Funny you say that Skinny, PolicalWire linked a piece today about liberals afraid a re-elected Obama would try to strike a "grand bargain" with the right-wing on entitlements.

Anyway another Flashback video of election night coverage of yesteryear.

Honestly, I have not followed the polls but see lots of Nate The Great stuff and Drudge links.

Nate thinks Obama will win Ohio by about 3 points. That would be a big victory there. With Obama losing some white voters, and a higher GOP turnout expected, angry Catholics, less enthusiasm among young voters, I just don't think he'll be right about the margin, but could be right about the overall result.

Whatever the margin, its like a football game. Whether you win by 50 or a field goal, what matters is you win.

Doesn't this look....sorta gay?

Despite being outraised, the Kenyan has out-advertised Willard this whole cycle.

I joked about it before I think, but seriously I wonder if somebody on Team Willard is embezzling all that money?

Romney is known for being rather creative with his taxes and accounting...

Besides Romney, those GOP Super PAC's have been spending outrageous amounts of money.

But even on that PAC front, the Democrats have surprisingly been able to keep up with them. But I hate PACs. Seriously why the Supreme Court allowed that bastard election season monster a free pass, I'll never understand.

It really takes a shit on the whole idea of campaign finance regulations, then takes said feces and wipes it in its face just because it can.

EDIT - If I'm not joking and serious about the embezzling part, Willard aint involved. He wants to win, no fortune in the world is worth campaigning non-stop for 2 years (in his case, 8 years). I remember a recent article claiming alot of that money went into professional political consulting firms owned by Team Willard members.

Fun Fact: James Polk 1844 is the only winner to win despite losing his native state and state where he currently lived.

Not saying Willard can't win, but the odds will be tough.

I think the GOP has to raise as much or more money to offset mainstream support for the Obama.

In other words, it was a fair fight this time, as opposed to 2008 when Obama outraised and outspent McCain 2-to-1 and in Virginia, 10-to-1. Complaining about not being able to raise or spend more this time gives the impression that Dems don't want a fair fight.

http://www.270towin.com/

Interesting little site. You can play out all sorts of scenarios on it. Me personally, both candidates have a number of way to get to 270. It's all about election day. We just don't know. The thing that shocked me was that how many states are a toss up. Just goes to show how close this actually is at this point.

We're not talking about the campaigns themselves raising money. I'm talking about independent groups (usually associated with said campaigns) being allowed to raise unlimited money and basically become legally unhinged arms of said campaigns/parties.

Which again defeats the whole idea of campaign finance reform, making sure such corrupt bullshit doesn't pollute the political system.

Remember when Bill Maher, later joined by other left-leaning Hollywood people like Weinstein and Spielberg, donated a million bucks each to Obama's officially sanctioned PAC? Not the campaign itself, but the PAC. How is that fair?

I love that site.

But Michigan a toss up? Sure whatever.

That site does remind me of that Electoral College thread I opened up: Why does little friggin Iowa matter more in elections than California, New York, and Texas combined?

Here's how I see the states now. Feel free to voice your opinion on it this is my take.

Iowa- toss up
Wisconsin- toss up
Michigan- lean Obama
Colorado- lean Romney
Nevada-lean Obama
Pennsylvania- toss up
Ohio- toss up
New Hampshire- toss up
North Carolina- lean Romney
Florida- lean Romney
Virginia- (barely) lean Romney

I've been trying to get into Skinny's EV game but the one state I keep having trouble predicting is Virginia, if only because parts of it were affected, flooded by Sandy. And mind you the areas affected are Democratic-friendly areas.

Florida is also tricky, I could actually see Obama winning there. But I could also see the very opposite.

Seems pretty even to me Dap. You agreed with me earlier that this was going to be close.

9 different '12 Electoral Predix collected together, all predict Obama victory. However they differ in final score (highest Obama EV is 332, lowest is 281.)

http://www.denverpost.com/politics-natio...ve-obama-ahead/

People can speculate all they want. But I think most of these polls that have Obama ahead are assuming their will be same Democratic turnout as there was in 2008. I don't see that happening. In fact this time it's the opposite.

