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.

(Breitbart.com)   333,000 votes in four swing states would have given Romney the Presidency. Also, a set of external genitalia would have given him an uncle instead of an aunt   (breitbart.com) divider line 323
    More: Unlikely, Mitt Romney, presidents, swing states, President Obama, socialist country, aunts, uncles, international  
•       •       •

6280 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Nov 2012 at 8:51 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-12 09:22:40 AM
Add the 64 electoral college votes from this switch of 333,908 votes in these four key states to Romney's 206, remove them from Obama's 332, and Romney defeats Obama 270 to 268.

Now that's a landslide!
 
2012-11-12 09:23:25 AM
666 x 500 = 330,000

They just needed more devil worshipers to vote.
 
2012-11-12 09:23:42 AM

nekom: You do realize, given his track record, he's not going to do that.


That's the other thing. The far right may despise Obama, but moderates see what he's done over the last four years.
 
2012-11-12 09:24:39 AM
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-11-12 09:25:16 AM

swaniefrmreddeer: And he would have lost the popular vote still by a large margin. The electoral college is a f*cked up system.


2000 - they loved the system
2012 - not so much

The electoral vote count WAS a landslide, much bigger margins than Bush enjoyed in two elections, but well short of the St Reagan mark.
 
2012-11-12 09:25:25 AM

Sybarite: Like my grandmother used to tell me "If the dog hadn't stopped to lick his balls, he would have caught the rabbit."

/totally serious


Not applicable to this particular saying, but one of my dad's favorite saying is "Passed around more than the ugly chick at the orgy."

Some other good ones, too. Dad is a visionary.
 
2012-11-12 09:25:38 AM
Not sure if this is true but if Romney had +300K votes in certain areas they would also would have had to kept it a secret otherwise the Obama ground would have been all over it and they would have lost anyways.
 
2012-11-12 09:26:34 AM

Linux_Yes: Obama won by ~3.3 Million popular votes.


Not only that, but Romney (as of the current count) received fewer total votes than even John McCain and John Kerry.
 
2012-11-12 09:26:37 AM
The obvious solution is for white people to have lots and lots ofsex to produce generations of little Republican voters.

/I'm available, ladies.
 
2012-11-12 09:26:47 AM

ArcadianRefugee: Yea, and if Woody had gone straight to the police, this would never have happened.


I'm so delighted someone else remembers that!
 
2012-11-12 09:27:08 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: Obama won with Electoral and Popular votes. Deal with it.


I wasn't as bitter after Obama won the popular vote. I really hate the electoral college. It's outdated by 50 years.

And despite what most would have you think, most of us move on with our lives...I was disappointed, but rarely does does a presidential election affect me personally enough to warrant caring past 2 days.

A governor's race, on the other hand...ugh.
 
2012-11-12 09:27:20 AM

Linux_Yes: Obama won by ~3.3 Million popular votes.


Handle it, Repugs!!


According to Donald Trump, Obama lost the popular vote.

This is what Republicans actually believe.

/and why they will continue to lose.
 
2012-11-12 09:27:22 AM

Skw33tis: I also sympathize with the argument that, under a pure popular-vote system, populous states like New York, California, and Texas would have disproportionate influence. To be fair, if most of the population lives in a few states, those states probably should be disproportionally influential, but smaller states shouldn't be de-facto shut out of the process, either.


Yeah, I can certainly understand a small state's desire to appear relevant, but as you said it's also easy to argue that a state with a higher population rightfully SHOULD have more clout.

I always figured perhaps it once made sense in logistics in the days when ballots were carried on horseback or whatever.
 
2012-11-12 09:27:40 AM

brobdiggy: Not protesting Obama or anything, but the Electoral College "winner take all" system is absolutely stupid.

Every election we hear the "your vote counts" garbage. That's not true. The message should be "your vote counts if you live in Ohio or Florida".

I understand why we don't do national popular voting (recount nightmares... yikes)... but voting should be done electorally be DISTRICT instead of at the STATE level.
In other words, All states should do what Nebraska and Maine do..
It makes the most sense, and it doesn't leave voters feeling disenfranchised like the current system does.

However, it would never pass, because liberals in blue states and conservatives in red states wouldn't allow it.

Congrats on hitting upon the worst idea yet! The reason this won't work is because whoever is in control of each state government at the time of the census gets to set the districts, and as you can see in nearly every state from Georgia to Ohio to PA and Illinois, the districts get gerrymandered like crazy. This means that some jerkoffs can make a power grab in a census year and then set the election results for the next decade.

