Is Barack Obama’s Revenge Pitch a Plug for Mitt Romney?

One of my favorite slogans this election season is “don’t boo, vote.” The president uses the line when his supporters start booing Mitt Romney, and it’s an effective way of noting that you ought to express your frustration by voting (even a spoiled ballot is more of a message than not voting, right?) The slogan would work just as well for Mitt Romney or any other candidate running. Don’t boo Barack Obama, vote against him.

On Friday, though, Obama took the slogan a step further, ad libbing that “voting is the best revenge.” Revenge? For what? A day later Romney had seized on the divisive remark and the Obama campaign’s press secretary tried to clarify what exactly Obama meant by revenge: “[I]f you don’t like the policies, if you don’t like the plan that Gov. Romney is putting forward, if you think that’s a bad deal for the middle class, then you can go to the voting booth and cast your ballot. It’s nothing more complicated than that,” said Jen Psaki.

But how does that fit into revenge? Dictionary.com defines the noun form of revenge as “the act of revenging; retaliation for injuries or wrongs; vengeance” and the verb form as “to exact punishment or expiation for a wrong on behalf of, especially in a resentful or vindictive spirit.” It’s hard to imagine what wrong Mitt Romney may have exacted on a potential voter. Bashing the president? Seems like weak tea.

Instead, treating voting like revenge reads, on its face, like a call to vote for Mitt Romney. After all, of all the candidates on the ballot tomorrow, Barack Obama is the only one in a position of leadership on whom the present economic or political policy conditions could be blamed. Many people upset with Obama, I imagine, are voting for Romney. But they’re also, presumably, voting for candidates like Gary Johnson or even Jill Stein, Rocky Anderson or Virgil Goode. And presumably, at least some of those third party voters might be persuaded to vote for Romney, especially, perhaps, if you framed it as a matter of “revenge.” Romney is by far the most likely candidate to defeat the president tomorrow, and so it stands to reason if you were trying to exact revenge at the ballot box for the failed policies of this president, you’d vote for Romney.  The Romney campaign, of course, has latched on to the president’s “revenge” comments, using them on the campaign trail and in ads. Romney says you should “vote for love of country.” But perhaps he should’ve pointed out, too, that if you do actually want to vote for revenge, you could vote for him.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • BarryD||

    The first time I voted, it was because I liked the candidate.

    Ever since, I've only voted for revenge.

  • ||

    The first time I voted, I was a moron, and came to regret what I'd done about a month later.

    Ever since, I've just said, "Fuck this shit," and gotten wasted instead.

  • BarryD||

    Why not go to the polls, once you're wasted, though?

    I mean, that's why they try to put them in walking distance, right?

  • db||

    If I tried to walk to my polling place it would take at least an hour.

  • ||

    That's probably because the government decided what constitutes walking distance and fucked it up, just like it does everything else.

  • BarryD||

    That's why it's a bad idea to get TOO wasted. It would take me an hour to walk there, too, if I went all out.

  • ||

    Can I get stoned instead?

  • BarryD||

    Sure.

    Or speedball. That won't slow you down so much, but will make the election more palatable.

  • rts||

    Obligatory: Don't say revenge

  • ||

    By questioning the wisdom and benevolence of the Dear Leader, Mitt Romney bas comitted an unconscionable crime against the people.

    Because that's really the only way you can justify calling for revenge against Romney, who hasn't harmed anyone. If anything he's given the Tony's of the world a scapegoat to blame their personal failings on, something Democrats are always keeen to exploit.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's entirely absurd. Again, Obama can't see to get his head around the fact that he's the incumbent.

  • John||

    It is not like he has been President for the last four years or anything.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I think his campaign against the incumbent is succeeding.

  • John||

    It has been the strangest re-election campaign ever run. I have yet to meet a single Obama supporter who can tell me what he plans to do with a secord term or why anyone should vote for him beyond some vague words about how horrible the other side is and "Bush"!

  • Pro Libertate||

    He needs more time!

    To do what?

    He needs more time!

  • ||

    It's time all the way down.

  • Brutus||

    Rome wasn't sacked in a day.

  • ||

    Well, you got to hand it to him. Obama ran as if he wasn't the incumbent and managed to get away with it quite well.

  • Killazontherun||

    Hand nothing to him. The press was every bit as servile as Jann Wenner asking Obama what he liked least about his opponent. The way they blamed Romney for Benghazi, and took umbrage at his criticism of the Egyptian embassy appeasement of barbarians, was surreal. It's like having a couple of billion extra in campaign funds for him.

  • ||

    Hand nothing to him. The press was every bit as servile as Jann Wenner asking Obama what he liked least about his opponent. The way they blamed Romney for Benghazi, and took umbrage at his criticism of the Egyptian embassy appeasement of barbarians, was surreal. It's like having a couple of billion extra in campaign funds for him.

    Yes, all true.

  • Nephilium||

    As someone said here in Ohio recently, the only thing both the Republicans and Democrats have said in all of their advertisements is why you shouldn't vote for the other guy.

    And in this case, I agree with both of them. There's lots of reasons to not vote for Obama or Romney.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I found some of those reasons compelling as well, which is why I voted for Gary Johnson nearly a week ago.

  • Randian||

    derp derp that means you hate Romney derp.

    I think that if a gun were held to my head and I absolutely had to vote for one of the "Big Two", I would vote for Obama solely on the fact I think he's less likely to get us into a war with Iran, so I'll head the Team Red Retard Railroad off at the pass with this one.

  • John||

    Why do you think that Obama, a guy who has drone striked half of the world and who is currently planning to intervene in Syria and already has intervened in Libya, won't go to war with Iran?

    What makes you think Obama won't go to war? He has done nothing in the last four years that would support that assumption. Absolutley nothing. And since he doesn't have to worry about re-election and will have a fawning media, two things Romney won't have, isn't he more likely to go to war?

    That position makes no sense.

  • Killazontherun||

    Foreign policy is much different from economic policy for us of the libertarian bent. We are not always right when we stick to our principles. No one is always on the right side of events when calculating what should go down. The WMDs could have still existed in Iraq in '02-'03, though I was persuaded the previous inspectors actually did a pretty good job. If Saddam's people were more clever than they were in fact, that would not have been a given by any means.

    If you stick with your principles, and I'm all for that, you are going to find yourself on the losing end of events as well as on occasion getting it right. Here, you are dealing with human actors who are much more volatile than we and the Soviets were in the Cold War. I agree on the principle of non-involvement, but what if shit seriously devolves into a shooting match between Israel and Iran, what is our back up plan? Get out of the way? Will that be conducive to a quick deescalation or make it more likely Tel-Aviv, Tehran, Mecca and Medina are reduced to rubble? I don't have the answers.

    It's dumb luck we tend to be on the money. I don't argue much about foreign policy because unlike joe, shreek and Tony on economics I can't be entirely sure that John doesn't have a valid point.

  • John||

    I would vote for Obama solely on the fact I think he's less likely to get us into a war with Iran

    I guess thinking that keeps you from facing the terrible reality that maybe Iran gets to decide if we go to war with them or not.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    I guess thinking that keeps you from facing the terrible reality that maybe Iran gets to decide if we go to war with them or not.

