what to look for today (the day before it comes down)

[franksolich]

I won't be around today, much less exploring Skins's island, but a tip for those who plan to:

It's rather late in the day, but it's now apparent that for a few primitives, faint vestiges of reality are infiltrating into their heads.

It's way too late, but it's the primitives' own fault.  If the primitives had been looking at all reality, rather than just the "reality" that agrees with their primitive "reality," they would've figured it out last summer, that something was coming down that they wouldn't like.

Last summer into early autumn, if the primitives had seen it coming, they could've taken measures or adjusted their attitudes in time to react healthily to the events of tomorrow.  But no, they're seeing it only now, less than 24 hours before the election starts.

There's going to be a few primitives on Skins's island today, having grasped minuscule scintillas of real reality, who will feebly try to caution the other primitives that all is not well.

Those campfires get doused quickly by my fellow alum Skins; not merely "removed" or "locked," but actually deleted.

(For the record, nothing here on conservativecave has ever been deleted; if its appeared here, it's still here.)

If one has the time, and it's convenient, grab those ill-fated campfires before Skins extinguishes them.

[BlueStateSaint]

I had the retired office 'bat "officially" call the election for Obama.

His record on political prognostications is laughable, to put it mildly.

[Tess Anderson]

It's later in the day tomorrow that I can't be on, but some of those posts today are way off-the-wall - I think they think can will it. This particular wanna-be polling analyst is getting on my last nerve today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021717595

Response to brewens (Original post)
Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:03 PM
CoffeeCat (19,252 posts)
6. That place has become a very sad cave of denial...

Two weeks ago, their "Romney in a landslide!" posts were troubling. I found myself looking at all of the polls and the data, wondering if they saw something that I didn't.

Nope, it turns out, they were just listening to the packaged up pile of malarkey that Fox News, Karl Rove and the rest of talk radio has sold them.

It's really sad to see. I actually feel sorry for them, and I have NEVER felt sorry for them. Fox News gives them a few cherry picked data points--on which they hang all of their hope. They refuse to even LOOK at the average of all of the state polls, that give Obama wins or ties. In every single battleground state!

They repeatedly cite Rasmussen. OMG. They criticize Nate Silver, but they hug their big Rasmussen pillows, while ignoring so much data!

They are stuck on a couple of data points--That Romney is doing so well with Independents. Ok, yeah, Romney is ahead in most polls with Indies, but not by much. They fail to deal with the fact that Obama is winning the majority of the swing-state polls! And if you break down the demographics, Obama is winning overwhelmingly with Hispanics, African Americans and women.

They're clinging big time over there, and they're not letting go of their illusions. They're all going to be in shock on election night.

She makes another couple of stupid posts after that. Dumb bitch.

[franksolich]

It's later in the day tomorrow that I can't be on, but some of those posts today are way off-the-wall - I think they think can will it. This particular wanna-be polling analyst is getting on my last nerve today:

She makes another couple of stupid posts after that. Dumb bitch.

I was thinking about giving the caffeinated feline primitive prominence in the DUmpster on election night, given her off-the-wall "confidence" expressed so bombastically the other week, but then I decided upon a particular PoP (primitive of prominence) rather than a mere lumpenunterprimitiven.

<<is snobbish when it comes to primitives.

[Carl]

Response to brewens (Original post)
Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:03 PM
CoffeeCat (19,252 posts)
6. That place has become a very sad cave of denial...

Two weeks ago, their "Romney in a landslide!" posts were troubling. I found myself looking at all of the polls and the data, wondering if they saw something that I didn't.

Nope, it turns out, they were just listening to the packaged up pile of malarkey that Fox News, Karl Rove and the rest of talk radio has sold them.

It's really sad to see. I actually feel sorry for them, and I have NEVER felt sorry for them. Fox News gives them a few cherry picked data points--on which they hang all of their hope. They refuse to even LOOK at the average of all of the state polls, that give Obama wins or ties. In every single battleground state!

