Barack Obama

"Bread and Peace" Model Predicts Obama Loss—Only 47.2 Percent of Vote


Why don't you love me anymore?

While I've been delving into the social science literature to see if I can garner some insights into the dynamics of elections, I came across an intriguing article in the journal Political Science and Politics by former University of Gotheberg economist Douglas Hibbs in which the results his bread and peace model concludes that President Barack Obama is very unlikely to win in November. His model over a president's term of office combines a weighted (1) average of per capita disposable income growth and (2) the per capita number of casualties from wars of choice.

Hibbs thinks that war casualties will not play a big role in determining the results of this election, however, for Obama to win, his number crunching suggests that…

…per capita real income growth rates must average out at more than 6% after 2012:q2 for Obama to have a decent chance of reelection. If the US economy experiences an unanticipated reversal of fortune with growth surging to rates not uncommon in the initial robust phase of recoveries from deep contractions, Obama could squeak out a win, as implied by the last column of table 2.

Anybody around here seen 6 percent economic growth in the last couple of quarters? In likely scenarios, Hibbs' model projects that on November 6, Obama's "expected two-party vote share will be 47.2 percent."

The Hill is reporting that in Tuesday's Gallup daily tracking poll of likely voters: 

Romney takes 51 percent support to Obama's 46 in the survey of likely voters. Among registered voters, Romney maintained his lead of 48 to 47 over the president.

Go here to download Hibb's article.

NEXT: Tunisian Authorities Arrest Man in Connection With Benghazi Consulate Attack

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I don’t know anything about the war casualty per capita weltanschauung, but the momentum is all in Romney’s favor.

  2. Since I got on the Paleo thing, I don’t want bread. And peace sounds kind of hippie-lame.

    So what’s in this election for me?

    Oh that’s right. Jack shit… 🙂

    1. Is the shit of the Jack at least a decent fertilizer?

      1. Jackalope is better, but it will do.

    2. Obama’s nuts roasting on an open fire,
      Jack Shit nipping at your nose,
      Election carols being sung by a choir,
      And candidates claiming to be part Eskimo.
      And so I’m offering this simple phrase,
      To peeps from one to ninety-five,
      Although its been said many times, many ways,
      Hey fuck you, that’s why.

      1. There aren’t enough plusses in the world…

      2. Sing it loud, sing it proud!

      3. *applauds loudly while at work, ignores staring co-workers*

  3. There is that 47 percent again!!!

    1. Fooking ironic that.

    2. It’s almost as if Romney actually had a valid point there, huh?

    3. (another) +1

  4. Predictions based on popular vote rather than electoral vote aren’t worth much.

    1. Agreed. But was funny nevertheless. I wonder how long the author’s been scouring for that number.

    2. True.

      The national Gallup poll that has Romney ahead also has Obama -22 in the South.

      So Obama leads in 3/4 of the country.

      Still, it is not over by any stretch.

      1. lol

      2. So Romney is running up the score in the south. Why isn’t Obama doing the same in his areas of strength?

        1. And running it up isn’t always the best strategy. Spending campaign dollars to get more than 1 vote above your opponent is wasteful.
          ‘course, always difficult to know if you got that advantage.

          1. In two more weeks, what’s he going to do with the money anyway?

            1. Hide from Michelle?

            2. Stuff it in his secret Swiss bank account.

        2. A more realistic man would take the rest of his campaign fund, and all his staff, to Hawaii, get all the tee times he could get, and blow it all on one big, last party.

          Sometimes even narcissists forget to give themselves the best. I guess that’s why it’s called malignant narcissism.

          1. I suspect that after Obama loses, Michelle and her entourage will vacation non-stopped.

            1. Or if he wins.

              How long after he’s out of office, ’til she bankrupts the family, do you think?

              1. Because he looks like Scottie Pippen, you racist?

                1. The fuck???

              2. There’s plenty of moneyed liberal sycophants willing to keep them afloat.

                Expect at least one publishing house to be good for a seven figure advance for each of their “memoirs” plus at least one Michelle in the “It takes a Village” vein telling us all how to live.

