Never let a crisis go to waste.

[Freeper]

The DUmmies practice that well.

JackN415 (403 posts)

Pretend to be socio-politico-psychologist here... How Sandy may tip the scale in Obama's favor


 
I ain't no expert. But I recall reading that whenever there is a big disastrous event affecting everyone or a large population, there is a sense of unity with altruism and compassion. This applies to natural disasters, from Katrina, to Oklahoma tornado, Japan 2011 tsunami, Haiti earthquake, Indonesian Boxer's day tsunami, ... to social disasters such as 9/11. People tend to be more ethical and behave better. A famous case was the experiment of lost wallets when JFK was assassinated. People returned "pretended lost" wallets at a higher rate than normal.

If anything, images of Sandy disasters, people sufferings, etc. will make the nation as a whole more caring and compassionate, less selfish and hatred. This means they will vote Democrat. Anyone left who still wavers the last moment will likely break for the side with the message of being together and care rather than the side that promotes exclusiveness and hatred. Obama campaign should not go negative on Romney (which may turn people off), but just focus on the message of compassion and that we are in it together.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251188360

 

So this storm is going to turn everyone into a democrat.

courseofhistory (494 posts)
1. Here's how I look at it...

People will be needing disaster relief and consistency. If they stay with and re-elect Obama, they will get the things they need in a timely fashion. Remember the relief will transgress the election and move into the first of next year and beyond.

Electing Romney would slow down the relief effort with transitions of power and agency heads as well as very possible lack of funding and needed relief from Romney since he thinks federal funding is immoral for disaster relief.

If I were in any of those states affected, I'd be seriously worried about whether we would get the attention needed and deserved if Romney were president.

I think this is a plus for Obama and rightfully so!

Sheepshank (4,409 posts)
3. Not to mention that early voting tends to favor Dems

The later voters may not even make it to the polls. There may be a lot of cleanup problems, access problems, and general emergency taking over life.

Cosmocat (4,894 posts)
5. It effectively ends the campaign

The cake is pretty much cooked going into the weekend of the election, Sandy shuts down any real campaigning by either candidate.

Romney IS behind, and now is relegated to having to be on the bench while the President does his job.

The actual hurricane will dominate the news the next three days, and then the aftermath will suck the air out of the last few days.

Now, what it does at the actual voting level with disruption in the states hit by it, it is hard to know.

But, overall, it most assuredly does not help Romney at all.

But, the media does it's thing BAD NEWS FOR DS ... The president has RISK!

If it was Bush, or Romney, Reagen, it would be about how he gets to look presidential.

flamingdem (19,514 posts)
9. If the USA doesn't know what it's got after Obama has saved the auto industry

killed our number one enemy, and saved our asses with this storm then we're f*cked, permanently.

So much delusion.

[Ralph Wiggum]

This will be 0bama's Katrina. Or that Polish mayor in Chicago who lost to Jane Byrne in' 79 because he didn't get snow removed from the streets.

Edit...Michael Bilandic was the mayor. 8)

[Mr Mannn]

  Keep drinking the kool aid, boys.
I am going to LOVE election night!

[Freeper]

This will be 0bama's Katrina. Or that Polish mayor in Chicago who lost to Jane Byrne in' 79 because he didn't get snow removed from the streets.

Benghazi should have been that clown's "Katrina" but the media has covered for him.

[thundley4]

If anything, images of Sandy disasters, people sufferings, etc. will make the nation as a whole more caring and compassionate, less selfish and hatred. This means they will vote Democrat.

 

This coming from one of the most hateful, jealous and evil people on the internet.

If Obama had sons, they would look like the ones that will be doing the looting soon.

[jukin]

Benghazi should have been that clown's "Katrina" but the media has covered for him.

there is a very important difference. Katrina was not Bush's fault. The MSM made it look like it by lying their asses off. Benghazi is all Obama's fault. The MSM made it look like it was anybody but Obama by lying their asses off.

The media is the enemy. The enemy that was infiltrated 50 years ago but came to be truly traitorous in the late 90s.

[98ZJUSMC]

JackN415 (403 posts)

Pretend to be socio-politico-psychologist here... How Sandy may tip the scale in Obama's favor


 
I ain't no expert. But I recall reading that whenever there is a big disastrous event affecting everyone or a large population, there is a sense of unity with altruism and compassion. This applies to natural disasters, from Katrina, to Oklahoma tornado, Japan 2011 tsunami, Haiti earthquake, Indonesian Boxer's day tsunami, ... to social disasters such as 9/11. People tend to be more ethical and behave better. A famous case was the experiment of lost wallets when JFK was assassinated. People returned "pretended lost" wallets at a higher rate than normal.

