It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by fnpmitchreturns
Heff... Obama wins we lose!
Romney wins we lose!
hopeless change ......
Originally posted by tport17
Bush accidentally voted for Obama
Hehe. I guess he got confused by the voting machine and accidentally voted for Obama. When he tried to fix it, he thought "cast vote" meant get rid of your vote. The election officials wouldn't let him recast his vote. Too funny.
Originally posted by beezzer
Originally posted by gangdumstyle
Oh and JUST FYI, any of you Romney or Obama supporters get mad about loosing tonight,
I am waiting on my property line with a 12 gauge..
I'll be waiting on MY property line with 80 proof.
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by gangdumstyle
Can we do shots before you shoot us?
Might make the end a bit more pleasant.
Why the next president is lucky
Partisans always prefer victory to defeat, but in retrospect some elections look like poisoned chalices. Jimmy Carter’s narrow victory over Gerald Ford in 1976, for example, merely saddled the Democrats with the blame for economic problems that were global in scope and paved the way for Ronald Reagan’s 1980 election. In 2004, Democrats were desperate to boot George W. Bush from office, but his second term wound up being uneventful in policy terms, and John Kerry’s defeat allowed his party to duck a financial crisis that almost certainly would have come about one way or another.
Moody’s Analytics, for example, published an analysis of the economic outlook back in April that has 11.7 million jobs over the next four years as its baseline forecast. Macroeconomic Advisers has made a similar forecast, calling for 12.3 million jobs over the next four years.
There’s no reason to think 2013-2016 will see the kind of super-fast growth we saw in the late-1930s or mid-1980s, but it’s overwhelmingly likely that the next four or five years will look a lot better than the past four or five. That means whoever wins the election is likely to get a similar halo, and our understanding of Obama’s legacy will hang in the balance. At a telling moment on the infamous 47 percent tape, Romney told donors that “if we win on Nov. 6, there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country,” meaning that “we’ll see capital come back, and we’ll see—without actually doing anything—we’ll actually get a boost in the economy.”
This do-nothing approach to economic recovery was roundly mocked. But Romney is probably right: He won’t have to do anything to preside over a recovery. And neither will Obama. And that, paradoxically, is part of what makes the stakes in this election so high.
Originally posted by Zaanny
Of course the group that hands out free money is going to get the majority vote.
IF your on the DOLE and have not worked.... EVER
You should loose the right to vote.
Its no different than buying votes.
Originally posted by sixswornsermon
reply to post by LightWarrior11
And here I was trying not to be negative, and you have to bring reality crashing in with you.....
According to the R.N.C, there has never been a Republican candidate voted to the presidency without winning Ohio.
This explains the unprecedented campaign funds and energy expended in Ohio by both campaigns.
To date, Ohio has been bombarded by hundreds if not thousands of television campaign ads, as the candidates and their volunteers canvas the state as influence peddlers. As of this writing, the Romney campaign has spent no less than $100 million in swing states (including Ohio) on advertising, with the Obama campaign exceeding that figure.