                1. There should be an international treaty in which we agree that, once a middle-aged man with no notable accomplishments nor interesting experiences, has published two memoirs, he can’t copyright any more of them.

          2. He’s probably going to be the King of Europe. They really do deserve each other.

            1. Europe might deserve him, but Europeans (at least some of them) surely do not.

        3. He’s too intellectual for that.

      3. Yeah, because it happens quite often that a candidate above 50% in multiple national polls less than two weeks out from an election ends up losing. Happens all of the time.

        Gloria Aldred could always find that little boy in Romney’s bed I guess.

        1. An Ipsos poll of registered voters state-by-state had Obama crushing it.

          1. Registered are not likely voters.

      4. Obama is way down in the parts of the country that actually see any business and job growth. Hmmm….

        1. Yeah the shining utopia that is Mississippi. How about something meaningful like standard of living? Race to the bottom economics may improve one thing but not the other.

          1. Race to the bottom economics

            I was looking for a pithy way to describe left wing economic policy. Thanks.

    3. BTW, had a Repub relative of mine whining that Obama might not get the popular vote but still could get re-elected. And the unfairness of that!!!
      “But,” I said, “you do recall that… uhh, never mind.”
      It ain’t worth it.

      1. If Obama wins the electoral college is President fair and square. But good luck with that second term with a hostile Congress and an opponent who got better than 50% of the vote.

        Bush as least controlled the house and Gore only got around 48% of the vote. If Obama manages to win the electoral college chances are Romney will have gotten a majority of the vote. He would be the weakest most pathetic President in US history.

        1. If Obama manages to win the electoral college chances are Romney will have gotten a majority of the vote. He would be the weakest most pathetic President in US history.

          It would be awesome watching him retreat to his Fortress of Solitude to brood petulantly about all who wronged him.

          1. If they knew they had won a majority in the election, Republicans might grow a pair of balls and really fuck with him. Filibuster all of his nominees. Investigate the shit out of him. Meanwhile, Dems in the Senate would be left to face voters and an pissed off and angry Republican base and independents (who will have all voted Romney) in the 2014 elections.

            Obama would be better off losing and telling the world how the country wasn’t good enough for him than winning that way.

          2. Face it, whomever wins, this is a win for sarcastic bastards everywhere.

            1. Face it, whomever wins, this is a win for sarcastic bastards everywhere we all lose.

              Used like an old Amsterdam whore, but true.

            2. When isn’t it?

      2. I look forward to a Obama popular vote loss, but electoral vote win so that I can watch Team BLUE tards smugly tell me why the electoral college is so fucking important for freedom.

        1. They’ll just say “now we’re even”.

          1. Works for me. Then maybe Repubs can get behind election reform.

        2. Electoral college? Is that still around? I distinctly remember Sen. Hillary Clinton making its abolishment a priority in 2001. Guess she’s waiting for the same moment that OJ is to name the real killer.

          1. The Electoral College can’t be abolished until all the student loans are paid off.

        3. They won’t defend the EC, they just misattribute to you what Republicans were saying about Bush/Gore, (incorrectly) call you a hypocrite, wash their hands of it and feel like they won the argument.

    4. Only if you think that a single instance in the last 25 or so Presidental elections is a likely occurance. The popular vote isn’t the determiner and it is no gaurentee of winning. But given the history of the popular vote winner winning the election nearly every single time, it is a pretty damn good indicator.

      1. And in 2000 Gore won the popular vote by a few tenths of a percent. Scenarios where a 52-47 win in the popular vote doesn’t win the electoral vote have to be extremely contrived.

        1. If Romney actually gets more than 50% of the overall popular vote, he will almost certainly win most if not all of the toss up states and probably a few lean Obama states too.