So hey, terrible idea! National Popular Vote is the only reasonable way to go.
 
2012-11-12 09:27:52 AM

Dear GOP

dl.dropbox.com
 
2012-11-12 09:27:57 AM
Can we just go back to the old system of strange women lying in ponds, distrubuting swords?
 
2012-11-12 09:28:09 AM

Molavian: trotsky: I remember when the GOP took Wisconsin

Pretty sure Walker is still in office, bub.


Yeah, thanks for the reminder. Um, sure.
 
2012-11-12 09:28:09 AM

Thunderpipes: Headso: Breitbart's corpse is right, republicans shouldn't take this loss as meaning anything, the "squeaker" win that Zerobama pulled off shouldn't cause them to change their OP one bit. If anything the votes they did get were because of them and they should double down on the anti-science, morality police, anti-immigration rhetoric and throw in some more fear mongering and promises of military adventurism too all while ignoring any criticism or fact checking from the liebral-leftist-lamestream-driveby-media conspiracy. In short, suck it libs!

Dems just have the advantage. Mexicans, blacks are all in their corner no matter what and they breed like crazy. That alone gives them elections. Then you have moron young people, who cannot get a job out of college but still scream for Obama's nut droppings.

Just going to get way worse before, if ever, it gets better. Math is simple, and we cannot afford this route as a country. Eventually, you run out of successful people to tax because their won't be enough, and the screaming hordes of young unemployed Democrats will never see reality because they are idiots.


So basically you're saying you agree with everything I just wrote.
 
2012-11-12 09:29:25 AM
'Is that some kind of Math You Do As A Republican To Make Yourself Feel Better?'
 
2012-11-12 09:29:37 AM
www.startrek.com

Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
 
2012-11-12 09:29:43 AM
i47.tinypic.com
So Breitbart now gets their news from South Park?

Maybe they don't recognize that it's a parody ?

 
2012-11-12 09:29:53 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Can we just go back to the old system of strange women lying in ponds, distrubuting swords?


That's no basis for a system of government!
 
2012-11-12 09:30:22 AM
southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com
 
2012-11-12 09:30:49 AM

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: MrVeach: How is it a democracy if half the people want someone else as president? Maybe they should split the term percentagewise based on votes. Obama first 25 months, Romney last 23? Stagger it?

It's not a democracy. It's a representative republic.


The USA is a democracy, and it is a representative Republic. It is also a Liberal Democracy, a Representitve Democracy and a Democratic Republic. All are terms that can be used, correctly, about the United States.

It is not a Direct (sometimes called "pure") Democracy, however.

That doesn't stop your point about how pure vote tally isn't how the system works, but I just hate it when people use that phrase, because it shows they don't know or care what words means.
 
2012-11-12 09:30:55 AM
The republican nutcases are as prolific here as they are in the article....the election is OVER ,deal with it
 
2012-11-12 09:30:58 AM
upload.wikimedia.org

Does Brietbart really believe the election was close?

Or is this something they say to make morans feel better?

 
2012-11-12 09:31:09 AM

Krymson Tyde: The obvious response for republicans is to dial up the derp, that should get them the results they want.


Way back in the 1980's I had a 'very republican' teacher. He told us to never apologize, never say you are sorry, never admit a mistake. I've never really understood the position, but now I'm thinking he read a book by Rove or whoever Rove is modeling himself and the Republican party. No matter how far astray they go their solution will be to double down and insist they were right.

Predict a landslide for Romney against all evidence, there is one option that is off the table: to admit you are wrong. This also eliminates the analysis of where you went wrong and how to correct. Instead they end up doubling down to the point of absurdity. Case in point Rodgers.

A lot of pundits mentioning that this was a wake up call for the Republican party and they will change for the next election. They will be quite surprised that the change if any will be to shift farther to the derp side. The scary thing is there are 47% who will stand by their party (on both sides) as long as the party platform still leans towards one or two positions that are important to them. The party that will win 2016 is the one that will find something for that other 6% to gain their interest. This 6% are the people who watch 'reality' shows, yet are too busy to follow politics, so it really just boils down to a popularity contest for them.
 
2012-11-12 09:32:19 AM
It would be deliciously ironic if the same voter suppression tactics used by the republicans where the cause of Romney's 333,000 vote shortfall.
 
2012-11-12 09:32:49 AM
gobama
 
2012-11-12 09:33:05 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Can we just go back to the old system of strange women lying in ponds, distrubuting swords?


NO!


Supreme executive power comes from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony!