Who did you give Ohio to?

Those states like Ohio, Iowa, and Wisconsin are tricky. They are overwhelmingly white and not progressively liberal.

Obama got 43% of white vote in 2008. I don't think he'll get that this time. Just guessing it will be 40%. Average white vote for Dems in a Presidential is between 37%-43 so I put Obama in the middle.

Then you have to worry about a larger white turnout than 2008. I am sure more white voters will be out because Romney/Ryan is a much stronger combo than McCane/Palin.

That's why Romney is polling so high in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Iowa. Even Pennsylvania is tightening and it's all because more white voters support Romney than they supported McCane. The white vote is making this a close race.

It will be close but at this juncture I would say Obama has a slight overall lead.

Thats not what early voting has been showing so far...but I agree it will very likely be lower.

I agree with you on the white vote. Obama has lost a lot of favor there. But I didn't have one 'scenario' that I thought was going to happen because I can't honestly say at this point. In many scenario's that I had, Romney could lose the entire midwest. But if he got NC, Fla, and VA (all likely to go to Romney anyway) and he gets New Hampshire and Ohio he wins.

This is the way I see it Dap. Obama didn't just win his base he also got most of the independents (like me) and crossovers from the Republican party who couldn't stand Sarah Palin back in 2008.

This time there will be NO Republicans voting for Obama whatsoever and he's lost a good chunk of independents. Plus the black vote that Obama had so much of last time will be much lower. Combine that with like Skinny said, more Republicans motivated to vote for a stronger tandem and to get Obama "out" you have a much closer of not even race.

Gotcha, I understand your opinion. Like you, most people argue that undecided voters tend to break against the incumbent, in this case Mr. Obama. But this has also not really been true in recent elections.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/2012-polls-incumbent-rule_n_2061595.html?utm_hp_ref=@pollster

In some states, also, Obama is at 50 percent of the vote in the polling average, or close to it, meaning that he wouldn’t need very many undecided voters to win.

Another point that has been made is that Romney has the momentum in the polls: whether or not he would win an election today, the argument goes, he is on a favorable trajectory that will allow him to win on Tuesday. I dont buy this argument as you can see from the evidence on the right column of the table below.



That the beauty of America, we are all entitled to our viewpoints and opinion. We will see who is right next week. I cant wait till all of this is over!

Dems havent really been able to keep up with the GOP.

The top three GOP groups spent $173 million in October while the top 3 Dem groups spent $76 million.

Among the organizations spending more than $5 million during October on independent expenditures -- typically, ads or other mass communications that overtly support or oppose federal political candidates:

1) American Crossroads, $71.64 million, mostly in opposition to Obama and in support of Romney.

2) Restore Our Future, $51.64 million, all in opposition to Obama or in support of Romney.

3) Crossroads GPS, $49.36 million, mostly in support of Romney and several Republican congressional candidates and in opposition to Obama and numerous Democratic House and Senate candidates , most notably Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Rep. Shelley Berkley (Nev.), Tim Kaine (Va.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.) and Joe Donnelly (Ind.).

4) Priorities USA Action, $31.47 million, all in opposition to Romney.

5) House Majority PAC, $25.29 million, mostly in opposition to numerous Republican House candidates, particularly Reps. Robert Dold (Ill.), Judy Biggert (Ill.), Jim Renacci and Michael Coffman (Colo.) and candidate Randy Altschuler (N.Y.).

6) Majority PAC, $21.73 million, mostly in opposition to Republican Senate candidates, particularly Tommy Thompson (Wis.), Linda McMahon (Conn.), Rep. Todd Akin (Mo.), Richard Mourdock (Ind.) and George Allen (Va.).

7) Service Employees International Union committees, $17.8 million, in support of Obama and numerous Democratic congressional candidates and in opposition to Romney and numerous Republican congressional candidates.

8) National Rifle Association committees, $15.4 million, mostly in support of Romney and numerous Republican congressional candidates and in opposition to Obama and numerous Democratic congressional candidates.