    You really think Iran is going to attack the US? Or do you mean that if they don't do what we tell them vis-a-vis nukes, that is them deciding to go to war with the US. You say this over and over again, but never explain exactly how they are deciding to go to war with the US.

  • John||

    Ex Nilo,

    The would absolutely attack American bases in the Middle East. And once they have Nukes, they can pretty much do what they please and what we are we going to do about it? Risk a nuclear war?

    They say they plan to build nukes and destroy Israel. They don't seem to be kidding about that. And I doubt the Israelis are going to go quietly. Once there is a big war in the US, because we have people there, we will be involved no matter who is President. Even St. Gary.

  • Whahappan?||

    They've never said they plan to build nukes and destroy Israel. You really are delusional about Iran.

  • GILMORE||

    They say they plan to build nukes and destroy Israel. They don't seem to be kidding about that

    Yeah, and the late Kim Il Jung used to say he was going to drown the Capitalist West in a 'Sea of Fire'

    Sayin' it don't make it so

    or as the latins said, "et suppositio nil ponit in esse"

  • Randian||

    Less likely, you illiterate dipshit, not "unlikely".

  • GILMORE||

    Randian| 11.5.12 @ 2:22PM |#
    ... I would vote for Obama solely on the fact I think he's less likely to get us into a war with Iran,

    If you think all the hot rhetoric from ANYONE re: Iran (and, by the way, Obama has played the "talk tough about the mad Mullahs of Tehran"-Game plenty as well) has anything to do with actual sincere consideration of "direct action", you're missing the plot.

    Iran is a pinata that politicians use to flex their muscles in public... just as The Great Satan has been a wonderful brand-name talking point for both Iran and North Korea for decades. Our politicians use these pariah-states to GAIN power.... while Pariah states use the Evil Hegemonic Capitalist Oppressor to KEEP power.

    Didn't you ever read 1984?

    Each party is about as likely to actually get into a 'shooting war' as Israel is about to be 'swept into the sea', or 'sharia law' is going to somehow going to infect the US Judicial system.

    My point is: if you believe either party is "less likely to go to war w/ Iran"... you must also believe one of the other massive bullshit memes that seems to float around every 4 years: "That Democrats Care More About the Poor"

  • Randian||

    What is it about "less likely" that people are simply failing to understand? I didn't say "unlikely", I said LESS.

  • Nephilium||

    I'll be voting for Gary Johnson tomorrow, proudly wearing this.

  • ||

    I just try to short-circuit that process by saying that Obama is Bush III and if you didn't like Bush you shouldn't like Obama. Then they'll usually blubber aimlessly about how, boy, Bush sure was dumb, because there's obviously nowhere for them to go from there.

  • Drake||

    He's still channeling his father's anti-colonialism.

  • ||

    Now all that's left is an outright endorsement of murderous, imperialistic communism, and he'll be just like his papa.

  • ||

    One of the ads that's been on the radio here ends with, "I'm Barack Obama, candidate for president, and I approve this message." I honestly think he's trying to get some votes against the incumbent.

  • Pro Libertate||

    There's a weird one running here, with some mom talking about how she needs the government to do air-traffic control in her house. It comes across as really creepy, but they're running it again and again.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Yeah, I've heard that one a lot. The other one that's now getting a lot of air time is a black guy essentially saying that black people need to vote for Obama because he's black. No other reason is given. Just more confirmation that Obama's campaign is extremely worried about turnout with the base.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "Obama can't see to get his head around the fact that he's the incumbent."

    Neither can the mainstream media.

    They certainly aren't treating him as if he is.

    Imagine the MSM howling that would have ensued if Bush had used that line in 2008 against Obama.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I guess words like "revenge" come readily to the tongue when you have kill lists and stuff.

  • ||

    Vergeltung, you say?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Rache!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    If only someone could develop some sort of waffen to go with that vergeltung... maybe even two of them!

  • Enough About Palin||

    ^^THIS^^

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    It's revenge against Romney for his lifetime of White Male Privilege.

  • sarcasmic||

    Last presidential election was the first (and last) time I chose a major.

    I felt dirty, like I'd soiled myself.

    Time to boo them both.

    Erect Gary's Johnson!

  • ||

    But how does that fit into revenge?

    It's an emotional appeal to the absolute cretin TEAM BLUE retards who vote solely based on emotion. It is neither a logical statement nor one that can be parsed. It's for imbeciles; you're not going to be able to make heads or tails of it unless you are functionally retarded, so don't try. Or ask joe to translate for you.

  • John||

    Even if you hate Romney's guts, he hasn't held office yet. Unless you are pissed off about something he did as governor of Mass ten years ago, what the hell could he have possibly done to warrent "revenge"?

  • ||

    John, like I said, don't even try to make sense of it. That way lies madness and retardation.

  • ||

    That way lies madness and retardation.

    UMMMH! If once you start down the dark retard path, forever will it dominate your destiny

  • tarran||

    Even if you hate Romney's guts, he hasn't held office yet. Unless you are pissed off about something he did as governor of Mass ten years ago, what the hell could he have possibly done to warrent "revenge"?

    John, let me derpsplain it to you. It's not meant to be logical! It's meant to push emotional buttons! Don't think too hard about it, because it can only lead to sprained neurons!

  • Brutus||

    It channel's the Left's primary motivational force: Hatred.

  • PapayaSF||

    The old quip "living well is the best revenge" seems to be the origin of Obama's phrase, but I get the sense that Obama meant "revenge for daring to challenge me" or "revenge for the past crimes of AmeriKKKa" or some combination of the two.

  • ||

    He was born white. That's what.

    OBAMA 2012 EQUALITY FOR ALL

  • BarryD||

    Some people are still pissed off about the SLC Olympics.

    Mainly bankruptcy attorneys in Utah, who were denied a fortune in fees.

  • John||

    The dumbest and really nastiest thing said this election was Robert Reich's tweet that something to the effect of "if you want the governmen to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted, you should vote for Obama and if you want the opposite you should vote for Romney."

    Just think about the layers of nastiness and stupidity contained in the statement. Apparently in Reich world, the government does not represent or in anyway act in the interest of the "comfortable" whoever they are. What a repulsive and unAmerican thing to say.

  • DJF||

    Maybe Robert Reich doesn’t realize that he is one of the comfortable? Or maybe he is just a masochist and likes being afflicted?

  • John||

    "Comfortable" means the wrong kind of people to Reich. That is right out of Cambodia.

  • Ed||

    +1

  • Brutus||

    It's perpetually Year Zero for the marxoids.

  • Killazontherun||

    He is not only comfortable, he is amongst the most comfortable. To get to the level of being rich, most people who do so have to work their asses off and sacrifice immediate gratification for a greater reward later. My older bro is just under the millionaire threshold now by a few hundred thousand saved up. He put thirty years of ten and twelve hours days into it spending his weeks in places he'd prefer to never see like Philly. He is exactly the type that Reich spews venom at, yet, a former Harvard lecturer, political officer in the Clinton Administration and prof at Berkley like him doesn't really have to do shit to earn their level of comfort beyond tolerating the stupefyingly dull existence of living in classrooms and meetings in an environment purposely abstracted from accountable reality.

