Skinny Vinny is right in the sense that no matter how successful Obama was in this clean up it doesnt affect the outcome because the hurricane hit states that are blue and were a lock for Obama anyway. People from Ohio, Florida, and Virginia don't give a damn about a storm that has nothing to do with them. Which is why I still say this doesn't charge anything so late in the game.

People from NY/NJ/CT have a high sense of self. They think their situation will impact all of America. Truth is, other parts of America have suffered hurricanes(FLORIDA!), blizzards, blackouts, earthquakes, etc......and no one ever talked it influencing the outcome of an election.

Besides, the situation is said to be deteriorating. Looting. Dwindling gas supplies. Dumpster diving according to NBC 4.

In fact, the worse the situation gets, the less the mainstream media will cover the story if they think it no longer favors their candidate, Barack Obama.

I have to admit when an objective, non party affiliated magazine supports Obama that's a blow to Romney. Dap you can't seriously call the economist conservative leaning. They tell it like it is. But I subscribe to them and I love their articles, I think it doesnt bode well for Mr Romney if a highly independent magazine endorses the other side.

I have to admit when an objective, non party affiliated magazine supports Obama that's a blow to Romney. Dap you can't seriously call the economist conservative leaning. They tell it like it is. But I subscribe to them and I love their articles, I think it doesnt bode well for Mr Romney if a highly independent magazine endorses the other side.

I also subscribe to The Economist among a bunch of other stuff like the NYTimes, WSJ, Wash Post, Businessweek, Forbes, etc.

The Economist is a globalist magazine that touts free trade as its major policy perogative, free trade is part of the backbone of the conservative agenda.

They used to be known as "the Enronomist" back in the day during the Bush years. They tended to endorse Repub candidates unless the Repub was just a mess (i.e. 2004 and 1992). But they endorsed Reagan in 1980, Dole in 96, and Smirk in 2000. And they make it clear in the article that they don't like Obama's "anti-business" attitude, or the teacher's unions.

This is one of the main reasons I read the magazine, because regardless of their viewpoints they will tout the BEST overall policy/politician in their viewpoint even if it goes against what they should naturally select.

Well I voted against Amendment 6 in Florida today. That's the amendment that would cut state funding to pay for abortions.

I thought you wouldn't mind supporting less criminals?

If I voted for it(YES), then it would eliminate state funding of abortions. In other words, I voted the way Planned Parenthood would want me to vote.

I always thought Bush went for Amnesty knowing the Dems would vote against it, thus it would not pass, and the GOP could use that against the Dems by saying, "The Dems voted against Amnesty".

I'll respond (if not read yet) the first and third pieces you linked Dapper.

(1) I like Obama, but he's no FDR who was a master politician. In the late 1930s he prepared himself for the recession that came and survived it very well. Besides the right, if indeed their bubble of self-assurance burts and their sworn enemy is re-elected, will oppose him even if its reform that potentially they ideologically should be attracted to. (Of course the right-wing influenced ObamaCare is Socialism, so I doubt that'll matter.)

(3) Theoretically I could see Willard going Bubba on his base with triangulation. Difference is the liberal base in the 1990s were so demoralized, pussy whipped, and afraid of the GOP, they easily corralled under Bubba. The GOP base is so insane, they won't give a fuck they'll slap Willard so hard his dad 50 years ago will feel it.

I'm reminded of when Dubya boldly went for immigration reform, when he had Democratic support and who the hell knows, could've secured the GOP a permanent heavy bloc of Hispanic voting support. But nooooooo his own base whined about amnesty amnesty amnesty (which it wasn't but you can't argue with morons) and well Dubya lost his party's chance to fulfill Karl Rove's dreams of a permanent majority.

LOL. It's easy to misread those silly amendments.

Obama mentioned Romney today.

No clue why Romney is in PA. Some say it's because he thinks he can't win Ohio and is looking for another road to the White House. Others say he thinks he has Ohio and is trying to sway PA for insurance.

You don't know what to believe. Each side spins it their way.