QuakerOats;1314770 wrote:Ohio now tied; lol

:laugh:

say bye bye to the current SCOTUS. Obama another 4 years to make the SC left leaning. Support for the 2nd amendment only passed with a 5-4 split, one more liberal justice on the bench and no more firearms.

Manhattan Buckeye;1314977 wrote:... it would take a lunatic to want to run for POTUS in '16.

Joe Biden. No, I don't even want to think that.

MoldyDog;1314978 wrote:Nobody invests in losers. China invests in us because we're winners. Simple as that.

We can only win as long as we control the game, lose the US dollar's influence and we lose control of the game. Simple as that.

dazedconfused;1314971 wrote:he's right. votes for certain candidates in certain states will never matter

True but this country is not a democracy it is a republic. The states elect their president as prescribed in the Constitution. Each state is awarded electoral votes that comprise of their representation in congress. Would you abolish the Senate as well? Get the ball rolling on a constitutional amendment then. Look I am not happy with the results of this election. I just do not seek to change it because I do not like the results. It is a good system. The states have have elected their president. So be it. Romney is not going to win the popular vote either. Believer will come to his senses in the morning.

tk421;1314980 wrote:say bye bye to the current SCOTUS. Obama another 4 years to make the SC left leaning. Support for the 2nd amendment only passed with a 5-4 split, one more liberal justice on the bench and no more firearms.

Lets be real here. The founders were wise men when they ingrained the 2nd amendment into the constitution and trusted the free spirit of Americans to protect it. The final check against tyranny is solidly in place. Any reasonable federal politician or judge would never attempt to ban them as it would inaugurate civil war. Fear not my friend.

majorspark;1314989 wrote:Lets be real here. The founders were wise men when they ingrained the 2nd amendment into the constitution and trusted the free spirit of Americans to protect it. The final check against tyranny is solidly in place. Any reasonable federal politician or judge would never attempt to ban them as it would inaugurate civil war. Fear not my friend.

I'd encourage you to read (or re-read if you have already) the dissent in Heller. Just one more vote (let alone 3) could possibly make owning a handgun in one's home illegal in local jurisdictions.

Anybody know were the other candidates finished percentage wise?

Con_Alma;1314998 wrote:Anybody know were the ther candidates finished percentae wise?

Yes, the 47 percent lost. The country has lost. And even the Ghost of Saint Ronnie can not save us.

Con_Alma;1314998 wrote:Anybody know were the ther candidates finished percentae wise?

We might not know for a few days (at least an exact number), many local precincts won't completely release until they count the provisional ballots.

Where can I find a popular vote breakdown? It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

I can see some of you need this


[video=youtube;Nnjkb4q6FKU][/video]

majorspark;1314969 wrote:My diagnosis is you suffer from election fatigue and you have a mild case of Romnesia. My prescription is get some rest. In the morning read up on the history of the founding. Do a thorough reading of the constitution and get back to me in the morning.

Yes, yes I get that the "system" is designed to give "small states" a voice in the process and supposedly helps protect the federal system of governance, but when it comes to POTUS I still think the time has come to elect by popular vote.

The Feds have systematically chipped away at power held by state and local government anyway. If that's the case then let's put real power in the hands of the individual voter when it comes to electing POTUS.

And yes that would have meant we would have had a President Gore in 2000 and it also means Obama would still have been re-elected.

With the exceptions of the importance of casting votes for local issues and candidates at the local level, when we cast our ballot for POTUS I can't help but think, "what's the point?"

I have never quit anything in my life and I’m not about to start today. I have many decisions I have to make over the next few months regarding my businesses, personal retirement and financial investments. Many of you who voted for Obama will also in the next four year be faced with difficulties you do not anticipate when you case your vote yesterday. As for those who voted Romney we know what to expect, so now is not the time for giving up, feeling defeated but to dig in, prepare for the next opportunity at the polls to make our voices hear.

My America has never given up on me I'm not about to give up on America, freedom and liberty ...........

Manhattan Buckeye;1314982 wrote:We can only win as long as we control the game, lose the US dollar's influence and we lose control of the game. Simple as that.