If anything, images of Sandy disasters, people sufferings, etc. will make the nation as a whole more caring and compassionate, less selfish and hatred. This means they will vote Democrat. Anyone left who still wavers the last moment will likely break for the side with the message of being together and care rather than the side that promotes exclusiveness and hatred. Obama campaign should not go negative on Romney (which may turn people off), but just focus on the message of compassion and that we are in it together. 

When straws are the only thing you got, grasp 'em.

Sheepshank (4,409 posts)
3. Not to mention that early voting tends to favor Dems

The later voters may not even make it to the polls. There may be a lot of cleanup problems, access problems, and general emergency taking over life.

   Just what we want you to think.  Hint: 2008 Early Voting favored Republicans by about 1.6% *wink *   *wink*




 

[Freeper]

there is a very important difference. Katrina was not Bush's fault. The MSM made it look like it by lying their asses off. Benghazi is all Obama's fault. The MSM made it look like it was anybody but Obama by lying their asses off.

The media is the enemy. The enemy that was infiltrated 50 years ago but came to be truly traitorous in the late 90s.

That is why I used quotes around Katrina, I know that it wasn't Bush's fault, you know it and any sane rational person knows that, but the nutcases on the left made such a stink about it that it became a metaphor for a bad event that will hurt the president.

[Evil_Conservative]

I don't care if Sandy destroys the entire east coast, I'm still voting for Romney/Ryan.

[thundley4]

I don't care if Sandy destroys the entire east coast, I'm still voting for Romney/Ryan.

If New York City was wiped out, would upstate be enough to turn New York red?

[GOBUCKS]

If New York City was wiped out, would upstate be enough to turn New York red?

Absolutely. And the world would be a much better place.

[GOP Congress]

The problem is that people in the red states, or states which at least tend less democratic, are more likely to have state policies in place which, to be absolutely blunt, should be mostly responsible for their own disaster relief. Remember, in Katrina, the jackass mayor or New Orleans and the dimwit governor of Louisiana had little to no contingency plans, and had to rely 100% on FEMA, which by definition is supposed to be slower than state and regional responses.

However, this allowed the media to run with the ball to discredit Bush. This time around, the media is going to bend over backwards to HIGHLIGHT FEMA, even though its response will most probably be on the same scale as it did in Katrina. Since most of the affected states are blue states, there is still going to be a larger dependency on FEMA; however, FEMA has the relative home field advantage with Sandy because they will take less time to travel to the affected areas. As an aside, or more as a comparison, during the Joplin MO disaster a couple years ago, FEMA moved proportionately as slowly during that disaster as they did 5 years previously in Katrina. But since Missouri was a relative red state, they had state-provided contingency plans in place that reduced the urgency of FEMA resources; hence, FEMA was hailed a major Obama success.

So I predict that FEMA will be hailed as a BRILLIANT success, and that Obama will be hailed as its master architect of the response to Sandy. And guess what? Obama was looking to run against Bush; now it looks as if the press will have the opportunity to portray this as an Obama victory against Bush. And Benghazi? Fugedaboudit....

[Ralph Wiggum]

The problem is that people in the red states, or states which at least tend less democratic, are more likely to have state policies in place which, to be absolutely blunt, should be mostly responsible for their own disaster relief. Remember, in Katrina, the jackass mayor or New Orleans and the dimwit governor of Louisiana had little to no contingency plans, and had to rely 100% on FEMA, which by definition is supposed to be slower than state and regional responses.

However, this allowed the media to run with the ball to discredit Bush. This time around, the media is going to bend over backwards to HIGHLIGHT FEMA, even though its response will most probably be on the same scale as it did in Katrina. Since most of the affected states are blue states, there is still going to be a larger dependency on FEMA; however, FEMA has the relative home field advantage with Sandy because they will take less time to travel to the affected areas. As an aside, or more as a comparison, during the Joplin MO disaster a couple years ago, FEMA moved proportionately as slowly during that disaster as they did 5 years previously in Katrina. But since Missouri was a relative red state, they had state-provided contingency plans in place that reduced the urgency of FEMA resources; hence, FEMA was hailed a major Obama success.

So I predict that FEMA will be hailed as a BRILLIANT success, and that Obama will be hailed as its master architect of the response to Sandy. And guess what? Obama was looking to run against Bush; now it looks as if the press will have the opportunity to portray this as an Obama victory against Bush. And Benghazi? Fugedaboudit....

I don't think there is enough time for Big Zero to respond before the election. Going to be a mess on the East Coast pretty much all week.

