Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's already been reported that Johnson would hurt Obama in Nevada more than Rmoney. Social libertarian reign supreme there and they have the need to free the weed.
"At worst from Obama’s perspective, the thing is tied. As far as we know, looking at all the averages, on a state-by-state basis he’s ahead. If you assume seven or eight states in play and go through all the permutations, Obama often wins by taking just two or three of them."
"53% of those surveyed in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin think Obama was the winner to 42% who pick Romney."
Got something else for you...Portlandia likes Johnson's "free the weed" message also. We'll just have to see if that matters or not since Obama can only win Oregon by winning Portland and Eugene.
Got something else for you...Portlandia likes Johnson's "free the weed" message also. We'll just have to see if that matters or not since Obama can only win Oregon by winning Portland and Eugene.
THAT is NOT going to happen.
Oregon WILL be "blue".
THAT is NOT going to happen.
Oregon WILL be "blue".
Ken
I admit it's not likely. Just saying that Oregon's dynamics differ than say Pennsylvania. Portland is FAR left on civil liberties and drugs and not pleased with Obama's NDAA and war on drugs. They are principled "let the world burn" types who are more than happy to "throw away their vote" just as a poke in the eye for the establishment Democrats. Did you see the Nader turnout in 2000? Any poll without third party candidates in Oregon is garbage.
I admit it's not likely. Just saying that Oregon's dynamics differ than say Pennsylvania. Portland is FAR left on civil liberties and drugs and not pleased with Obama's NDAA and war on drugs. They are principled "let the world burn" types who are more than happy to "throw away their vote" just as a poke in the eye for the establishment Democrats.
Living "right next door" in "Liberal" Seattle (where we are likely to pass an intiative decriminalizing weed next month) I'm fully aware of the views in Oregon - and there's no way Oregon will go to Romney.
You're dreaming if you think otherwise.
Living "right next door" in "Liberal" Seattle (where we are likely to pass an intiative decriminalizing weed next month) I'm fully aware of the views in Oregon - and there's no way Oregon will go to Romney.
You're dreaming if you think otherwise.
Ken
What was Nader turnout in 2000? These are "principle above all" people and it's a big mistake to poll people in Portlandia with only two options. Furthermore, it's pure arrogance to assume that translates directly without at least a 5% play in the polls. Seattle is more orderly liberal and tend to be more pragmatic and robotic-like, filing in order with the establishment.
Again, it's a 5-1 odds play in my estimate, and I would take a bet with ANYONE on C/D if they gave 10-1 odds and a way to pay up if I win.
Obama will want words with whomever in Seattle is passing this initiative.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230
Actually Rasmussen typically uses a D+2 or D+3 turnout model for their polls, so the race is actually closer to a dead heat than 54 to 46.
Either way, I agree with you that Minnesota is safe blue. The voters there have proven their ignorance time and time again by electing clowns like Al Franken and Jesse Ventura. Plus the Vikings suck.
Include elected nutters like Michele Bachmann, and Tom Emmer, and I would tend to agree with you...
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73
Again, it's a 5-1 odds play in my estimate, and I would take a bet with ANYONE on C/D if they gave 10-1 odds and a way to pay up if I win.
I accept PayPal!
Although I suspect you're just another one of those rightwingers who post lotsa b.s. feverishly leading up to the election.... and then drop out of sight, only to sign on under a new name when your guy loses.
What was Nader turnout in 2000? These are "principle above all" people and it's a big mistake to poll people in Portlandia with only two options. Furthermore, it's pure arrogance to assume that translates directly without at least a 5% play in the polls. Seattle is more orderly liberal and tend to be more pragmatic and robotic-like, filing in order with the establishment.
Again, it's a 5-1 odds play in my estimate, and I would take a bet with ANYONE on C/D if they gave 10-1 odds and a way to pay up if I win.
Obama will want words with whomever in Seattle is passing this initiative.
Nader got 5% of the vote in Oregon in 2000 - but Nader isn't a LIBERTARIAN - he was a GREEN. The Libertarian candidate in 2000 (Harry Brown) got just 1/2 of ONE percent in 2000.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