    5. Well, Romney is going to win both the electoral college and the popular vote.

  5. Also, inflation is completely contained – almost dead. So how would income rise?

    Most rational people know about the Economic Crisis of 2008.

    1. I would hope so.
      But I think those same people are now hand-wringing about the one in 2012.

    2. Oh, so now people are “rational”. In what rational nation is Jersey Shore must see TV?

      1. The Germans couldn’t get enough of Baywatch, and they’re pretty rational.

        Well, they’re rational when they design cars and appliances, which involve incremental innovation. You wouldn’t want to trust them with any final solutions.

        1. You know who else…ah, never mind.

        2. They also love Hasselhoff.

          1. Meaning his music, as opposed to his role in Baywatch

      2. Oh, so now people are “rational”. In what rational nation is Jersey Shore must see TV?

        Why not? It’s like watching Wild Kingdom but replacing the monkeys with Mediterranean apes.

        1. Wait… Is there a Jim character on Jersey Shore? Do they tranq one of the beached hippos, only to have her rise up and chase after Jim when he approaches?

          I’ve never seen it, but maybe I should if it’s like that.

      3. Oh, so now people are “rational”. In what rational nation is Jersey Shore must see TV?

        Oh lord. I am sure whatever you watch is super superior.

        1. Pawn Stars! (bows)

    3. It is totally contained. I mean it is not like gas is five bucks a gallon or anything. If you lie enough and take all of the products whose prices might actually rise during inflation out of the government inflation index, wow, you don’t get inflation according to the idex. Who would have thought such a thing?

      1. Asset values are down, consumable costs are up. Net zero inflation!

        1. Prices of necessities like high-end European sports cars have remained essentially flat, whereas only prices of luxuries like food and energy have risen sharply.

          It’s your choice if you want to waste your money on that stuff, anyway.

      2. Gas is lower than it was July 2008.…..spx?time=1

        Just shut the fuck up.

        1. Yeah shreek if you cherry pick a number, you can show anything. Computers are much lower than they were in July of 1970. And everything in Germany is lower than it was in the 1920s. So fucking what?

          God you are a half wit.

          1. The computing thing would at least be arguably honest.

            Comparing 4th of July weekend to the middle of autumn, not so much.

          2. John, one thing you can be sure of:

            If shreek posts a number, it has been cherry-picked.

        2. And it’s twice as expensive as it was on BO’s inauguration day.

          Cherry pricking is fun!

        3. I admit, I don’t know the history around this neighborhood very well, nor all the commenters’ outlooks, based on the small sample of what I’ve seen.
          But… I’m sorry, this has to be one of the most remarkably witless things I’ve ever read.
          You do realize that the historical prices over a several year period, and normalized….
          Never mind.
          And you, yourself, pointed to a tracking site that utterly trashes your thesis….?!
          Oh, my.

          1. You are naive. Most here are.

            Energy input prices are down across the board.

            Coal is 1/2 its prior high, crude is only $86/bbl, and natural gas is 70% off its previous high.

            If inflation truly existed consumable energy commodities would be at their highs and rising.

            Of course domestic production in all the above is excellent. But world demand for all is rising too.

            1. Your moniker is an insult to all the good buttplugs out there. Ever hear of shale drilling?

              1. I said production was up.

                Tell us how shale drilling causes inflation (like you imply).

                1. I implied no such thing. Shale drilling masks inflation by increasing supply of NG and lowering demand for coal.

            2. And where are those commodities in relation to their historic lows, Mr. Butt?

            3. You are tying yourself into inextricable knots because of your emotional attachment to a team. One that has failed as miserably, if not more, than the last.
              You are swapping issues, overall inflation vs. gasoline prices, which was your initial charge. Then you confused cause and effect, as posters wrote, cherry picking data points, not to mention tossing about numbers without qualification.
              Step away from tree examination and look at the entire forest.
              Don’t cite examples that undermine your case.
              The case, better yet, the man you support is a buffoon. He is a handsome, articulate, ivory tower puppet.
              You embarrass yourself with this tripe.
              But the next time a middle aged trucker is crying about his operating expenses, we can remind him that coal is off its high.