Of course, you are smarter than the entire Chinese braintrust. We won't come close to losing the game, unless the tea partiers in the house don't get their crap together.

It is that simple.

ptown_trojans_1;1314831 wrote:Uhh, that is where people live.
It is the 21st century, world wide people are moving to cities. It is human nature. Accept it.

Yeah, we get that. But take Ohio for instance. Obama won 16 counties, Romney won 72. So 72 counties could have had 0 people show up to vote and it wouldn't have made one difference.

That seems disturbing to me.

WebFire;1315034 wrote:Yeah, we get that. But take Ohio for instance. Obama won 16 counties, Romney won 72. So 72 counties could have had 0 people show up to vote and it wouldn't have made one difference.

That seems disturbing to me.

+1

Now here comes ptown with a smug, arrogant response to this.

Are we not allowed to point out how odd it seems that Romney won 72 of the 88 counties and lost the state?

SportsAndLady;1315038 wrote:+1

Now here comes ptown with a smug, arrogant response to this.

Are we not allowed to point out how odd it seems that Romney won 72 of the 88 counties and lost the state?

I think this is a ridiculous argument. He many have won 72 of the 88 but im sure 1 of the counties he lost had as many people as 10 of the ones he won. Why should a country with 10 people count as much as a county with 30? That doesn't make sense.


And I voted for Romney in Franklin county

I'm doing my Told Ya So Dance up and down the aisle. I voted for BHO because I like to back a winner. Will he do anything that dramatically changes my lifestyle over the next 4 yrs? Doubtful. The Repubs need to seriously question whether to jettison the Ultra Religious Right and Gun Toters before they make another run. Right now many moderate intelligent Americans are voting Democrat because the Far Right Fringe is downright scary and a Mormon wasn't going to change that perception.

ohiobucks1;1315054 wrote:I think this is a ridiculous argument. He many have won 72 of the 88 but im sure 1 of the counties he lost had as many people as 10 of the ones he won. Why should a country with 10 people count as much as a county with 30? That doesn't make sense.


And I voted for Romney in Franklin county

It wasn't an argument. Merely just pointing out most of the state is republican but the dems won the big cities and won the state.

ohiobucks1;1315054 wrote:I think this is a ridiculous argument. He many have won 72 of the 88 but im sure 1 of the counties he lost had as many people as 10 of the ones he won. Why should a country with 10 people count as much as a county with 30? That doesn't make sense.


And I voted for Romney in Franklin county

Why do people always take the opposite extreme to counter someone's point? Did I say a country with 10 should count as much as 30? No. But our system says that the country with 10 has NO say, as it was in Ohio. Obama won popular vote in Ohio 50-48%. Yet he got all the electoral votes for the state.

That is what needs looked at.

In Florida, Obama won 13 counties, Romney 54. Obama squeaked by on popular vote, yet gets all the electoral votes. You see where I am going?

Yet people want to rip Mitt for his 47% comment.

ohiobucks1;1315054 wrote:I think this is a ridiculous argument. He many have won 72 of the 88 but im sure 1 of the counties he lost had as many people as 10 of the ones he won. Why should a country with 10 people count as much as a county with 30?

For reasons similar to the election of 2 senators from every state, regardless of size/population. One of the major inentions is to not have small urban areas dictate policy, solely due to population, to the vast majority of the country, when neither areas have much in common. In other words, what might be good for Massachusetts is probably not good for Nebraska, and what might be good for Cleveland, is not good for Paulding County.

Tiernan;1315059 wrote:I'm doing my Told Ya So Dance up and down the aisle. I voted for BHO because I like to back a winner. Will he do anything that dramatically changes my lifestyle over the next 4 yrs? Doubtful. The Repubs need to seriously question whether to jettison the Ultra Religious Right and Gun Toters before they make another run. Right now many moderate intelligent Americans are voting Democrat because the Far Right Fringe is downright scary and a Mormon wasn't going to change that perception.

Interesting, about half the country just voted against the ultra-liberal, radical left. In fact, Mr. Romney won the majority of your so-called moderates; the independants. If being a defender of liberty and an advocate of fiscal sanity is "scary" and "far right fringe", then this nation obviously has serious issues that may well be unsolvable.