9) Americans for Tax Reform, $15.32 million, mostly against Democratic congressional candidates, particularly Rep. Bill Owens (N.Y.), Charlie Wilson (Ohio) and Al Lawson (Fla.).

10) U.S. Chamber of Commerce, $12.79 million, mostly in opposition to numerous Democratic congressional candidates including Senate candidate and Rep. Martin Heinrich, Brown and Baldwin.

11) FreedomWorks for America, $12 million, mostly in support of numerous Republican congressional candidates such as Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.) and Mourdock, and in opposition to numerous Democratic candidates including Tammy Duckworth (Ill.) and Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.).

12) American Future Fund, $10.15 million, mostly in opposition to Obama and in support of Romney.

13) Congressional Leadership Fund, $7.94 million, all in opposition to Democratic congressional candidates, particularly Rep. Betty Sutton (Ohio), Brad Schneider (Ill.) and Pat Kreitlow (Wis.).

14) League of Conservation Voters committees, $7.68 million, mostly in support of Obama and numerous Democratic congressional candidates and in opposition to Romney and numerous Republican congressional candidates.

15) Independence USA PAC, $7.32 million, mostly in support of Democratic congressional candidates Val Demings (Fla.) and Gloria Negrete McLeod (Calif.) and Republican congressional candidates Andrew Roraback (Conn.) and Dold.

16) Ending Spending Action Fund, $7.25 million, mostly in support of Romney and Republican Senate candidates including Flake and in opposition to Obama and Democratic Senate candidates including Bob Kerrey (Neb.) and Brown.

17) American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees committees, $7.01 million, mostly against Republican congressional candidates, particularly Flake, Thompson and Allen.

18) Americans for Job Security, $6.79 million, all against Obama.

19) EMILY's List's Women Vote!, $6.17 million, in opposition to numerous Republican congressional candidates, particularly Sen. Dean Heller (Nev.) and Thompson, and in support of several Democratic congressional candidates, most notably Baldwin and McLeod.

20) Planned Parenthood committees, $5.56 million, mostly in support of Obama and numerous Democratic congressional candidates and in opposition to Romney and numerous Republican congressional candidates.

21) Now or Never PAC, $5.33 million, mostly in opposition to several Democratic congressional candidates including Sen. Jon Tester (Mont.), Richard Carmona (Ariz.), Brown and Duckworth and in support of Akin.

http://www.nj.com/us-politics/index.ssf/2012/11/outside_groups_spend_500m_in_o.html

Here's the problem with Florida for Obama. It's almost 40% black and Latino and it's a toss-up in some polls while leaning Romney in others. Toss in the Jewish vote and Florida is 40% minority because the Jewish vote is overwhelmingly Obama.

If Obama can't win a swing state with so many minorities, that he won in 2008, what's going to happen in OH, NH, WI, etc????

Obama has to win Florida, not Ohio.

I'm with you Dap. I enjoy talking politics but it gives me a headache

Anyway the only poll I really trust is Rasmussen which is one of the best I think. They have Romney up marginally or tied so you could make arguments either way. But I agree we will have to see next Tuesday. Who knows what will happen!

Ohio is very important for Romney, but Florida is one of the keys for Obama.

There's the whole issue of voter suppression which is a real concern IMO especially when the former State GOP chairman says he was in meetings with other GOPer's where they actively discussed ways to suppress the minority vote in Florida.

@WSJwashington: Obama holds an edge over Mitt Romney in Florida (49%-47%) and Ohio (51%-45%) , new WSJ/NBC/Marist polls show.

Not sure why WSJ uses a D+9 sample for Ohio but I guess we'll find out Tuesday night. Or Wednesday morning.

Ronnie that's coming from NBC. I don't trust their polls as far as I can throw a sumo wrestler. FOX is biased too. Real clear politics has them at a dead heat in Ohio and a Romney slight edge in Florida and I'm more willing to bet on that than super liberal NBC and WSJ.