              1. Bullshit.

                I voted LP until 2004 when I went anti-GOP. I will vote for GJ this cycle.

                I just hate liars like Glenn Beck hawking gold and false inflation stories.

                The USD is gaining strength. There is no inflation to speak of.

                T-Bills confirm it.


                2. keep trying, keep crying…

                3. The only thing that low T-Bill interest rates tell us is that there really isn’t any good place to store your wealth right now. There certainly aren’t many investments out there earning good returns, and there aren’t many safe havens either.

                  As a wise man named Tulpa once said, “A plugged toilet lifts all turds.”

          2. Note to FD: Michael Palin’s Buttplug is a the dumbest segment in the Team Blue Centapede.

            1. I was stupid. I have made, thankfully, my last reply to that person.

        4. Everyday price index is up

  6. Barrack you have only yourself to blame.

    1. Wanna bet?

      1. Can you see this coming down to a habdful of confused elderly Florida voters who checked the wrong box?

        1. And accidentally left their ballots in a big box in the trunk of a Cadillac?

        2. And what an ending if, like in 2000, it all came down to SCOTUS, and the repub traitor Roberts had to break the tie.
          Just classic.

        3. Nah. Romney wins at least 50.5% of the popular vote in FL. I’ll be in the guys voting for Johnson.

          1. As will I. And my mom won’t have to cut off my pie allowance, because Romney will win the state easily without my vote.

  7. It’s remarkable that Democratic partisans don’t even talk anymore about winning the popular vote. They conceded it over the last few weeks.

    1. That can’t be good.

      1. After days of listening to the proggies in the office assuring each other that Romney isn’t a normal person and shouldn’t be president, Obama losing by a landslide to Romney would definitely go a ways towards slaking my thirst for schadenfreude.

        1. If he loses, I am proclaiming the week following the election as national schadenfreude week. We will have four years to be angry at Romney and bitch about what a lousy President he is. But the salty tears and lamentations of the Obama supporters will only come once.

          1. I remember riding the T the morning after Bush won his second term. It was so quiet. A sea of grim, downhearted faces, slumped shoulders and stooped postures.

            1. In retrospect Bush winning was good to show the total failure of his two full terms.

              It is only in that light Obama looks like a great POTUS.

              1. Keep telling yourself that shreek. Sure Obama is a compelte failure who has turned a bad situation into a complete disaster and done more damage to the Democratic Party than any man in history. But at least he is not Bush!!!

                1. Needs more Christfag.

              2. I don’t know about that. I can think of a different historical head of state Obama might compare favorably to…. actually no, on second thought they’re about the same.

            2. It’ll be anger this time, not sadness. Chris Matthews is already blaming racist southern dudes.

          2. I want so, so badly for Obama to lose. And for this vey reason. To see the True Believers be forced to watch his fallwill be excellent.

            That said, I don’t necessarily relish being called a racist multiple times on a daily basis again. But to know that’s all they have left will be sweet.

            1. Just be assured that you are a racist either way.

              1. They’ll still be whining about this in 2028.

            2. Yeah. I really am going to enjoy the suffering of people like Shreek and the entire labor force at MSNBC.

              1. Obama could lose but he is currently the favorite among all oddsmakers. European betting sites have him even higher than Intrade and Vegas.

                1. Intrade is nothing but conventional wisdom. It is the ultimate lagging indicator. Even on Intrade Obama’s chances keep falling.

                2. The same oddsmakers who predicted a Yankees-Nationals World Series?

                3. Stupid firewall doesn’t let me go to betting sites at work (WTF, IT?), but I recall seeing that Romney was getting better odds than Obama from at least one major Euro bookmaker.

                  And those are the ones that let you bet serious money, not just spare change, so if you’re looking for good “market” data, they’re the ones to look at, not InTrade.

