FALSE.Originally Posted by LLL
You mean the one where Gore won the popular vote and if a full statewide recount was done would have won Florida and the election?Not looking good for Romney.
At the moment Obama leads Ohio by 5 and Florida by 1. If Romney loses either state, he's done.
Obama also leads by 1 in Virginia.
Obama leads by 5 in Nevada, 1 in Iowa, 3 in Colorado, 4 in Michigan, and 4 in New Hampshire.
It is now looking pretty good for Romney in Missouri (+5) and Indiana (+9), but he was expected to take those, anyway.
Romney has also fallen into a tie in North Carolina -- a state he was originally expected to take.
While many of Obama's leads are within the 3% statistical margin of error, it doesn't look good for Republicans that Obama is currently leading all seven toss-up states, including a 5-point lead in Ohio.
We still have 3 months to go, so a lot can change, but I am not seeing Romney doing a lot to change his image as an out-of-touch rich guy.
Romney could probably win Florida by getting Marco Rubio as his VP candidate, but Rubio wouldn't do a lot to solve the Ohio problem.
I think Romney's only hope lies in two areas:
1) Obama really fucks up big time in some way, and everyone gets really pissed off at him
2) There is another major economic failure (such as the bank crisis in September, 2008) between now and election time, which kills people's faith in Obama to handle the economy
Otherwise Obama is going to win this one, and it won't even be that close.
Looks like the Republicans are about to beat themselves again, just as the Democrats did in both 2000 and 2004 (especially 2004).
The popular vote part is true, but your statement about Gore winning if a full statewide recount was done is very misleading.
The correct statement is, "If a full statewide recount was done, and the standards from each individual county (which varied from county to county) were used, Gore would have won by about 100 votes."
The problem is that this statement assumes that the standards in each county are fair. Some were very flawed, and would happened to have to ended up benefiting Gore.
Let's look at the 2000 election a different way.
If you count the "hanging chad" votes (where a punch was made but the piece that's supposed to fall out didn't detach), Bush wins, even in a complete statewide recount.
This can be found on the NY Times website, which is clearly not biased for Bush, as the NY Times is very liberal.
http://www.nytimes.com/images/2001/1...nt/index.html#
Select any of the "Chads detached" options on the right and click for the results.
Oh, and another fact lost from the 2000 election was that Gore would have lost if his own campaign's last recount request (to only recount from heavily Democratic counties) were granted. Gore didn't want the whole state recounted because he thought this would put him at a disadvantage, so he tried to ask for just certain counties that would favor him to be recounted. That was rejected, but he still would have lost.
Reply With Quote