  • sarcasmic||

    If Romney is elected then the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer!

    He robs from the poor and gives to the rich!

    Besides, it's not like the rich pay their fair share!

    They're rich!

    If they paid their fair share then they wouldn't be rich!

    They're the ones Romney represents!

    Vote for envy!

    Vote for hatred!

    Vote Obama!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I started reading that ala "Dennis Moore"... Maybe O! should have adopted that as his campaign theme?

    "Stand and Deliver! Hand over the lupins".

  • ||

    Stupid bitch...stupid bitch...

  • ||

    Wow, in a saner world that would be a shocking statement. That is just disgusting. That smug douche Reich probably thought he was being really clever. Government shouldn't be in the business of afflicting or comforting anyone.

  • John||

    It is one thing to say the government needs to go out and help the unfortuneate. That has been bread and butter liberalism for 100 years. But to come out and say that government's job is to oppress everyone else is quite remarkable.

  • ||

    I just want to know how to vote to afflict Reich.

  • ||

    The masks slip more and more.

  • Brutus||

    The Left has been openly fascist for some time now. If the mask has slipped even more, it could only have been out of its lap.

  • SugarFree||

    The "revenge" line is the perfect extension of the victim narrative the Democrats have been running for decades. The 47% have to be told that nothing about their circumstances is in anyway their fault. By othering Romney as a stand-in for the myriad excuses they've constructed (or had constructed for them), then the anger they've built up over their own willing participation in their infantilization can be externalized.

    Like Akin and Murdock, Obama did not mis-speak whatsoever. This is exactly what his audience believes and they support this statement utterly.

  • John||

    But national politicians are supposed to not let the mask slip. You are not supposed to say what your trogladyte supporters actually believe.

  • ||

    NutraSweet, you told me to kill you if you started using "othering" in any way other than an ironic, mocking sense. That time has come. Remember that I do this because you asked me to and I respect that.

    (raises knife)

  • Sudden||

    Remember that I do this because you asked me to and I respect that.

    Liar. We all know you're doing it because he had a nekked deep dish pizza cooking party with Jim and you were seething with jealousy like an Obama supporter at a Bentley dealership.

  • ||

    JJ and I have an open relationship and I can handle it. I can!

    (runs off crying)

  • ||

    Fuck Bentley. Lincoln all the way.

    And Jim wasn't participating voluntarily. He was drugged and hoodwinked, like Clarice Starling in Hannibal.

  • nicole||

    Fuck Bentley.

    I used to agree. Then I saw this car parked right outside Hermès. No joke.

  • John||

    I think Bentleys look like something a English footballer or rap star would drive. If I am going for that class of car, it is all about the Massurati Quatraporte. I know they are Italian and absurdly complex and will probably break down before 10,000 miles. But as they described them on Top Gear; the car is a like a three year old child, it drives you insane but if anyone tried to take it from you, you would kill them.

  • nicole||

    I'm a simple girl, John. I would be more than happy with a nice little Porsche Panamera. See, I'm even practical!

  • John||

    Let me guess Nicole, you really liked Beauty and the Beast as a child. The Panameras are amazing pieces of engineering. But calling them Quizimodo would be putting it lightly. UGh what an eyesore of a car.

  • nicole||

    I used to think that, but I see them a bizarre amount now* and they totally grew on me. I'll tell you, a nice black one looks a lot better than the 911 I saw the other night in the lamest powder blue color ever (being driven by a dude who looked like he could barely fit in the door).

    *Does anyone know why there seem to be so many really high-end cars driven around Chicago? I see Lamborghinis, Porsches, Maseratis, Bentleys, etc., more than weekly (and I don't drive a lot). Wayyy more than I ever saw cars like that growing up in richy-rich CT.

  • ||

    Seattle has a lot of high end cars (I see Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Porsches, Maseratis, Aston Martins, and tons of the high end Audis all over the place), probably from all the MS employees who have millions in stock from working there for 20 years and from all the startup millionaires we have. I don't know about Chicago, though. Maybe deep-dish millionaires? How gauche.

  • nicole||

    How gauche.

    I always assumed it was something about Midwesterns and super-Amurcan-style conspicuous consumption, or something.

  • John||

    Washington has a lot of high end cars. The parking lot at American University has an epic collection of muscle cars, all of which seem to be owned by foreign students. There is a Audo R8, a Nison NSX, three Shelby Mustangs, and a top end Dodge Charger.

  • ||

    Montana has a lot of high end cars. Silverados, Rams, F-150s and sometimes, the real yuppies, drive Tundras.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    My Swiss Insurance Behemoth masters had some pow wow downtown a little while back, and they had a bunch over highly overpaid guests come in...?

  • ||

    The Maserati is SO FUCKING BEAUTIFUL. It would be an idiotic car to buy from a good purchase perspective, but I WANT ONE. Plus, Vince bought E one and that's good enough for me.

  • John||

    Another great Top Gear Line about the Maserati. The Pamaera looks like a guy who was shot and dumped in a lake and left to rot for three weeks. The Maserati looks like the guy who put him there.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Uglier than a 911?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I figure that by the time a Maserati purchase becomes viable, you can put up with the rest of the car's problems.

  • ||

    Someone consistently parks one in my gym's parking garage. Every time I see it I have to restrain myself from molesting it, much like I have to with JJ.

  • ||

  • ||

    You're...you're joking, right?

  • ||

    It's not his fault, Epi; he came from the The Land of LADA.

  • ||

    I can't hide my adoration of that car. Fuck it. And how's the Lada relevant to this discussion. We're talking about cars, dude. The Lada's a broken electric shaver.

  • ||

    I sincerely hope so. Unless RPA is secretly an 80 year old man from Michigan.

  • NoVAHockey||

    He just likes the town car's trunk space for his arsenal. or bodies. my wife's grandfather has one. you could fit four people in there easily.

  • ||

    I honestly like the way it looks. But yeah. Where am I going to put all my NFA shit when the Occutards start rioting? I'll need a portable armory.

  • Enough About Palin||

    One parked in the ramp by my office. The thing was gorgeous.

  • Enough About Palin||

    (the Massurati Quatraporte)

  • The Hammer||

    You're all idiots. In a world in which the M5 exists, why would you ever buy any other ludicrously expensive sedan?

  • ||

    Because it's BMW, that's why. DIE DEUTSCH!

  • Sudden||

    BMW drivers are the most self-entitled douchebags on the road.

    It is known.

  • db||

    Bite me.

  • ||

    ditto.

  • The Hammer||

    THE LEFT LANE IS FOR PASSING, NOT CRUISING AT 45 MILES PER HOUR IN YOUR LITTLE ECONOMY SHITBOX! DON'T HATE ME BECAUSE I KNOW QUALITY, JUST GET OUT OF THE FUCKING WAY!!!!

  • Gray Ghost||

    BMW drivers are the most self-entitled douchebags on the road.

    Soccer Mom nearly sideswiping me in her GMC Yukon/Lexis LX 570/Mercedes GL 450, while checking her Farmville and setting up playdates, says, "Hi!" Invariably the fucker has a gazillion "100 Club" stickers on the rear window, and several other stickers informing the hapless pedestrian she's just run over that Taylor plays baseball and Katelyn does cheer at "XYZ Preparatory."