                4. Slim Whittman sold over a million records in Europe…

                  1. and Jerry Lewis motherfucka!

          3. “We will have four years to be angry at Romney and bitch about what a lousy President he is. But the salty tears and lamentations of the Obama supporters will only come once.”

            That EXACTLY captures my hope for this election.

            1. To crush Obama,to drive his appointees from office and to hear the lamentation of women’s groups.

              1. On a more serious note, I think that driving his appointees from office is my top priority.

                Those who get caught up in the question of whether Romney is any different from Obama, are forgetting the whole list of fuckwads who will be replaced.

                Could we, for example, have an AG worse than Holder? Sure, I guess, but what are the odds?

                1. Could we, for example, have an AG worse than Holder? Sure, I guess, but what are the odds?

                  Joe Arpaio?

                  1. He’s not an attorney, is he?

                    1. He’s not an attorney, is he?

                      I was just thinking about assholes in law enforcement, and he came to mind.

                    2. Well that’s a long list, but…

                  2. Arpaio wouldn’t be worse. Do you really think Arpaio would have sent guns to Mexican drug gangs?

                    1. Again, I’m curious how some of the radical libertarians out there justify their outrage over F+F. If you think a gun purchase should have no more restrictions than a toilet paper purchase, and that we should have open borders, I don’t see what you can get worked up about.

                    2. Our tax dollars paid for the guns.

                    3. No they didn’t. The cartels paid for the guns.

                    4. They sold guns for the prupose of them being used in murders so that said murders could be used to justify gun control in the US.

                    5. Yes, how is that not enough for libertarian outrage? Pro-gun isn’t pro-murder.

                    6. My point is that in extreme libertopia, you wouldn’t need the BATFE to be complicit in a F+F scheme at all, because straw purchases and weapon transport across the open border would be perfectly legal and completely unregulated. If you think allowing those things to happen is tantamount to murder, how can you support allowing them to happen under a libertopian govt.

                    7. They sold guns for the prupose of them being used in murders so that said murders could be used to justify gun control in the US.

                      That’s conjecture at this point. The evidence only shows what they did, not the motivation.

                    8. Do you really think Arpaio would have sent guns to Mexican drug gangs?

                      Do you think he’d leave a single medical marijuana dispensary standing?

                    9. Do you think he’d leave a single medical marijuana dispensary standing?

                      And Holder has?

                    10. And Holder has?

                      Yes. Yes, he has. I believe Arpaio would totally ramp up raids compared to Holder.

                    11. A good point…

                2. And would Romney at his absolute worst even consider appointing a Secretary of Energy whose stated goal is making gas go up to 10 bucks a gallon?

                  Would ANYONE but Obama? It’s hard to conceive of a President who would appoint such an asshole, if only out of his own sense of political self-preservation.

                  1. Don’t forget Ray LaHood and Cathleen Sabilius. Obama really has the worst cabinet in living memory.

                    1. That’s the tip of the iceberg.

                      The odds of Romney appointing a worse cabinet to replace them are zero, and the odds of him appointing one equally bad are infinitesimal.

                      That’s not because Romney is so great. It’s because the task would be impossible.

                    2. Just when people thought no president could be worse than Bush, along came Obama.

                    3. Obama is one man. Finding a whole cabinet of worse scum would be far more difficult.

                      We’d definitely need to boost the quota for H1B visas.

                    4. To equal this cabinet, Romney would have to appoint Arpio AG, Santorum head of HHS, G Gorden Liddy at DHS, and maybe dig up Nixon’s corpse to put in at the NSA.

                3. Difficult to say. Swapping the hats, on the one hand, might slow the rate of growth simply because a new bunch of sycophants puts their family photos on the desk — there’s ramp-up time, finding the bathroom, and all that settling in.
                  But on the other hand, many want to make a name for themselves (as the economicaly ignorant Obama-ites did), and they went pedal to the metal a few days after they got their badges and hired their admins.
                  Which sums up my feeling that Romney and his groupies, if even he did win, will do little to stem the tide.

