Really? Obama won by like 7-8 points, I don't think many people thought that was a huge win. Bush won by 12, which was huge considering the public's attitude towards Bush's administration. I was still a kid in the 96 election, that was a 9 point defeat. What was the public's reaction to that election? It seems like most elections have been around 7-12 points since the 1980 election which was more like an 18 point defeat. I expect Obama to win by no more than 4 points. I think a lot more people are going to vote against him than are willing to admit. Unfortunately, I don't think Mitt is any better of a choice. Can't wait for 2016...
Not sure where you are getting your figures but Obama won by 6 points and Bush won 2004 by only 2 points. But I see your point. I just think in today's political environment, a 10 point win would be a big win. And I think it's just the opposite about people quietly voting. Can you name one demographic besides white males (from the south) that Romney has a chance to win? Women Minorities Young people Educated people Obama will take the majority of all of these.
A slight jab at Republicans? Lol I got my numbers from uselectionatlas.org And now that I think about it, I think I just quickly grabbed the popular vote, rather than the electoral. You think that all women are pro-abortion, there are many socially conservative women who will vote Republican. Minorities tend to vote Democratic, but a large proportion are anti-gay marriage and will vote Republican strictly on that issue (I knew 7, SEVEN!, black friends with parents who voted for Bush ONLY because of gay marriage). I do think he will take the majority of young voters, and a majority of the minorities. I disagree about women. Recent polls show Romney narrowly leading that block. Remember white's still are 72% of the population, he doesn't have to win every demographic as long as he gets the majority of that group.
Interesting Most polling I've seen for women have Obama up 7 to 9 points depending on the poll. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
via TPM -- Well, That’s Honest The state official in charge of administering Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Law, in court today: “I don’t know what the law says.”
There is not a single mention of race in the entire post -- nor is anything racial implied. That's a fact.
It is better to stop 1 fraudulent vote even if it costs millions of dollars and prevents millions of democrats from voting.
absentee/early voting and electronic machines seem like the most likely avenues for fraud, rather than showing up pretending to be someone else
CBS News cites them as a liberal group. LINK Also it looks like the Brennan Center is backed by George Soros. Another Article And Another Article In this day and age how can someone even function without a photo ID. You can't open a bank account, cash a check, buy a house, fly on an airplane, heck I can't enter my children's school without showing a photo ID. I am constantly asked to show my ID whether it be at a pharmacy, hospitals, doctor offices, etc.... If there are a lot of poor minorities who do not have photo ID's, then they may very well be missing out on programs designed to help them. If these poor people are in need of welfare programs, they couldn't even cash a check if they received one.
Government regulation (through denying them suffrage) is the solution. It's not for anything else, mind you.
??????? Good morning Northside! My point is having a photo ID is an almost necessity in this day and age. Having a photo id has a lot more benefits than just voting. Since you brought it up, how is requiring an id denying suffrage when anyone can get one? Now it may deny suffrage to illegal aliens who can't get an id. MC quoted the Brennan Center report which says that voter fraud is nonexistent, given the almost necessity to have a photo id, I say there are VERY few who don't already have them. BTW, how did you become a Rockets fan living in Canada?
