Well, I think it's going to be Perry vs. Romney

[SFC Ollie]

In 1992, Marvin Simkin wrote in Los Angeles Times,

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch.




I think I would rather keep the Electoral college.........

Wouldn't it just be a total pisser if Pres. Obama won re-election like Shrub won his first one?

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

That would be a major meltdown, we know the house would never re-elect Obama...

I'm talking Martin Luther King riots X 1000............

 

[elvis]

Wouldn't it just be a total pisser if Pres. Obama won re-election like Shrub won his first one?

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

That would be a major meltdown, we know the house would never re-elect Obama...

I'm talking Martin Luther King riots X 1000............

I wonder how many people would say it was an "illegal" election?

 

[elvis]

Wouldn't it just be a total pisser if Pres. Obama won re-election like Shrub won his first one?

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

That would be a major meltdown, we know the house would never re-elect Obama...

I'm talking Martin Luther King riots X 1000............

I wanna be that football in your sig.

 

[Missourian]

In 1992, Marvin Simkin wrote in Los Angeles Times,

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch.




I think I would rather keep the Electoral college.........

Wouldn't it just be a total pisser if Pres. Obama won re-election like Shrub won his first one?

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

Yep...still 538 electoral votes, 270 to win, 269 ties.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html​

 

[elvis]

Wouldn't it just be a total pisser if Pres. Obama won re-election like Shrub won his first one?

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

Yep...still 538 electoral votes, 270 to win, 269 ties.

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

 

[Greenbeard]

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Definitely mathematically possible. You can play with different scenarios on the 2012 map here: 270 to win.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm mostly curious how the Tea Party will respond if either one of these yahoos are nominated. My hope is that the libertarians among them would finally get it through their heads that the Repubs don't give rat's ass about freedom, and only like government to be limited when they're not in charge.

Actually, the TEA Party would be happier with Perry than the establishment would.

Perry supported the TEA Party before it was cool.

 

[elvis]

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Definitely mathematically possible. You can play with different scenarios on the 2012 map here: 270 to win.

I'm familiar with the site. It's how I figured it out it was possible in 2008. I was just hoping someone had already done it for this time.

 

[Missourian]

I haven't looked, but is a 269-269 tie possible this time around, with the new census? It did in 2008. It even had a good chance of happening before the meltdown.

Yep...still 538 electoral votes, 270 to win, 269 ties.

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Things have changed, but only +1 here and -1 there.

States won by Democrats in 2000, 2004, and 2008

• Illinois – 1 fewer vote
• Massachusetts – 1 fewer vote
• Michigan – 1 fewer vote
• New Jersey – 1 fewer vote
• New York – 2 fewer votes
• Pennsylvania – 1 fewer vote
• Washington – 1 more vote

States won by Republicans in 2000, 2004, and 2008

• Arizona – 1 more vote
• Georgia – 1 more vote
• Louisiana – 1 fewer vote
• Missouri – 1 fewer vote
• South Carolina – 1 more vote
• Texas – 4 more votes
• Utah – 1 more vote

Remaining states

• Florida – 2 more votes
• Iowa – 1 fewer vote
• Nevada – 1 more vote
• Ohio – 2 fewer votes

United States presidential election, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

With all the states with 3 and 4 and 6 electoral vote, I guarantee there is a scenario that results in a tie. Right now it's 201 Obama, 191 Republican with 146 toss-ups.

 

[dblack]

Actually, the TEA Party would be happier with Perry than the establishment would.

Perry supported the TEA Party before it was cool.

LOL... ok. I'm talking about the libertarian roots of the Tea Party. If there are any of those left. I think they'll bolt if Perry is nominated.

 

[elvis]

Yep...still 538 electoral votes, 270 to win, 269 ties.

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Things have changed, but only +1 here and -1 there.

States won by Democrats in 2000, 2004, and 2008

• Illinois – 1 fewer vote
• Massachusetts – 1 fewer vote
• Michigan – 1 fewer vote
• New Jersey – 1 fewer vote
• New York – 2 fewer votes
• Pennsylvania – 1 fewer vote
• Washington – 1 more vote

States won by Republicans in 2000, 2004, and 2008

• Arizona – 1 more vote
• Georgia – 1 more vote
• Louisiana – 1 fewer vote
• Missouri – 1 fewer vote
• South Carolina – 1 more vote
• Texas – 4 more votes
• Utah – 1 more vote

Remaining states

• Florida – 2 more votes
• Iowa – 1 fewer vote
• Nevada – 1 more vote
• Ohio – 2 fewer votes

United States presidential election, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

With all the states with 3 and 4 and 6 electoral vote, I guarantee there is a scenario that results in a tie. Right now it's 201 Obama, 191 Republican with 146 toss-ups.

