Member since: Fri Jul 13, 2012, 12:38 PM
Number of posts: 496
Number of posts: 496
Secret Service is with threats against the president.
Since Mr Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service.
When folks do this to a president
then other wacky folks get the idea that their president is not "one of them". He's been heavily demonized by the right wing.
I suspect the threats reduced some with the notion that Romney would look after this "problem" for these wackos. Since that didn't happen, I expect President Obama is in as much danger as he's ever been.
And let's not forget that this same president is the man who took bin Laden out so the al qaeda terrorists or Khadafi clan probably wouldn't mind knocking him off either.
I also suspect that is why they yanked the security detail on Romney as quickly as they did because they're overloaded.
As I've observed him, it's amazed me how calm and cool he can be in front of a crowd knowing that at any given moment, one of these nuts might try to take him out.
I worry about him.
If any of you encounter a concern:
How can I report a threat towards a protectee?
And if you misplace that link, the Dept of Homeland Security will forward a concern.
I have made a couple of reports some years back and the Secret Service were great, nailed a guy and were zero hassle to deal with. They're simply outstanding people.
If you ever go to see him, watch his back.
Sorry for any notion of paranoia but having been a big admirer of the Kennedys, MLK and John Lennon, maybe I'm a little more hyper about this. The anguish when you lose someone like that, even though you don't know them personally, can be pretty bad. It was for me. You all worked so hard for four more years with this man as your president - I'd rather be cautious and over react a little than not say anything. I have great affection for President Obama.
Sorry if this bothered anyone.
Posted by cleduc | Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:23 PM (3 replies)
and mouse over the counties to catch what was left - or look at a list like I did for Florida.
(the above link was updated in real time)
You could see, as FOX News did, that there was nothing of substance left for Romney in Ohio. Rove talked about Hamilton county but Obama was winning that by 5 points with a bunch of the vote in.
And it went on and on until the others had been announced though he'd back off some when Obama got a 29,000 vote lead around the time FOX announced IA and OR had gone blue at 11:45pm or so.
Rove would also know their chances of winning NV were nil because of the gap that remained and how far behind they were in early voting.
So I do think Rove was in some form of denial on Ohio. How sinister that was, like you, I'm not sure what his motivation was.
But my knock is more on Romney because by 11:45 or so, it had to be clear to them that it was over. IA, NV, OR and CO had gone blue and Obama was at 272.
Further, around the same time, when FL was at 84% returned, around that time, it projected to Obama though the margin was slim enough I could allow them some slack. But VA, using the same approach looked grim because so much of the blue part of the state remained to come in with little red left for Romney - long before they called that state as I was watching it.
Like you or me could, except likely sooner with someone dedicated to monitor each state, the Romney folks would be watching the county by county returns. They would know the margins and numbers they would need to hit in key counties in order to win or lose and like you and me, can project the tallies to 100% - just like the networks do. So they would know they were screwed before the networks went on the air with it in any given state.
In my opinion, the Romney folks knew it was over well before 11:45pm and I suspect they dragged it out to deny Obama his moment and avoid as many seeing Romney's concession until after most folks had gone to bed.
Posted by cleduc | Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:04 PM (1 replies)
Fox as the election came down.
I was tracking as they went along. Here's the timeline I had:
07:00PM VT 3 3
08:00PM ME 4 7
08:00PM RI 4 11
08:00PM DC 3 14
08:00PM IL 20 34
08:00PM MD 10 44
08:00PM CT 7 51
08:00PM DE 3 54
08:00PM MA 11 65
09:00PM MI 16 81
09:04PM NY 29 110
09:10PM NJ 14 124
09:15pm PA 20 144
09:26pm WI 10 154
09:37PM NH 4 158
10:23PM NM 5 163
10:48PM MN 10 173
11:02PM CA 55 228
11:02PM HI 4 232
11:02PM WA 12 244
11:10PM IA 6 250
11:26PM OH FOX Debacle starts - 18 EV excluded
11:33PM OR 7 257 OR +10.5 not a shock or hard to call
11:47PM CO 9 266 CO +4.7 - not hard to call when polls closed at 9pm
11:51PM NV 6 272 CBS says NV +6.6 LIKELY @10:22PM so this wasn't a shock or hard to concede
Even without Ohio, the election was over around 11:51PM when NV or CO was called.