    And then has the sheer balls (first husband's) to look pissed at me for using my horn.

    #firstworldproblems

  • Big 'Orra||

    The "revenge" line is the perfect extension of the victim narrative the Democrats have been running for decades.

    Goes along quite well with Obama's "he's not one of us" rhetoric ... some of the uglier elements of fascism seem to be on full display from the left these last couple years..

  • ||

    Like "economic patriotism"?

  • Sudden||

    The revenge motive is not so confusing to me.

    "He is rich, vote against him as revenge for the fact that there is no way he can be rich unless you are poor." The thought process of the left is not that hard to grasp. It makes no sense, but it can easily be understood by realizing that all thinking of the left is motivated by a single central tenant: Envy.

  • Sudden||

    single central tenant tenet.

    FIFM

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Once upon a time, the left had an elegant philosophy that explained the world in terms of a coherent political philosophy which had the backing of the finest minds in academia.

    The result was millions of deaths, autocracy of the worst sort, and the rise of one of the largest, most imperialistic, and most aggressively evil powers in world history.

    After the 90s, that was a fact that couldn't be denied. Now they have only their hate. Today's left is organized around group affiliations and impulses -- remnants of that elegant philosophy. Call them on it, and they'll shriek about evil bankers and cronyism -- but they know it's true and they wouldn't have it any other way.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    After the 90s, that was a fact that couldn't be denied. Now they have only their hate. Today's left is organized around group affiliations and impulses -- remnants of that elegant philosophy. Call them on it, and they'll shriek about evil bankers and cronyism -- but they know it's true and they wouldn't have it any other way.

    No, the Rule of Two wasn't established until 1,000 years before the Battle of Yavin.

  • ||

    Fuck Bane and his successors.

    The Old Sith Empire all the way. Or Big K's One Sith.

    Though I'm a Gray Jedi guy myself.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Their sad devotion to that ancient socialist religion has not helped them conjure up a cure to poverty.

  • ||

    *Force Choke*

    I find your lack of faith disturbing, dude.

    /Joe Biden

  • T o n y||

    The Romney campaign's incessant grasping at out-of-context quotes as an election strategy is one of the surer signs that it's losing.

  • John||

    Shut up sock puppet. And you know what is a really good sign that you are losing? Being an incumbent who can't get 50% the day before the election even in polls that are absurdly weighted towards your party. You know what else is a good sign? When 13% of the likely voters who voted for you last time are now saying they are going to vote for your opponent.

  • T o n y||

    You got $10,000 you could part with? I'd love to make a wager.

    What I absolutely don't want to see on Wednesday is a bunch of mouth-foaming conspiracy theorizing when the results turn out close to what the polls are predicting.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What I absolutely don't want to see on Wednesday is a bunch of mouth-foaming conspiracy theorizing

    Tell that to Ice Cube.

  • John||

    Tony, you odn't have 10,000. And beyond that, do you honestly think that Democrat who is running even or worse in Michigan, Minnisota and Wisconsin and is down among independents by over 15 points in every single poll is going to win? CNN has a D+11 turnout national poll that has the race even and Obama under 50%. First, the turn out in 08 was only D+8. It is almost certain to be less than that this year, although not the dead even it was in 2010. That right there is game over.

    And one other thing, even the Dems are admitting they are likely to remain even or lose seats in the House. Do you really think there are a bunch of ticket spilters out there? Not even Nate Silver's idiotic similuations could come up with an Obama win and a net D loss in the House.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I thought thanks to Nate Silver and SABERmetrics, we no longer need to play baseball games as we already know how they will turn out. Since statistical analysis, there has been no surprises in a baseball game ever.

  • Brutus||

    That'll make the Washington Nationals feel a lot better.

  • The Hammer||

    Good choice, John. I don't think sock puppets have agency, so you couldn't hold it to the wager if it lost.

  • T o n y||

    I agree that it's odd that in a presidential year in which the president is favored to win that a House that had a large turnover in 2010 wouldn't be more favorable to his party. I guess we'll just have to see.

    You're not understanding how those polls work. They're not assuming an arbitrary party ID turnout, that's part of the questioning. And there's more reason to believe that potential Democratic voters are undersampled, if anything (there has been reporting on this specifically with regard to Nevada and Latinos).

    All I'm saying is you bet against Nate Silver at your own risk (not that he's betting or claiming Obama is going to win, just that the probability has an 86% chance).

  • John||

    They're not assuming an arbitrary party ID turnout, that's part of the questioning

    Exactly. And they all assume a D turnout that is absurdly unlikley.

    And Silver is an idiot. He was wrong about 2010 and he is wrong now. His claiming "well the long shot came through" won't work with anyone but you. His reputation is done tommorow.

  • ||

    The best thing about a Romney victory?

    The scarcity of liberal sock puppets on H&R.

  • T o n y||

    He did well in 2010, off by 8 seats in the house 1 seat in the Senate, and 1 governorship, all within his "confidence interval." And there's nothing for him to be "wrong" about. He's not making predictions, he's calculating probabilities. He says over and over that Mitt Romney can still win (upsets occasionally happen).

    If he gets it pretty much spot-on as he did in 2010 and 2008, will you declare your reputation officially done? Or will you regurgitate whatever bullshit conspiracy story Matt Drudge shoves down your throat like a whiny little bitch?

    Can we wager on that one?

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "You got $10,000 you could part with?"

    It wouldn't matter if he did.

    You certainly don't.

  • T o n y||

    I do, but I'm not too worried since the odds are so overwhelmingly in my favor.

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    10k lying around? I see no difference between hoarding 10k and shooting someone with no medical care in the head, Tony.

  • T o n y||

    Is that supposed to be a lot of money?

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    When people are out dying in the streets from lack of free colonoscopies? Yes.

  • PapayaSF||

    Then you should be willing to give odds. Since Silver says an 87% chance Obama wins, let's round that down to 80% for simplicity. Will you give 4-1 odds that Obama wins?

  • sarcasmic||

    Yeah right. Like you could be trusted to keep your end of the bargain.

  • ||

    Can't we vote for Eastwood's empty chair instead?

  • Sudden||

    John, just be patient. In 24 hours, you will be able to smile wickedly as you read his posts about "stolen elections, recounts, voter suppression" and sundry other canards.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Should O! lose, it will be voter supression all the way - you are correct.

  • ||

    And riots instigated by Occutard malcontents destroying people's private property and shitting in the gutters.

  • Brutus||

    Shitting in th gutters would be an improvment, no?

    And yes, I foresee riots when Romney passes 270.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    "And yes, I foresee riots when Romney passes 270."

    27.5 years I waited - and NOT ONCE did I get to hit a hippy with stick, so I retired from the National Guard...now you tell me there will be riots!

  • John C. Randolph||

    Toney, tonay, toneeee....

    The Ruling Party will win this "election", whether it's the richer douchebag or the somewhat less rich douchebag that gets the Big Chair for the next four years.

    -jcr

  • Sudden||

    The Ruling Party will win this "election", whether it's the richer douchebag or the somewhat less rich douchebag that gets the Big Chair Iron Throne for the next four years.

    FIFY.