/if I went around saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bink had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!
 
2012-11-12 09:33:14 AM
"A quarter of an inch this way and it would have gone in. A quarter of an inch, Charlie."

"Yeah, but a quarter inch the other way and you'd have missed completely."
 
2012-11-12 09:34:50 AM
Obama lost North Carolina by a smaller margin than he won in Ohio and Virginia. So THERE!
 
2012-11-12 09:34:58 AM

brobdiggy: Not protesting Obama or anything, but the Electoral College "winner take all" system is absolutely stupid.

Every election we hear the "your vote counts" garbage. That's not true. The message should be "your vote counts if you live in Ohio or Florida".



At least get your facts straight. President Obama won re-election by Colorado. It doesn't matter that Ohio was decided earlier in the night. The way the electoral vote turned out Florida and Ohio did not matter. Romney could have lost both and President Obama would have been re-elected. Those two "battleground" states with Virginia padded the Democratic victory margin. They did not decide the election.

The battleground states whose electoral vote decided the election (including winning margin) are:
Wisconsin (Obama +7%)
Nevada (Obama +7%)
New Hampshire (Obama +6%)
Iowa (Obama +6%)
Colorado (Obama +5%)
 
2012-11-12 09:35:54 AM

Diogenes: ArcadianRefugee: Yea, and if Woody had gone straight to the police, this would never have happened.

I'm so delighted someone else remembers that!


Ah, Shuddup!
 
2012-11-12 09:36:07 AM

Marcus Aurelius: If Breitbart were alive today, he wouldn't be dead.


*golf clap*
 
2012-11-12 09:36:26 AM
FTA: Obama's victory doesn't constitute a mandate for his far left agenda to "transform America" into some nightmarish amalgam combining the worst features of a European socialist state with an Indonesian oligarchy.

Um.. how many votes required for this? 55% of electorate? 60%? I don't even remember this from the platform.
 
2012-11-12 09:38:33 AM

Le Grand Inquisitor: Free Radical: If Obama wouldn't have won by a landslide it wouldn't have been a mandate.

That election was not a mandate...popular vote was close and the the house stayed GOP. If you expect political capital and change, you are sorely mistaken


Bigger popular vote margin than 2004 (3.01 mil vs. 3.31 mil)
Bigger popular vote percent margin than 2004 (2.47% vs. 2.69%)
MUCH bigger electoral college margin than 2004 (34 vs. 126)
Significantly bigger effective margin than 2004 (in 2004, a universal 2.12% spread would've given Kerry the win; in 2012, it would take a universal 4.7% spread)
Significantly bigger "swing" margin than 2004 (120,000 votes in Ohio vs. the headline's 330,000 votes in 4 states).

George W. Bush and the beltway media claimed a mandate out the goddamn wazoo. I believe this is referred to as "Chickens is coming home to roost, so stop farking them."
 
2012-11-12 09:40:35 AM

lordluzr: FTA: Obama's victory doesn't constitute a mandate for his far left agenda to "transform America" into some nightmarish amalgam combining the worst features of a European socialist state with an Indonesian oligarchy.

Um.. how many votes required for this? 55% of electorate? 60%? I don't even remember this from the platform.


Because reform of the health insurance industry is the worst thing this country has ever faced, apparently.

Especially when that reform is largely the Republican plan proposed as an alternative to HilaryCare.

/The horror...the horror
 
2012-11-12 09:41:21 AM
If Bapp hadn't designed that poorly fitting dressage horse costume he might not have been turned into a slurry.
 
2012-11-12 09:41:23 AM
If you just replace "lost" with "won", then Romney would have "won" the election.
 
2012-11-12 09:41:41 AM

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: swaniefrmreddeer: The electoral college is a f*cked up system.

Why? It prevents one or two states from completely disenfranchising the rest of the nation. As much as you'd like it to be, the United States is not "California and New York".  The Electoral College isn't a perfect system, but going strictly by popular vote would be a disaster.>

You are right, now its Ohio, Florida, and Colorado that control the system. Im not totally against the EV, but it is far from a perfect system. Oklahoma hasn't seen a Democrat nominee since like 1993, yet the swing states see them both Republican and Democrat nominees constantly. The swing states are constantly being promised things for their votes. Its the same problem as with a popular vote system, its just shifted which states are important.

The national parties are unintentionally polarizing the nation even worse by ignoring the non swing states. Howard Dean was a crazy mofo, but he had the right idea in that you need to continue to work in states even if they are heavily against you, otherwise they just become much more against you because they feel like they are being slighted by the party.