They repeatedly cite Rasmussen. OMG. They criticize Nate Silver, but they hug their big Rasmussen pillows, while ignoring so much data!

They are stuck on a couple of data points--That Romney is doing so well with Independents. Ok, yeah, Romney is ahead in most polls with Indies, but not by much. They fail to deal with the fact that Obama is winning the majority of the swing-state polls! And if you break down the demographics, Obama is winning overwhelmingly with Hispanics, African Americans and women.

They're clinging big time over there, and they're not letting go of their illusions. They're all going to be in shock on election night.

Uhmm...why has O had to make campaign stops in Wisconsin and why would Gov.Romney waste time and money there and in Pa if his internals said it was hopeless?

[franksolich]

Uhmm...why has O had to make campaign stops in Wisconsin and why would Gov.Romney waste time and money there and in Pa if his internals said it was hopeless?

This particular re-election campaign is surely much different from others in the past.

After someone wins the presidency the first time, when the second time comes around, one tries to expand, build on, the margin of victory that had gotten one into office.  One wants to get a bigger victory the second time.

I offer the examples of Eisenhower 1952-1956, Nixon 1968-1972, Reagan 1980-1984, and the second Bush 2000-2004, in which these candidates sought, and got, votes they hadn't gotten the first time around.  These are extreme examples, as every president seeking re-election has done this (but with less stellar results).

Excepting this incumbent.

I'd fully expected Barack Milhous to be campaigning for a second term in places such as South Carolina, Nebraska, or Idaho, to pick up votes that had gone to McCain in 2008, but oddly he hasn't, instead reploughing old territory he'd already won his first time around--Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, &c., &c., &c.

One wonders why.

Or, really, seriously, one already knows why.

[Freeper]

BlueStreak (1,612 posts)
15. It is a real problem. Many of the people who get news from RW sources

seem to be completely unaware that it is not truthful.

Of course, they place themselves inside that bubble, but once inside they get enough reinforcement that they begin to look at everything outside the bubble as being invalid for one reason or another.

Ultimately they are intellectually dishonest, and they are only living inside the bubble because they want to believe shit instead of reality. But my point is that to many of them, that is very real to them. They truly think that is the real world.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021717595

That description fits DU pretty well. They only ever look at news sources approved by DU. They say day in and day out how biased Fox is, but they have never actually watched it or even read the website, they claim that Rush is a hate filled liar yet they don't listen to him nor read what he writes. If anyone lives in a bubble it is the DUmmies.

[Celtic Rose]

I'm perfectly aware that nothing is certain in life except death and taxes.  I'm not under the illusion that it is impossible for Romney to lose tomorrow.  However, based on the fact that Obama has done a very poor job of arguing why he deserves a second term, and on the fact that the Democratic base is not as fired up as it was in 2008, I feel that his re-election is not very likely. 

[ChuckJ]

This particular re-election campaign is surely much different from others in the past.

After someone wins the presidency the first time, when the second time comes around, one tries to expand, build on, the margin of victory that had gotten one into office.  One wants to get a bigger victory the second time.

I offer the examples of Eisenhower 1952-1956, Nixon 1968-1972, Reagan 1980-1984, and the second Bush 2000-2004, in which these candidates sought, and got, votes they hadn't gotten the first time around.  These are extreme examples, as every president seeking re-election has done this (but with less stellar results).

Excepting this incumbent.

I'd fully expected Barack Milhous to be campaigning for a second term in places such as South Carolina, Nebraska, or Idaho, to pick up votes that had gone to McCain in 2008, but oddly he hasn't, instead reploughing old territory he'd already won his first time around--Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, &c., &c., &c.

One wonders why.

Or, really, seriously, one already knows why.

Speaking of campaigning. Either during one of the debates or while watching one of 0's commercials, my wife mentioned something that I think a lot of people might be thinking. When Obama mentioned something about his 'plan' she asked, "if he knows how to fix things and has a plan, why hasn't he already fixed it? Did he just think of it or something?"

The Democrats at DemocratUndergound.com need to wonder how many every day people across this county are wondering the same thing as my wife.