17 PM  

Vash The Stampede: This one seems a bit off. I've never heard of Foster McCollum before, do they have a good rep?


In their last poll of Florida they had Romney up 15.

Take that as you will.
 
2012-11-04 08:34:24 PM  

Darth Macho: randomjsa:
I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.

What the hell, I'll answer.

Why Bush won 2004:
* Americans always re-elect Presidents in the middle of wars (even Lincoln).
* 9/11.
* Multi-state bills banning gay marriage motivated conservative base.
* Liberals, enraged by popular opposition president, drove away moderate support with partisan vitriol and in an attempt to woo them back chose a unlikeable and indecisive blue-blood candidate from Massachusetts, thus alienating minority and working class voters (does this sound familiar?).
* Reagan-era Baby Boomers had not yet reached median life expectancy.

What might happen 2014 and 2016:
* It's projected that the 2012 Senate elections will yield 53 Democratic-leaning seats and 47 Republican-leaning seats. Republicans will consider this another defeat.
* 2014 Senate Election: 20 Democratic and 13 Republican seats (class of 2008, Hope & Change era)
Link
* Likely a switch of 4 seats (AK, CO, MN, NH) leading to slim 51-seat GOP majority.
* 2015-2016: Republican revolt against Obama. Artificial scandal, possible impeachment, shutdown, etc.
* 2016 Senate Election: 10 Democratic and 24 Republican seats (class of 2010, the Tea Party)
Link
* Possibly a total Republican collapse, Democratic supermajority and end to the Tea Party.

So yeah. Good luck with the future, GOP.


I agree with most of what you said, but Al Franken's not gonna lose reelection.
 
2012-11-04 08:35:01 PM  

theknuckler_33: randomjsa: if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years

Get it though your thick skull... not 'reporting' the right-wing nonsense you hear on AM radio is not 'covering' for the president. It's not reporting whack-job conspiracy theories and abject nonsense. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin are pushing your ridiculously partisan buttons and you are buying it hook, line, and sinker. How many 'libs are stoopid' books have you bought?


This. A hundred gazillion times this.
 
2012-11-04 08:35:38 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Benevolent Misanthrope: Well, I have to hand it to the stupid farking press - they managed to turn this into a horse-race after all, when it should have been over months ago because of Romney's repeated efforts to shoot himself in the foot.

I'm completely disgusted with my country and its election process.

Seconded.

Let's move to our own planet.


Coming! Can I be comptroller?
 
2012-11-04 08:36:08 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?


Reverse of now. With Bush barely leading nationally and in enough states to put him over the top.
 
2012-11-04 08:37:07 PM  

eddiesocket: Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?

Reverse of now. With Bush barely leading nationally and in enough states to put him over the top.


Eh, Bush was a little better of - he had an average RCP lead of 1.5. Obama is at 0.5. But Bush didn't have the electoral college edge that Obama does.
 
2012-11-04 08:38:13 PM  
Well you see Mr. Hume. When Obama leads in higher population states by 5-10 points in the polls. This will be offset in National Polls by lower population states in the south mainly that have Romney leading by 20 + points. However because of the electoral college it does not matter whether you win a state by .00001% or 99.99999% because in the end you get the same number of electoral votes. So even if Romney received 100% of the votes in the states he currently leads in and if Obama received 50.5%, Obama would still win because that is how the electoral college works. Having the popular vote does not ensure a presidency.

It would be extremely ironic if Romney had more in the popular vote, yet Obama won the electoral college, because a black president would then be (re)elected as a result of an institution that was put in place because the slave owners felt they would not be fairly represented in elections.
 
2012-11-04 08:38:51 PM  

eddiesocket: Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?

Reverse of now. With Bush barely leading nationally and in enough states to put him over the top.


Sounds familar.

/so much that it's scary
 
2012-11-04 08:38:59 PM  

eddiesocket: Darth Macho: * 2016 Senate Election: 10 Democratic and 24 Republican seats (class of 2010, the Tea Party)

Wow, only 10 Dem senators and all of them are from bright blue states. The Repubs will be crushed that year. All we have to do is get through 2014, which will admittedly be difficult. It will probably be a long time before we regain the House, though. What will have to happen first is a Republican president who farks up as much as Bush did.


The house will be a while, but it probably won't be too long.

Consider the teabaggers' 3 biggest enemies, age, obesity, and time.

I give it until 2022.
 
2012-11-04 08:39:08 PM  

Lligeret: It would be extremely ironic if Romney had more in the popular vote, yet Obama won the electoral college, because a black president would then be (re)elected as a result of an institution that was put in place because the slave owners felt they would not be fairly represented in elections.


Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
Romney's now losing the Electoral College about 1/3 of the time he wins the popular vote in our simulations.
 
2012-11-04 08:41:08 PM  
yafh.com
 
2012-11-04 08:42:27 PM  

Mrtraveler01: DamnYankees: Mrtraveler01: Spanky_McFarksalot: I'm a die hard Obama supporter and I can't shake the feeling that america is about to pull a Bush II.

maybe that the fault of the media. all the signs point to an Obama win, but I can't stick a fork in it.

What were the polls like at this point in 2004?

A pretty clear Bush win. Narrow but clear.

That's what I recalled too but wanted to make sure (and too lazy to Google).


It's not the 04 election that you need to consider here. It's the 1992 election--the last time a sitting president got ousted. George HW Bush's loss was more of a shocker than W's win, because W had his war to keep him in place, he was riding the 9/11 patriotism wave, and the business scandals hadn't hit yet.

People should have been examining what was going on between Bush Sr. and Clinton to see what happened there, to know what might go down this time.
 
2012-11-04 08:43:02 PM  

Anti_illuminati: spongeboob: Emposter: I'm puzzled how he can call himself a political analyst when he doesn't understand how the electoral college works.

I'm puzzled how anyone can pay him for his political analysis when he doesn't understand how the US elects it's president.

because Fox News.


Yes. And also, fark you, that's why.
 
2012-11-04 08:43:44 PM  

stoli n coke: The house will be a while, but it probably won't be too long.

Consider the teabaggers' 3 biggest enemies, age, obesity, and time.

I give it until 2022


That 2022 date is probably more accurate than you think. The 2020 census is going to be very unkind to Republicans if current trends continue.
 
Displayed 50 of 348 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report