              2. +6.02e23

          4. We will have four years to be angry at Romney and bitch about what a lousy President he is. But the salty tears and lamentations of the Obama supporters will only come once.

            Hear, hear!

  8. My Laphroiag Quarter Cask just came in, so I am even more firmly in the “meh” camp on R v O.

    So Obama leads in 3/4 of the country.

    Doesn’t look that way on the RCP map.


    Also, inflation is completely contained – almost dead.

    Well, no wonder gas prices are at historic highs for this time of year and food prices are up.

    So how would income rise?

    Because demand for labor exceeds supply? Increases in real productivity?

    1. Obama leads the Gallup poll in three of the USA quadrants.

      The South, as usual, is the ass end of the country – think of Florida as the penis.

      1. The Electoral College chooses the president, not quadrants, dumbass.

          1. Tell your mom.

            1. She won’t be able to hear it with her head down between Episiarch’s thighs.

              1. Sorry, I thought I was back in high school for a minute.

          2. Does Gallup get to override the way the constitution provides for the election of presidents?

        1. The Delta Quadrant would vote for Jeri Ryan every time.

          1. I would.

          2. That’s what you call your penis?

      2. LOL. If you put the west coast and the northeast into a “quadrant”, then Romney leads in the other three. The EC doesn’t give a shit about geographical contiguity.

      3. Obama leads the Gallup poll in three of the USA quadrants.

        That’s nice.

        Romney leads Obama in more states.

        1. So? Cali is 55 EVs. NY has a load. TX and IL are there too.

          97-34 there.

          1. And TX is going Romney.

          2. Oh, so now we’re back to the electoral college?

            1. It takes a while to move goalposts, RC.

    2. Huh; the fact that New Jersey is listed as ‘Leans Obama’ rather than solid or likely Obama, can’t indicate good things for Obama.

    3. Did you get a bottle of Quarter Cask (good!), or did you actually order up a quarter cask of it (even better)?

      And have you tried Triple Wood? It’s wonderful stuff!

      1. A bottle. I would kill you, yes, you, in front of your family, with my toenails, for an actual quarter cask of Quarter Cask.

        1. I am a Friend of Laphroaig. And before I die, I swear I will get to Islay, see my “plot” and collect my ground rent!

          1. Me, too!

            And you must try Triple Wood.

            Lagavulin, also. Right next door.

            Then there’s this…

            1. Too peaty.

              I like McCallan, Highland Park and Cragganmore.

              1. Try Aberlour A’bunadh.

              2. and being stupid – don’t forget that special gift of yours.

          2. Same here. I’m looking at my framed certificate as we, er, speak.

  9. Politically this point is a lot like when it began to dawn on Titannic passengers that yes, this mutha really is headed for the bottom.

    1. Because voting for Obama again would be like backing up the Titanic to ram the iceberg a second time?

      1. “It could have been worse.”

  10. It will be interesting to see what happens if Mitt wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College.

    I’m sure that the liberals will be up in arms and demanding that the EC be abolished so the will of the people can be heard.

    Haaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha!

  11. “The Bread and Peace Model regards American fatalities in
    Afghanistan under G.W. Bush following “9/11” as owing to a
    provoked commitment of US forces. Consequently, unlike the
    IraqWar, fatalities in Afghanistan did not detract from Bush’s
    vote in 2008. However, US fatalities in Afghanistan beginning
    with President Obama’s prolonged “war of necessity”
    against the Taliban more than seven years later are treated as
    due to an unprovoked foreign war.”

    Well that’s a seriously flawed assumption in the model.

    1. It seems unfair, but since when does fairness count for anything?

    2. Because Afghanistan wasn’t prevoked? Have you gone full truther Retard since leaving us Joe? Gone back to your lefty retard roots?