And I hope all you East Coast folks stay safe!

[USA4ME]

Playing politics with this is stupid, but as long as the primitives want to go there...

Aren't the states mostly being effected states that are going Dear Leader anyway?  Rhetorical question.

The only states in the path that might go Romney is NH and they'll recover in time to vote next week.  PA will be effected, but mainly Philly which will go Dear Leader.  Ohio is gonna get some rain and winds, but they'll be recovered by election day.  WV will have snow, but they're used to that.  Seems to me all the major areas getting hit by this storm that may still be under duress come election day are urban areas that vote Dem.  Republican strongholds are fairly safe.

.

[Skul]

Bush's fault and those pesky Joooooos, too.
No, wait,... Rove, you magnificent bastard!  

[thundley4]

 Seems to me all the major areas getting hit by this storm that may still be under duress come election day are urban areas that vote Dem.  Republican strongholds are fairly safe.

.

Which is why Obama might try and extend the election.

[USA4ME]

Which is why Obama might try and extend the election.

He can try, but Constitution is specific on when election day takes place.  Wanna get a bunch of people absolutely hating your guts beyond any hope of repair, that'll do it.

.

[Alpha Mare]

So much delusion.

Which is why around here they're known as "Delusional Underground."

[thundley4]

He can try, but Constitution is specific on when election day takes place.  Wanna get a bunch of people absolutely hating your guts beyond any hope of repair, that'll do it.

.

Then, does early voting violate that?   Just because something is unconstitutional doesn't mean Obama won't try and do it.

[GOBUCKS]

Ideal scenario would be for this storm to obliterate NYC and Long Island, and then a massive quake to dump the western quarter of California into the sea.

I know, it's just a dream.

[Revolution]

Benghazi should have been that clown's "Katrina" but the media has covered for him.

Benghazi should have been his 9/11! (in the DUmmie's eyes, mind you with their hatred of Bush, and all that) In fact, in that respect, it was worse. President Bush red to kids for 7 minutes as to ensure no panic broke out. Obama TURNED A BLIND EYE to this catastrophe. Told soldiers to stand down! Because of that, a couple of our boys are DEAD!!

[Skul]

Benghazi should have been his 9/11! (in the DUmmie's eyes, mind you with their hatred of Bush, and all that) In fact, in that respect, it was worse. President Bush red to kids for 7 minutes as to ensure no panic broke out. Obama TURNED A BLIND EYE to this catastrophe. Told soldiers to stand down! Because of that, a couple of our boys are DEAD!!

If any DUmpmonkeys are reading this... which one was the man, and which was the wannabe?
Think about it, DUmpmonkeys.

[USA4ME]

Then, does early voting violate that?   Just because something is unconstitutional doesn't mean Obama won't try and do it.

No early voting doesn't violate election day.

Election Day in the United States is the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.  That law was made by Congress in 1845 and they aren't going to change it over a storm.

This reminds me of the Senate Rules saying you have to have 60 votes for a bill to go to a final vote in the Senate.  Every term it seems we hear that the party in power is going to change the Senate rules to where it's 50+1, but it never happens.  Both parties know that eventually the other party will be in power and then they'll be subject to the same rule.  Better for both sides to keep it at 60.

Besides, what states could Dear Leader hope to pick up in the NE that's he's not already going to win?  NH isn't going to make a diffrence, and PA will be fine to vote.  It's the states along the coast that are going to take the brunt, and they're already in the Dem bag.

.

[98ZJUSMC]

Quote
Sheepshank (4,409 posts)
3. Not to mention that early voting tends to favor Dems

The later voters may not even make it to the polls. There may be a lot of cleanup problems, access problems, and general emergency taking over life.

   

  Just what we want you to think.  Hint: 2008 Early Voting favored Republicans by about 1.6% *wink *   *wink*

Whuuuups........Sorry.  I tried to tell you.......

**GALLUP SHOCK** ROMNEY UP 52-45% AMONG EARLY VOTERS

via Gallup:

Romney currently leads Obama 52% to 45% among voters who say they have already cast their ballots. However, that is comparable to Romney's 51% to 46% lead among all likely voters in Gallup's Oct. 22-28 tracking polling.

and Ohio?:

But here is what we do know: 220,000 fewer Democrats have voted early in Ohio compared with 2008. And 30,000 more Republicans have cast their ballots compared with four years ago. That is a 250,000-vote net increase for a state Obama won by 260,000 votes in 2008.

[FlaGator]

What they aren't considering is that most of the states being affected are blue states and come next Tuesday people may be more concerned with getting through another day without electricity and running water than they will be in voting.