Obama had already won without VA, FL or OH.
VA then was called at 12:11pm
So a lengthy hissy fit by Rove over Ohio or Romney dragging his heels to concede didn't make tons of sense to me at the time. It was over even if they wanted to bicker about OH, VA or FL. The other states needed to win were so handily won, they were beyond reproach with the smallest margin being +4.7.
Posted by cleduc | Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:52 PM (2 replies)
which is greater than
1980 Ronald Reagan 50.75%
2004 George W. Bush 50.73%
1976 Jimmy Carter 50.08%
1960 John F. Kennedy 49.72%
1948 Harry S. Truman 49.55%
1996 Bill Clinton 49.23%
2000 George W. Bush 47.87%
1968 Richard Nixon 43.42%
1992 Bill Clinton 43.01%
1860 Abraham Lincoln 39.65%
1824 John Quincy Adams 30.92%
It would tie him for 26th in 48 presidential elections since they started keeping track of the numbers (to the best of my knowledge).
The 67,924,682 votes projected for Obama is the second highest in US history, behind Obama's 69,499,428 in 2008. Those two vote totals exceed Ronald Reagan's by 39,000,000 votes and GW Bush by nearly 25,000,000.
Obama's 332 EV exceeds both GW Bush years (271 + 286 EV).
But the GOP is questioning whether Obama has a mandate ....
Posted by cleduc | Thu Nov 8, 2012, 10:10 PM (1 replies)
after trying to dig this country out of one of the worst holes it's ever been in, I don't think anyone is exaggerating when they describe what those people did as the greatest campaign in US history. They beat one gigantic nasty experienced organization pretty badly.
And that video helps to shine some light on why: a great leader surrounded by great people.
Posted by cleduc | Thu Nov 8, 2012, 09:23 PM (0 replies)
Just before the election, Real Clear had Obama with 201 EV (solid and leaning)
Just before Sandy, Karl Rove had it with Obama 221 EV (solid and leaning)
that was the closest Rove ever had the race until the day before the election. And that flies in the face of his lie about Sandy.
How can Rove predict Obama's position got worse (Rove's final map/prediction) and that Romney was going to win:
Rove's Final Prediction
while he now claims at the same time that Sandy killed his candidate's chances? There were dozens of polls published after Sandy - well before the eve of the election when he made his final prediction.
And if you look at these Rove maps:
Rove never had Romney ahead until the day before the election - well after Sandy
Here's one of many paths for Obama to 270
201 EV from Real Clear Map with solid and safe leans
+ 16 Michigan
+ 20 Pennsylvania
+ 10 Wisconsin
+ 6 Nevada
+ 18 Ohio
271 Electoral Votes for Obama to win
Now look at the poll of polls for those five "toss up" states and see if you notice a pattern:
The obvious pattern is that Romney never led any of them in the poll of polls. You could add Iowa to that list if you want. Obama had 277 EV according to the poll of polls in states that Romney NEVER led. From the time when Romney won the GOP primary to when Romney won the first debate to just before Sandy and just after Sandy ... Romney NEVER led in those states.
And in those five states, Romney very rarely ever led in a poll - while the vast majority of the few polls Romney did lead in were GOP leaning pollsters or outliers.
And those poll of polls graphs on Real Clear include the GOP leaning polls that shrunk the real margin = those graphs represent the worst case below reality.
Romney never led this campaign nor was it all that close in the Electoral College throughout the campaign
Sandy may have helped a touch but basically had little to do with it.