I got it to work. Although last time, the scenario I produced was much more probable than this time.

 

[Missourian]

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Definitely mathematically possible. You can play with different scenarios on the 2012 map here: 270 to win.

Yep, just playing with it for a few minutes I had 3 likely situations, based on RCP's current toss-ups, that resulted in a tie.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, the TEA Party would be happier with Perry than the establishment would.

Perry supported the TEA Party before it was cool.

LOL... ok. I'm talking about the libertarian roots of the Tea Party. If there are any of those left. I think they'll bolt if Perry is nominated.

You mean the nutbags who keep inflicting Ron Paul on us every four years?

Who cares?

 

[elvis]

well, yeah. but since the electoral numbers have changed in each state, is it possible for a candidate to get a total of 269? as in mathematically possible.

Definitely mathematically possible. You can play with different scenarios on the 2012 map here: 270 to win.

Yep, just playing with it for a few minutes I had 3 likely situations, based on RCP's current toss-ups, that resulted in a tie.

Were these politically feasible?

 

[dblack]

You mean the nutbags who keep inflicting Ron Paul on us every four years?

Them's the ones.

Who cares?

That's what we're going to find out, idn't?

 

[JoeB131]

You mean the nutbags who keep inflicting Ron Paul on us every four years?

Them's the ones.

Who cares?

That's what we're going to find out, idn't?

Nobody talked about Ron Paul in 2008 after McCain locked up the nomination.

No one is going to talk about him in 2012, either.

 

[dblack]

You mean the nutbags who keep inflicting Ron Paul on us every four years?

Them's the ones.

Who cares?

That's what we're going to find out, idn't?

Nobody talked about Ron Paul in 2008 after McCain locked up the nomination.

No one is going to talk about him in 2012, either.

That gave me an honest-to-goodness belly laugh! Given how many Ron Paul supporters, many that I know personally, who voted for Obama over McCain. So, go ahead and marginalize Ron Paul supporters again. I dare ya!

 

[Missourian]

Definitely mathematically possible. You can play with different scenarios on the 2012 map here: 270 to win.

Yep, just playing with it for a few minutes I had 3 likely situations, based on RCP's current toss-ups, that resulted in a tie.

Were these politically feasible?

Yes. Here's a quick one.

From the 2008 actual map Republicans take NC, VA, PA, OH, IN, CO and NH.

From RCP: Toss-up List

• Colorado (9)

• Florida (29)

• Iowa (6)

• Michigan (16)

• Nevada (6)

• New Hampshire (4)

• North Carolina (15)

• Ohio (18)

• Pennsylvania (20)

• Virginia (13)

• Wisconsin (10)

 

[Missourian]

Them's the ones.



That's what we're going to find out, idn't?

Nobody talked about Ron Paul in 2008 after McCain locked up the nomination.

No one is going to talk about him in 2012, either.

That gave me an honest-to-goodness belly laugh! Given how many Ron Paul supporters, many that I know personally, who voted for Obama over McCain. So, go ahead and marginalize Ron Paul supporters again. I dare ya!

Ron Paul supporters are marginalized...now threaten to take your ball and go home again...I triple dog dare ya.

 

[dblack]

Nobody talked about Ron Paul in 2008 after McCain locked up the nomination.

No one is going to talk about him in 2012, either.

That gave me an honest-to-goodness belly laugh! Given how many Ron Paul supporters, many that I know personally, who voted for Obama over McCain. So, go ahead and marginalize Ron Paul supporters again. I dare ya!

Ron Paul is marginalized...now threaten to take your ball and go home again...I triple dog dare ya.

Alright. As long as you're around here crying the blues when your 'game-show-host' Republican nominee loses the election. I wish I could say that would be worth it, but it wouldn't. Much better if you realized how fucking stupid it would be to nominate another establishment jackoff.