    In the war of the five kings, I support the sixth: Mance Rayder.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    In the war of the five kings, I support the sixth: Mance Rayder.

    Can we have the same rules? You win or you die.

  • Cavpitalist||

    Mance Rayder is a pussy.

    I think. I just started the 5th book.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Brutus||

    It didn't sound any better in context, and the context the Obama campaign tried to provide was complete bullshit.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    The Romney campaign's incessant grasping at out-of-context quotes as an election strategy is one of the surer signs that it's losing.

    How is this out of context, you bloviating buffoon?

    "No, no, no - don't boo! Vote! Vote for revenge!"

    What else did he say to give that any other context?

  • Brutus||

    An Obama campaign flack tried to say it was in reference to Romney's "scare tactics" about Chrysler and Jeep. The only problem is that Obama wasn't talking about Chrysler or Jeep for another six paragraphs or so.

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    Jack Revenge is a House candidate in Ohio.

  • T o n y||

    Can you at least quote him correctly:

    "No, no, no — don’t boo, vote. Vote! Voting is the best revenge."

    It's a pretty innocuous thing Romney has once again blown out of proportion in lieu of articulating any concrete policy ideas.

    I'd think you'd be above this nonsense.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    Can you at least quote him correctly

    Ok, so where is this mythical "out-of-context" thing you so highly touted?

    I'd think you'd be above this nonsense.

    You're certainly neck-deep in it, considering you're now in the business of making shit up. Again, where's this "context" you talked about?

  • PapayaSF||

    An innocuous thing blown out of proportion? Thanks heavens the Obama campaign never does that! (*Cough* "binders" *cough*)

  • Cavpitalist||

    The Romney campaign's incessant grasping at out-of-context quotes as an election strategy is one of the surer signs that it's losing.

    So, what was the proper context that unfucks the idea that you cast a vote for the incumbent for "revenge"?

    The biggest trend I've seen come out of this election is the ole "Barack Obama is too god-damned stupid to say things correctly, so search for some context to make him not look like an inarticulate dipshit" standby of the left.

  • Enough About Palin||

    OT -- The Atlanta police helicopter that crashed Saturday night, killing two officers, was a Vietnam War-era chopper that city officials 11 years ago said had outlived its useful life.
    Officers Richard J. Halford, 48, and Shawn A. Smiley, 40, were using the helicopter to search for a missing 9-year-old boy when they crashed near the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. and Hamilton E. Holmes drives. The boy was later found safe.
    According to Atlanta City Council records from September 2001, the Hughes OH-6 helicopter that crashed was built in 1967 and was used by the U.S. Army until it was donated to the APD in 1996 to assist with the Olympic Games.
    Eleven years ago, the APD requested $2.8 million from the City Council to replace the Hughes OH-6 that crashed Saturday night, as well as a Bell Jet Ranger helicopter also operated by the department, saying they “have outlived their useful lives of 25 years.”
    The council approved $1,360,425 to replace one of the helicopters, but current FAA records show both aircraft still being used by APD.
    The AJC is attempting to contact APD officials to find out whether the $1.36 million was used to purchase another helicopter.
    The National Transportation Safety Board is working to determine what caused Saturday night’s fatal crash.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/news/p.....nta/nSw6K/

    Those fuckers went down in Nam, too. Play war; die playing war.

  • db||

    I love reading NTSB reports--they regularly tear the FAA creative new assholes.

  • InfernalBear||

    "... they crashed near the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. and Hamilton E. Holmes drives." ... in Atlanta.

    Brings to mind scenes from Black Hawk Down.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Is there some kind of voting thing happening in your country?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I've heard rumblings to that effect - but I cannot be sure.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Prince Ludwig: I shall return and wreak my rewengey!

    Blackadder: No you won't, you will die and be buried.
    [throws knife at him]

  • sarcasmic||

    If Romney gets the popular vote and Obama wins the EC, I'm sure that the "One man one vote!" liberals will be clamoring to have Romney put into office!

    Right, Tony?

    C'mon! Stand on your principles!

  • John||

    In unlikely event that that happens, I will say it right now "tough shit Romney, you lost". The rules are the rules.

  • T o n y||

    I'm for abolishing the EC and that's not gonna change based on the outcome of this election.

  • T o n y||

    I won't be advocating for Romney to be put into office in such a scenario, because that would be unconstitutional. We do have to change the law first.

  • sarcasmic||

    because that would be unconstitutional

    I'm sure you were saying that in 2000, right?

    Ha!

  • T o n y||

    I find the installation of the US president by the Supreme Court to be constitutionally suspect at best. That election was a travesty all around. One of the biggest reasons we need national election reform.

  • Brent||

    When Romney Loses, how will the GOP freak out?

  • John||

    Interesting how Obama is going to win even though 13% of his supporters say they are not voting for him this time. Math is a hard mistress.

  • rho||

    They'll probably go to work.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Brent,

    When Romney Loses, how will the GOP freak out?

    When Obama loses, how will the DNC freak out?

  • John||

    The Gallup page on the composition of the electorate. The headline is this

    2012 U.S. Electorate Looks Like 2008

    That is interesting and true as far as it goes. Except there is one big difference; this little thing called party identification.

    In 2008, it was D 39, I 31, R 29. In 2012 it is D 35, I 29, and R 36. Yeah, that is a change in the electorate from D + 10 to R + 1.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/158.....-2008.aspx

    If that is even close to being true, tommorow should be very interesting.

  • db||

    I'd like to see a treatment of actual party affiliation as measured in polls independent of voting questions. I wonder about the heavy weighting D seems to have in the poll samples relative to reported party identification.

  • db||

    And I understand that they are measuring party ID, not assuming it. I wonder if asking the questiins in the same interview has an effect in the answers.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    On Friday, though, Obama took the slogan a step further, ad libbing that “voting is the best revenge.”

    What a truly astounding thing to say. Talk about a two-edged sword.

    "Adlibbing" my ass; did Stephanie Cutter, Supergenius come up with that?

  • Brutus||

    I agree with Cutter, Obama was ad libbing. He always gets his tit in a wringer when he starts going off-script and accidentally says what he really means. From "punch back twice as hard" and "bring a knife to a gunfite" to "punish our enemies," it's clear that Obama sees the apparatus of the State as a means to oppress those that do not share his worldview.

  • db||

    If Romney doesn't take Florida he's in bad trouble. If he does, he only needs Va, OH, IA. If he loses OH and FL, he could still win but that is a vanishingly small probability, as the states he needs in that case are even less likely. I'm taking as a basis Rasmussen's swing state list, which FL just reentered.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'll be shocked if Romney doesn't win here.

  • db||

    What I don't get is why FL is still considered a swing state. The polls have converged very rapidly in many states. Is it true that even after 3.5 years of an presidency that people are still not sure whether an incumbent is worth another go?

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's really all about how Central Florida votes. The northern part of the state is mostly Republican; the southern more Democrat. Central Florida trends conservative but can go the other way on occasion. Like in 2008.

    From where I'm sitting, I doubt seriously that Obama can get enough votes in Central Florida to even come close to winning this time.