      1. It is a weakness in the argument; the author’s subjective decision heavily influences the outcome.

        1. But doing that helps Obama not hurts him. If you held Afganistan casualties against him, Obama is even lower. And moreover, they didn’t seem to hurt the previous incumbent Bush. So it seems to be a pretty good assumption they won’t hurt Obama.

        2. Never mind I read it backwards. I think Afghanistan is probably a mild minus for Obama. The funny thing is that to the extent that it is a minue it is because of Obama’s one claim to fame; that he got Bin Ladin. Now that Bin Ladin is dead more people view Afghanistan as a war of choice not necessity.

    3. Well that’s a seriously flawed assumption in the model.

      Not so sure. Bush had popular support for Afghanistan going into the 2004 election (as I recall), while there isn’t much popular support for being in Afghanistan now. I can see why Bush would get a pass for Afghanistan casualties in ’04, but Obama wouldn’t in ’12.

      1. I think you’re certainly right that support for the war in Afghanistan is lower than in 2004.

        It still doesn’t make sense that the model predicts that Bush would receive 0 negative from casualties there up to 2008, but Obama would receive the full effect of those casualties.

        The model seems completely arbitrary.

  12. If Obama loses, he better get his skinny ass out on the speaking circuit, because Michelle and the brats are not flying comercial, they are not staying in anything less tha five star, and they ain’t living in no dump in Chicago.

    1. Speaking of which, I wonder what kind of shape they will leave the White House in if the have to move out next year.

      1. I think that may be racist.

      2. The shredder’s going to need to be sharpened, that’s for sure.

      3. Considering the general maturity level of the White House staff, I would imagine not good. Look for more juvinile pranks like tearing the “W” key out of all of the computer keyboards and such. And I would imagine Michelle will take the silverware and light fixtures to Hawaii.

        1. Serious question: do they change out the beds in the WH during a “change of possession”? Or do Ann+Mitt have to bump the uglies in the same bed that Barry+Michelle did?

          It would be even more sticky of a situation after an assassination.

          1. the outgoing first family pays to have their shit removed. the transition office pays for the new president’s stuff to come in.

      4. Depends if their pardon fire-sale goes better than the Clinton one did.

        1. I hadn’t even thought of the Festival of Pardons.

          So much to look forward to if Obama loses.

          1. Oh, that could get ugly. Not like he’s going to pardon for good reasons.

    2. The First Half-Black President and his family will never have to pay for a meal for the rest of his life. Sad but true.

  13. Pardon me, boys, but I see the Chattanooga newspaper has endorsed GayJay.

    1. Clever.

      Is the Torg thing getting any play around the water cooler?

      1. Oh, yeah. What an ass. You know he’s out the door, right?

        1. Yes, but I think that’s an overreaction to an ill-conceived tweet.

          1. Yes. I think being a no-talent, unfunny hack was far worse than his sophomoric tweet. My guy!

            1. Regardless of the aesthetics, the optics on that decision sucked. People hate Herbstreit. I mean HATE, as I am sure you know.

    2. The News-Free Press? Really?

      1. That is my understanding.

        1. That’s most excellent.

  14. I don’t believe these improved poll numbers for Romney are anything more than part of the conspiracy to steal votes from Gary Johnson.
    Lots of misguided libertarians will now whine that “my state is so close to going against Obama and I just can’t take the chance of voting Libertarian.” Hope you remember how you voted when son/nephew/grandson/you are called upon to strap up and head out on
    patrol near Teheran.

    1. Parody…?

    2. Don’t we wish that Johnson was on their RADAR that much?

  15. There are not enough data points to create a science of presidential elections. You can correlate things all day, but every four years some of the models will continue to work and some won’t, pretty much like flipping a coin.

    Polling on the other hand has gotten increasingly scientific, and polling models have the race pretty steady at Obama’s odds being about 2 in 3.

  16. Survey Finds Professors Have Moved Further Left

    I’m sure we’ll hear about how much more extreme the left has become from the usual crowd of pantywaist “moderates”, “centrists”, and “independents” any day now.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.