So the GOP can shove their nonsense rhetoric, of pathetic dishonest excuses for ripping off their billionaires by lying to them about the state of the race to keep the cash coming, down some cave on Bullshit Mountain. Hopefully, that's what the billionaires say to Karl Rove when he tries to BS them again today about what went on in this election and how Rove blew hundreds of millions of their dollars - justified by his bullshit.
End of rant.
Posted by cleduc | Thu Nov 8, 2012, 03:21 PM (0 replies)
Date of third debate was October 22, 2012.
On October 29th, 8pm, a week after the 3rd debate, Sandy came ashore
and Obama gets a little bump that also falls away a bit shortly afterwards.
Nate also reviewed this question:
and more or less, had very roughly similar conclusions as Dr. Wang.
But note: Obama was never behind in either of those projections at any time since Romney was nominated. And again, Sandy didn't provide a colossal bump for Obama nor a bump that stuck.
Rove's public analysis of the effect by Sandy on the election is about as accurate and honest as his original prediction on who would win. He has to say that in the wake of hosing the billionaires of hundreds of millions of dollars for a campaign of lies that based it's chances on more lies to get that money in the first place.
Once again, the GOP is trying to go with the rhetoric to scream as loudly as they can over the facts.
Posted by cleduc | Thu Nov 8, 2012, 10:22 AM (0 replies)
here's what I got:
St Nate Actual
CO 2.5 3.7
FL 0.0 0.5
IA 3.2 5.6
NH 3.5 5.4
NC -1.7 -2.2
NV 4.5 6.6
NM 9.4 9.9
OH 3.6 1.9
PA 5.9 5.1
VA 2.0 3.1
WI 5.5 6.7
Nate's projections are often on the conservative side.
The three states where Nate projected high for Obama were:
PA, OH & NC
Pollster and Votematic were in the same boat on those three.
This Daily Kos poster really analyzed the early vote in NC
It was a bit of a surprise NC shifted as much as it did to the ultimate margin it arrived at.
I'm not into conspiracy theories and making accusations based upon a convenient stringing together of loose facts. But I have never seen an election with more reports of one party trying to suppress or game the vote than this one. To me, it was staggering and by far the biggest reason I lacked confidence in Nate's forecast.
As the standard bearer of democracy for the world, US elections should be beyond reproach. Clearly, there is ample evidence to suspect with the various and numerous shady tactics throughout the battleground states, this election was not beyond reproach. If I could, those are the three states that I would look more closely at or audit if possible.
Something needs to be done.
Posted by cleduc | Wed Nov 7, 2012, 10:25 PM (1 replies)
last night so full of BS designed to deny Obama a moment during prime time viewing hours with his victory speech.
Whether Romney won Ohio or not, they had to know how Colorado was trending and that along with Nevada - where they were hopelessly behind in early voting, was all Obama needed to clinch. And internally, they had to know Obama had clinched with those two states.
In other words, Ohio, Florida & Virginia weren't essential
Obama had 272 EV already with NH, WI, NV, CO and IA.
The old, rich white guys didn't pay hundreds of millions of dollars to watch a black guy show up their white, aristocratic puppet presidential candidate on national television is the feeling I was left with. As one of them said (paraphrased) “I don’t want him to feel like he has a mandate”
Posted by cleduc | Wed Nov 7, 2012, 04:09 PM (0 replies)
It affirmed much of what I thought about the man.
"Most men wore jacket and tie; women donned dresses and heels. Secret Service agents blocked reporters from mixing with the Romney supporters as they sipped cocktails and nibbled canapes."
Take that in and then think about President Obama's rally. I doubt that crowd would get tears of joy on their canapes.
And that has always been something that has struck me when watching the crowds of the two men. In Obama's crowds, you often see adoring faces, energy and uplifting emotion. In Romney's crowds, they either seem placid and emotionless or fired up with hate.
Good riddance to that lying son of a bitch who didn't get the coronation his rich buddies tried to buy for him.
Posted by cleduc | Wed Nov 7, 2012, 03:41 PM (2 replies)