  • db||

    I have some friends from high school who live in Orlando. They tend to be liberals, from their facebook posts. I gave up on FB back in January, but sometimes I'm tempted to take a peek at what they're saying to get an idea of what they see in FL politically. But then i decide to slam my password-typing fingers in the car door instead.

  • John||

    Look at what the campaigns are doing. That tells you what is going on. Neither one of them are anywhere near Florida even though it is the third biggest electoral prize. Meanwhile, Obama is in Wisconsin and Romney is in PA. That tells you where the actual battleground is. And it isn't in Florida.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    Both campaigns had people all over CO last week. Sometimes I wish I had stayed OCONUS for two more weeks.

  • John||

    And they have kind of moved out. Obama has been in retreat for about a month. Originally VA and Florida were his firewalls. Then it became Colorado, Nevada and Ohio. Now he is out of Colorado and is really left with Ohio, PA and Wisconsin.

  • db||

    I wonder about Colorado. In my models I haven't included it as a swing state just because based on the people I know from CO I feel like it'll go for O.

  • The Hammer||

    OCONUS?

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    Outside the Continental United States

  • The Hammer||

    Ah. Thank you.

  • Enough About Palin||

    I thought it's the Obama supporters asking to be conned.

  • T o n y||

    Romney in PA is a desperation move. He can't lose Ohio and PA and win the election without something bizarre going on. Except he knows he's probably going to lose Ohio, and that probably means the election too.

  • Brent||

    But then Republicans are always voting against their own self-interest.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    There are lots of people who might arrive at the polling booth with revenge in their hearts.

    Delphi employees whose pensions were wiped out

    Chrysler "secured" creditors

    Anybody who has watched the rate of return on their savings go negative

    Anybody with a foreign bank account

  • Brent||

    Working class voters: why America's poor are willing to vote Republican

    There is nothing more vexing to liberals than poor Republicans. Their very existence rankles. It turns their world on its head and their assumptions inside out. The effort to explain them is understood not just as a political paradox but a psychological disorder. They have been duped. They must have been. How else would one explain putting your cross next to the man who derided them as "victims" among the 47% "I don't worry about". To many liberals these are turkeys voting for Christmas or lemmings off for a leap; the condemned tying the noose for their own execution.
  • Julio Cesar Samper Uribe||

    Concern troll is duly concerned.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Liberal dipshits: "What's the matter with Kansas? Why don't these cousin-humping, slack-jawed, sloped-forehead retards embrace our wonderful ideas and vote for us?"

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Brent,

    To many liberals these are turkeys voting for Christmas or lemmings off for a leap;

    What's vexing is that liberals are vexed by Americans voting for what many of them believe is less government (even if duped by the GOP) and that liberals would believe that this is the same as voting for death to come quickly. 120 million dead by goverment would not think so.

  • KPres||

    This is easy. Republicans vote on principle, Democrats on self-interest. For Republicans, stealing is wrong even when you steal from rich people. For Democrats, stealing is right so long as they get a cut.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Here's another question:

    According to the reports I have seen, more Demos than Rethuglitards have voted early, but WHY DO WE ASSUME EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE DEMOCRATS VOTED FOR OBAMA?

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Speaking of Top Gear:

    Jeremy Clarkson ‏@jcrclarksonesq
    Isn't choosing between Romney and Obama a bit like choosing which leg you'd most like to have amputated.
  • The Hammer||

    Wonderful. I wish he was American.

  • SugarFree||

  • nicole||

    Well, if it's called "fuckery," it must be serious.

  • Pro Libertate||

    "Cruising towards reelection?" WTF?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    "Thank the gods of Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood's secret lovenest that this endless, yammering election cycle is finally in the home stretch, and barring some kind of mass craziness, most of this democratic process infotainment cacophony should be over in 48 hours."

    43 words. What kind of fucking lede is that supposed to be?! Are good editors part of the Patriarchy, too?

  • MJGreen||

    It's quirky! LOL!

  • Killazontherun||

    It's all quirky. You have got to mete that stuff out. That's why Apple Maps failed.

  • nicole||

    If any of you wait for more than 3 hours to vote, if we ever meet, I will give you a hug and whatever candy I have on me.

    If any of you wait for more than 3 hours to vote, if we ever meet, I will tell you you are a fucking moron to your face.

  • The Hammer||

    My polling place opens at 7:30 in the morning, and serves about 3000 people, roughly half of whom received mail-in ballots, and another roughly 600 voted early. I am going before work in the morning, and if it takes more than 10 minutes I will be disappointed.

  • MJGreen||

    "I'm voting for Romney."

    Would that still get the person candy? She can keep the hug.

  • Brett L||

    Exactly. I passed 4 voting precinct signs between work and home (none of which are mine). The county courthouse where they were holding early voting had maybe 20 voting stations and only 4 ballot printing stations. EACH of those 4 poll locations is going to be equipped similarly. Early voting is a convenience. Your an idiot if you do it and it is less convenient than voting on Election day. If I didn't work 2 blocks from the courthouse, I'd have just driven up to my poll on Tuesday. I know that even with record turnout, it wouldn't take me 20 minutes to vote at my precinct. Stupidity is its own punishment.

  • John||

    If Obama loses and Akin and Mourlock win, I don't think even a Warren victory will be enough to southe the Jezies. The amount anger, sadness and pure hormonal hatred that is going to come out of that site if things don't go well tommorow is going to be epic.

  • NoVAHockey||

    Romney is at +10 in the RCP in MO. Low of +7 to high of +13. That might be enough to drag Akin across.

  • Brett L||

    Akin is walking away. I think Murdouck fatally wounded himself, however.

  • Killazontherun||

    Which is odd, because Murdouck has the intellectual integrity to see his creed to its logical conclusion. I see no way out but for a Christian to agree with him. You have two choices if you accept the creed, a human life being the intended will of God, or it is not which means the life of a human born of rape is an abomination. Who is willing to draw that conclusion and find it copacetic with the Christian doctrine?

    Since, you are all just hoomons to me, it is not my problem. Dunmeri can't be saved right? But for anyone of the faith to treat him like pariah that is the height of ignorance.

  • nicole||

    Which is odd, because Murdouck has the intellectual integrity to see his creed to its logical conclusion.

    Oh Killaz, that's not odd. Or did you expect the electorate to understand difficult concepts like logic and internal consistency?

  • Killazontherun||

    Now, that is quite odd of me to expect that.

  • T o n y||

    With the amount of wishful thinking you're engaging in, will your Wednesday despair be characterized as hormonal as well?

  • nicole||

    I feel so stressed out right now. I am likely to lose 30 lbs, all my hair, and develop a nervous twitch in the next day.

    Seriously, it's this type of comment that is the worst. They are super worried and stressed because this really really really matters.

  • ||

    I'm going to be honest: I enjoy how much this matters to them. Because only through that can I harvest the salty ham tears that I crave. And tomorrow, somebody is going to feed me, because either way someone loses.

    Jesus, I'm the salt monster from TOS.

  • nicole||

    Am I supposed to be shocked by that? Although I did think you were an emotional vampire though.

  • ||

    No. I expect you to be shocked by my tramp stamp.