 
2012-11-12 09:41:50 AM

Pants full of macaroni!!: And let me guess.... these votes are hidden away somewhere, confiscated by Liberals working the polls, perhaps of the Black Panther variety?


No, "liberals" did not hide conservative ballots. They submitted extra liberal ballots, as is evident by one Florida county reporting 140.92% turnout. That the "turnout" percentage is based upon the number of ballot cards cast in an election with two cards per ballot compared with the number of registered voters (thus all registered voters submitting an entire completed ballot would produce a 200% turnout) is immaterial.

Additionally, liberal voter fraud is evident by the election results failing to meet "unskewed" polling expectations, anecdotal and gut feelings.
 
2012-11-12 09:41:58 AM

nekom: Skw33tis: I also sympathize with the argument that, under a pure popular-vote system, populous states like New York, California, and Texas would have disproportionate influence. To be fair, if most of the population lives in a few states, those states probably should be disproportionally influential, but smaller states shouldn't be de-facto shut out of the process, either.

Yeah, I can certainly understand a small state's desire to appear relevant, but as you said it's also easy to argue that a state with a higher population rightfully SHOULD have more clout.

I always figured perhaps it once made sense in logistics in the days when ballots were carried on horseback or whatever.


Um, so "disproportionally" means everyone's vote means the same and "proportionally" means the vote of the guy in the littlest state (population) has a lot more influence?
 
2012-11-12 09:42:18 AM

RminusQ: Le Grand Inquisitor: Free Radical: If Obama wouldn't have won by a landslide it wouldn't have been a mandate.

That election was not a mandate...popular vote was close and the the house stayed GOP. If you expect political capital and change, you are sorely mistaken

Bigger popular vote margin than 2004 (3.01 mil vs. 3.31 mil)
Bigger popular vote percent margin than 2004 (2.47% vs. 2.69%)
MUCH bigger electoral college margin than 2004 (34 vs. 126)
Significantly bigger effective margin than 2004 (in 2004, a universal 2.12% spread would've given Kerry the win; in 2012, it would take a universal 4.7% spread)
Significantly bigger "swing" margin than 2004 (120,000 votes in Ohio vs. the headline's 330,000 votes in 4 states).

George W. Bush and the beltway media claimed a mandate out the goddamn wazoo. I believe this is referred to as "Chickens is coming home to roost, so stop farking them."


What you call a mandate is up to you. It's just like landslide, it's an arbitrary term. Obama CLEARLY won rather handily, make of that what you will. The latter point, though, is sadly true. Without the house, we could be in for 2 years of gridlock. Whether or not that translates to big wins for Democrats in the mid term, well that is something to keep an eye on for sure.
 
2012-11-12 09:42:49 AM

CPennypacker: Maybe the Republicans didn't get off work yet.


haha...2 people I know that posted that one on Facebook have, sadly, taken it down.
 
2012-11-12 09:42:52 AM
332 to 206. That's how close the election was.

Words like "blowout" or "landslide" or "squeaker" or even "mandate" are all subjective terms, fraught with ambiguity. They generate their own spin, depending on how they're used. But whatever.

332 to 206. That's what happened. Period.
 
2012-11-12 09:44:04 AM
Came here for the Python references and the butt-hurt schadenfreude. Leaving happy.
 
2012-11-12 09:44:44 AM
This weekend, in a video game, someone was touting this shiat, as well as how our country is doomed and has only been sinking for the last 4 years. After I proved that the economy is growing, unemployment is shrinking, consumer confidence is rising and Obama won by not only the Electoral, but the Popular vote, and that these 330,000 votes wouldn't have made a difference, even if split up between the states Romney was supposedly earmarked to win, they put me on ignore and everyone else in the general channel ridiculed them.

It goes back to my belief that the only way to get through the butthurt is through ridicule, because these people are being ridiculous and 'facts and logic' are quite literally considered 'tools of the liberals' and shouldn't be trusted. It's amazing the mental and emotional hoops they'll jump through in order to keep up the victim complex as well as considering the election still to be contested.

It's like a Macro version of Allen West, all across the country.
 
2012-11-12 09:45:44 AM
Republicans weren't complaining about the electoral college in 2000.
 
2012-11-12 09:45:51 AM

Manute Bol: CPennypacker: Maybe the Republicans didn't get off work yet.

haha...2 people I know that posted that one on Facebook have, sadly, taken it down.


I had a couple facebook friends post it. Probably the two brokest friends I have. I was amused.
 
Displayed 50 of 323 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 »






Report