  • nicole||

    Eek!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Unfortunately, I don't see too much salty ham tear potential from Romney "supporters". I haven't met a single Romney supporter who actually gave three shits about the man; in the event of a Romney loss, they won't be mourning Romney's loss so much as Obama's win.

  • ||

    As I said below, tears of woe are tears of woe. I really don't care if they come from people who are sadface that someone lost, or that they're sadface because someone won. Or if they're sadface because the refs called the Tate catch for the Seahawks. Nope, it's all good for me.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Steyn will probably have a pretty funny meltdown, but what I'm really hoping for is pure, undiluted Chrissy Matthews tears.

    Is that too much to ask?

  • ||

    No. No it's not.

  • John||

    Steyn will just be crying. He has written off America about eight times in the last 10 years. So I am not sure you will notice any difference in Steyn.

    But no one on the Right is going to act the way people like Matthews and the Jezzies are going to act.

  • db||

    If I had a Heinleinian parallel universe continua craft, I would make so much money selling both brands of salty ham tears...

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Be careful, mainlining Matthews tears can be a dangerously crazy thing.

  • The Hammer||

    You haven't met Tulpa?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Touche!

  • nicole||

    Ladies, I am legitimately terrified for tomorrow. I can't live in a country that will deny me, and all women, basic human rights. And now all this crap with voter suppression...I just can't. It's deplorable.
    My stomach hurts =(

    My tummy hurts too, but I'm pretty sure it's because I'm all hopped up on NyQuil.

  • SugarFree||

    It's hard to believe the levels of self-delusion required to make Milquetoast Mitt out to be this hard-line right-wing nightmare.

    I wish they would suffer this ill effects. Anyone that takes this zero-sum nonsense seriously should have to suffer like we have to suffer by having to listen to them.

    Anyway... New Skyrim DLC: Dragonborn

    "Did you really think you were the only one?"

  • nicole||

    HOT

  • sarcasmic||

    It's hard to believe the levels of self-delusion required to make Milquetoast Mitt out to be this hard-line right-wing nightmare.

    But, but, but he's going to rob the poor so the rich can have tax breaks!

    He's going to end Social Security and Medicare!

    If he's elected there will be no more social safety net!

    You'll be stacking up the poor and the elderly like cord wood!

    He's a monster!

  • John||

    I will be happy to see Obama lose. But I am not going to lose a minute of sleep over it one way or another. I find people like Mark Steyn who are running around saying that an Obama win will be the end of America as we know it to be just as annoying. I don't understand how people get themselves into these states.

  • Brutus||

    I think Steyn has a point. Obama is changing the structure of our society in ways not attempted since the Johnson administration. Once it was just porr folks and oldsters that were supplicants to the State. Now it's all of us.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    All of us?

  • Killazontherun||

    A repeat performance of collapsing wealth in the middle and lower classes, shrinking job pool, rising energy prices, and the virtual outlawing of the use of coal as a policy goal, continues, the result will not be a steady decline but an accelerated one. We'll still have a country but you wont recognize it assuming your not frog broil.

    It's essential that Obama's political officers over the regulatory agencies are replaced. I hear things about them often that you would not believe happens in a county that is not a member of the Warsaw Pact. Beyond that, there are some things Romney will not have control of like the aftermath of QE-infiniti that is driving the current meager job growth. Expect the exact same in trough in four months that Cash4clunkers resulted for the auto industry. Mild spurt followed by a steep drop that undermined the steady but weak growth that preceded the policy.

    That's going to happen no matter who is president. It's called a productivity trap.

  • Killazontherun||

    you're not frog broil -- I was doing so well.

  • Fatty Bolger||

  • db||

    I haven't played skyrim--i just can't get into the wizard shit anymore. Now a new Fallout? I'll be all over that.

  • The Hammer||

    Dear lord, the comments are Slate-esque:

    another point of why video games needs some sort of consumer protection.
    This is a perfect example of how a developer abandons its product and leaves the consumer 60+$ poorer.
    I never bought the game because of the issues I read, though I would have loved to try it. Seriously everyone who bought this for PS3 should start a class action suit for refunds or fair and equal offerings that both PC and 360 have. Im not stating this because I want to start trouble but because it's a shame you buy something then are promised fixes, they never come and then you can trade it for about 9$.
    Seriously people go to here and sign it as a petition and I will forward it to my state rep and try to start something.
    [tevilblog.blogspot.com]

    Seriously, people!!!

  • Killazontherun||

    First of all, tevil, you do want to start some shit. Multi-paragraphs are not born of apathy.

    Second, you have no fucking idea what goes in the creation of even your most mediocre shooter. There are more difficult maths than anything used on the first moonshot to render scenes that look smooth to the human eye in real time.

  • KDN||

    That comment caught my eye, too. I've bitched about studios' lack of interest in the PC market save for a couple of shitty XBox ports as often as anybody, but it's definitely none of the state's business. That's just a natural reaction when ease of piracy destroys all of the makers' margins. As far as why there's been a constant pivot away from PS3 (if that's true; I neither know nor care) then that's probably Sony's fault, not the studios'.

  • Killazontherun||

    Some of those shots look like the East Coast of Vvardenfel. Ah, back to my Tevanni kin and our Anarco-murdernomics ways!

  • Fatty Bolger||

    The comments are full of batshit crazy stress and paranoia. Though I suppose that's the norm there.

    I'm going to develop an ulcer between now and tomorrow night. I've been reading The Atlantic's pieces on voter suppression all day, and I am a wreck.
    ...
    Even my students have started to notice something is wrong with me. And I teach freshmen level comp, so half the time they don't even know my name to drop off stuff at my mailbox. I feel you. I seriously can't read anything about voter suppression anymore or I'm going to flip my shit.
    ...
    Ugh, I can hardly function at work. I have been reading things online all day.
    ...
    If I didn't have classes, I'd sedate myself for the next two days to preempt a panic attack. This shit is not democracy.
    ...
    I'm pretty sure I've developed at least 3 ulcers since I woke up this morning.

  • ||

    Unfortunately, while I wish this were true, I can pretty much guarantee you that most of this is hyperbole to express to the TEAM how much they care. Because if it is true, they need to be institutionalized.

    Still, tears of woe are tears of woe.

  • nicole||

    How about tears of statist fuckfaces? We will cry and develop ulcers if we think there is voter suppression, but how worked up will we get about kill lists? Murder drones? Bajillions spent to lock up nonviolent "criminals"?

    Ugh, now I'm getting worked up. They're all on the list.

  • John||

    Voter supression is one of their better pieces of stupidity. You see if it takes any effort at all for you to vote or you have to produce an ID, you have been suppressed!!

  • ||

    It's not the voter suppression they care about, nicole, it's that they're afraid voter suppression might make them lose. It's like, oh, I don't know, Green Bay fans who scream bloody murder when the refs make a dubious call for some team from Seattle but say nothing about the multiple dubious calls that went their way prior.

    Believe me, if there turns out to be voter suppression that favors their TEAM, they will be the first to cover it up and explain it away. Count on it.

  • John||

    Believe me, if there turns out to be voter suppression that favors their TEAM, they will be the first to cover it up and explain it away. Count on it.

    ^^THIS^^ Look and see sometime how concerned they are about military absentee votes. Oddly, the left never seems to care too much about those. Funny that.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I've got to say that I'm very disturbed by such things. Our political system's integrity, to the extent that it retains any, if far, far, far more important than who wins a particular election.

    I'd demand the heads of all participants in voter fraud regardless of whether those participants helped advance a cause or a candidate I preferred. How many partisan fruitcakes can honestly say the same?

    We need to hold politicians and the government in general to higher standards, not lower ones.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Remember kids, only through the healing power of feminism can women achieve this level of mental stability.

  • nicole||

    I showed my boyfriend some tweet a few weeks ago that ended in "I just can't" (like one of the passages I quoted above) and he completely didn't get it. He's just like, "can't what?" And I realized that I spoke a language of complete morons.

  • nicole||

    And on that note:

    I just watched the video. Sweet dancing unicorns, I can't even. Sometimes I worry about my ability to eloquently articulate my policy opinions and hopes. Never again.

    HA!

  • R C Dean||

    Sometimes I worry about my ability to eloquently articulate my policy opinions and hopes.

    You should, sweetie, you should.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    This shit is not democracy.

    WTF

  • John||

    It is only democracy when your side wins.

  • nicole||

    I'm having an election party tomorrow because drinking and staring at the TV in a panic by myself is probably a bad idea, so the only thing currently keeping me under control is planning election-themed foods.

    Yes, it really, really sounds like that is keeping you under control.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    That and some lithium.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Christ, a Romney win and real, actual voter supression would almost be worth it if it put even half of these university twats in the hospital permanently.

  • Julio Cesar Samper Uribe||

    And here I thought the "most important election EVAH!" rhetoric belonged only to TEAM RED hyperbole artists.

  • Tim||

    BARACK OBAMA II: Revenge of the Sissy

  • $park¥||

    How long before we start seeing "Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson" bumper stickers?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Libertarianism is. . .never having to say you're sorry.

  • sarcasmic||

    Tell that to the coworker of mine who thinks that a Johnson vote is a lost Romney vote. There's one pissed off Marine who will make you say sorry.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm enduring something along those lines in an RLC e-mail discussion group. One guy keeps saying that it's irrational to vote anything other than Romney if you're a libertarian.

  • sarcasmic||

    Gary who?

  • PapayaSF||

    Just have them say "Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian" and use them after every election! *Rimshot*

  • Lisa||

    2 days

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "Cruising towards reelection?" WTF?

    But suddenly, a shadowy figure emerged from the underbrush along the road, and with deadly aim shot out the tires of the Election Special with his assault rifle!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I can't live in a country that will deny me, and all women, basic human rights.

    I heard some fucking retard (male) the other day say, "If Rick Hill gets elected governor (of Montana) women won't be allowed to work or vote in this state anymore!"

    How can these people possibly believe this shit? They make the Birthers seem dispassionately thoughtful.

  • nicole||

    And someone tried to say the other day that progressive males were a null class.

    Maybe he was making a pun.

  • Killazontherun||

    Conspiracy theorist do tend to be intelligent. The more tenuous the theory the greater the puzzle to be solved.

  • Lisa||

    Ironically, I think more people probably wish women couldn't vote than ever before. Feminists are probably going to become louder and shriller and more nonsensical until someone starts saying "fine! if I say you can't vote will you shut up?" "See!? See!?" "ARRRGH"

  • wingnutx||

    It's preemptive revenge against Romney for outlawing vaginas.

  • Adam.||

    If you write a story where the phrase the "[dictionary] defines ..." appears you have failed as a writer, journalist, and human being.

  • tarran||

    Ha! So the circle of progressives that I went to high school with are getting real pissy.

    This afternoon, yet another Mitt Romney will slaughter virgins and bathe in their blood posting was being shared around on facebook, and I made a crack about only 24 hours being left until we knew who would administer W's fourth term.

    A quick debate followed, followed by the almost instantaneous deletion of my comment containing a long list of unacceptable (to liberals) things that both Obama and Romney agreed on, and a demand I not pollute his wall with such 'crap'.

    I laugh, because what was once seen cannot easily be unseen.

  • Enough About Palin||

    Which is why one should never click one of Sugarfree's links. Even the ones that don't work!

  • SugarFree||

    Especially the ones that don't work.

  • Killazontherun||

    That Anthony Gregory quote I'm very fond of concerning all the ways Obama has compromised the left, you should put it up on the board to see how they react.

  • tarran||

    Sure! Link for the lazy?

  • Killazontherun||

    Okay, sorry I was rambling up there a ways, I'll find that sucker in a minute of googling.

  • Killazontherun||

    http://lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory217.html

    But Barack Obama is really what has made the left-liberal illusion fold under the weight of its own absurdity. Here we had the perfect paragon of left-liberal social democracy. He beat the centrist Hillary Clinton then won the national election. He had a Democratic Congress for two years. He had loads of political capital by virtue of following a completely failed and unpopular Republican administration. The world welcomed him. The center cheered him. And what did he do?

    He shoveled money toward corporate America, banks and car manufacturers. He championed the bailouts of the same Wall Street firms his very partisans blamed for the financial collapse. He picked the CEO of General Electric to oversee the unemployment problem. He appointed corporate state regulars for every major role in financial central planning. After guaranteeing a new era of transparency, he conducted all his regulatory business behind a shroud of unprecedented secrecy. He planned his health care scheme, the crown jewel of his domestic agenda, in league with the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.

    cont.

  • Killazontherun||

    He continued the war in Iraq, even extending Bush’s schedule with a goal of staying longer than the last administration planned. He tripled the U.S. presence in Afghanistan then took over two years to announce the eventual drawdown to bring it back to only double the Bush presence. He widened the war in Pakistan, launching drone attacks at a dizzying pace. He started a war on false pretenses with Libya, shifting the goal posts and doing it all without Congressional approval. He bombed Yemen and lied about it.

    He enthusiastically signed on to warrantless wiretapping, renditioning, the Patriot Act, prison abuse, detention without trial, violations of habeas corpus, and disgustingly invasive airport security measures. He deported immigrants more than Bush did. He increased funding for the drug war in Mexico. He invoked the Espionage Act more than all previous presidents combined, tortured a whistleblower, and claimed the right to unilaterally kill any U.S. citizen on Earth without even a nod from Congress or a shrug from the courts.

  • Killazontherun||

    The left-liberals who stand by this war criminal and Wall Street shill have made their choice: better to have the militarism and police state, so long as it means a little more influence over domestic politics, even if that too is compromised by corporate interference, than it is to embrace a radical antiwar agenda that might complicate their domestic aspirations.

    Our critics complain that America has "moved to the right" in the last three decades, and that would supposedly include Obama’s record so far, which appears in most part like a third Bush term. Yet not a single one of the egregious policies above passes libertarian muster. They are all anathema to the libertarian.

  • T o n y||

    All true. Republicans are worse. What are you gonna do?

  • tarran||

    Nice!

  • GILMORE||

    “voting is the best revenge.”

    Because that that animates Obama's core constituency is a burning desire for comeuppance of people who have made any money

  • Lisa||

    A vote for Obama is a vote for revenge against those bayonet-wielding binder-filling muppet-haters.

  • PapayaSF||

    You forgot birth-control-stealing.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement