Obama Kiss Ohio Goodbye!

Black Swan

It was just announced on radio that Arnie the Governator is traveling to Ohio to speak on behalf of McCain month end. The former weight lifter, actor, and current California Republican governor is so popular in Ohio, especially Columbus, that he will swing the currently close election (polls) in this major swing state in favour of McCain, just like he swung it in favour of GW Bush in the close 2000 election. Ever heard of ABOC? Arnie's Battle Of Columbus? If you were into weight lifting, body posing, or martial arts in the States, you would know that Arnie has hosted this popular regional event for over 30 years, and draws crowds from all over Ohio each year.

Methinks that Arnie is doing this to get the "Recall Recall Republicans" off his back, given that he stood them up on being the keynote speaker at their convention, and has thus far resisted offshore drilling.

And if Arne goes back on his word to California and allows offshore drilling along the coastline, he can kiss me goodbye too! Drilling offshore of Long Beach has trashed it, and the make-believe oil rig islands offshore look hideous, ruin the view of the Pacific, and put tar on the beaches, your swim suits, and surf boards. Yuk! No telling what this pollution is doing to the sealife...

Manic Moran

As it happened, there was a discussion on the radio yesterday about why the Governator has been so quiet in this election. After all, as a moderate he would appeal strongly to those who the McCain camp needs to win over. (Subject to the crietrion that they give a damn what anyone else thinks). Apparently the answer was twofold. One was that nobody asked him, the other is that he's focusing a lot of his attention on the California initiatives, particularly the redistricting.

To listen (Takes about two minutes) go to http://www.kcbs.com/pages/460668.php?, look on the left for "Monday AM 10/20"

He must like Ohio, his tank spent eight years there before he brought it back to California earlier this year. It spent a year at a Coloumbus mall before being moved to a museum in Groveport. (Yes, he used to be a tanker. Another reason I like him)

NTM

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

One was that nobody asked him, the other is that he's focusing a lot of his attention on the California initiatives, particularly the redistricting.

I cannot buy these two reasons for why Arnie has not decided to support McCain until now. He has been a friend of McCain for years, furthermore, in the cigar filled rooms I bet the Republicans have agreed to back off their Recall Recall attempts in California in exchange for tipping Ohio over in favour of McCain, just like he tipped it in favour of Bush in 2000.

Why is Ohio so important to this election? I read someplace that since about 1960, no one has won the US presidency without at least winning two of the three major swing states: Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. Well, Obama has Pennsylvania, now McCain will have Ohio, so the real battle will occur in Florida, just like in the 2000 presidential. And I predict that there will be huge election irregularities in this Florida election, just like in 2000 if the election is close. Dimpled chads anyone?:rolleyes:

I have to go see if the Florida Secretary of State is Republican or Democrat. Because they are in charge of the state election, for some reason I think this may make a difference.

EDIT: Bad news for the Democrats attempting to win Florida for Obama...

"Secretary of State Kurt S. Browning was named Florida’s Secretary of State by Governor Charlie Crist in December 2006."

"The Secretary of State serves as Florida’s Chief Cultural Officer and Chief Elections Officer"

Browning was "... a member of Governor Jeb Bush's Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology..." Republican Jeb Bush is GW Bush's brother, and was Governor of Florida when brother Bush won the state and the election with about 500 votes.

Source: http://www.dos.state.fl.us/

brianthebard

Manic Moran wrote: »

As it happened, there was a discussion on the radio yesterday about why the Governator has been so quiet in this election. After all, as a moderate he would appeal strongly to those who the McCain camp needs to win over. (Subject to the crietrion that they give a damn what anyone else thinks). Apparently the answer was twofold. One was that nobody asked him, the other is that he's focusing a lot of his attention on the California initiatives, particularly the redistricting.

This may seem like a dumb question, but for a long time McCain was seen (here at least I feel) as a moderate among the republicans, and brought in Palin to shore up the base. Now he needs a moderate (Arnie) to attract the people he should have been attracting from the start??? What the hell happened there?

Black Swan

It begins in Florida...
"October 11, 2008 TALLAHASSEE - Secretary of State Kurt Browning defended himself Friday against allegations that his enforcement of the state's voter-registration law means he's trying to disenfranchise voters."

Source: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/state/orl-voting1108oct11,0,5942110.story

Ponster

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

EDIT: Bad news for the Democrats attempting to win Florida for Obama...

"Secretary of State Kurt S. Browning was named Florida’s Secretary of State by Governor Charlie Crist in December 2006."

I don't think FL has been decided at all. In every poll on the 'net Obama is leading in Florida.

It's all about Virginia folks. If McCain can't hold it then it's all over for him.


Obama simply has too many safe states to lose this one. Give him every state to the northeast of Maryland along with Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, Iowa, and the West Coast and Hawaii. It's a sure bet that he wins all of those states

Give McCain the rest of the states except the following tossups: FL, VA, NC, MO, NM, CO, OH, NV.


Any single one of those states (with the above states) will put Obama over 270 with the exception of CO and NM, which would have to be won together. That means that McCain can only afford to lose New Mexico or Colorado. He has to win every one of those above states. If McCain loses one of them (or both NM and CO) then he's done.

Manic Moran

This may seem like a dumb question, but for a long time McCain was seen (here at least I feel) as a moderate among the republicans, and brought in Palin to shore up the base. Now he needs a moderate (Arnie) to attract the people he should have been attracting from the start??? What the hell happened there?

Funny that you should mention that.... You're not the only person to think the campaign has made a major strategic error.

I mean, I can see him doing something to help galvanise the Base. I know a few people who, until he picked Palin, considered McCain to be a RINO and as bad as a Democrat, so wasn't going to vote for him. He did need to attract them. The problem was that the campaign didn't just try to reach out to the base a bit by taking a stance against abortion or by picking Palin or by encouraging off-shore-drilling or whatever, he did 'all of the above' and thus utterly abandoned a large number of the moderates in a desperate lunge to the right. Very bad move, if you ask me.

NTM

brianthebard

It makes him look like a headless chicken politically tbh.

Manic Moran

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

EDIT: Bad news for the Democrats attempting to win Florida for Obama...

"Secretary of State Kurt S. Browning was named Florida’s Secretary of State by Governor Charlie Crist in December 2006."

"The Secretary of State serves as Florida’s Chief Cultural Officer and Chief Elections Officer"

Why is this any worse than Ohio's SecState being a Democrat? They've got to be from one side or the other, and the 'other' side is going to be at a disadvantage in a swing state if you choose to believe that there's no such thing as an honourable SecState without a party loyalty.

NTM

Black Swan

Ponster wrote: »

I don't think FL has been decided at all. In every poll on the 'net Obama is leading in Florida.

19 October
FOX News/Rasmussen 1000 LV 3.0 Obama 48 McCain 49 (McCain +1)

16 October
SurveyUSA 553 LV 4.3 Obama 47 McCain 49 (McCain +2)

15 October
Research 2000 600 LV 4.0 Obama 49 McCain 45 (Obama +4)

14 October
CNN/Time 765 LV 3.5 Obama 51 McCain 46 (Obama +5)

13 October
InAdv/PollPosition 612 LV 3.8 Obama 48 McCain 44 (Obama +4)

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

if you choose to believe that there's no such thing as an honourable SecState without a party loyalty.

It also suggests that persons in the GW Bush and Jeb Bush circle will be honourable? I wonder how the Bushs' define honourable? Maybe from their perspective they were being honourable in terms of how they may have affected the 2000 election in Florida (or the 2008 election of today)?

For some reason this reminds me of (Shakespeare) Mark Anthony's speech over the dead body of Caesar... how the meaning of "ambition" can change from something negative to something positive? In order words, is the Bush definition of honour value laden? The Republican? The Democrat? If you believe the Republican party to be honourable, then would party loyalty be honourable?:rolleyes:

Manic Moran

I'm just pointing out that the playing field is equal and opposite in those two high-profile swing States. Both have people running the elections who are openly aligned with the major parties. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I'm going to take both officials at their word that they will perform their duties in an honest manner regardless of who appointed them. By way of example, Greenspan, a self-proclaimed life-long Republican, appointed by Reagan, seemed to have little trouble being trusted by Democrats after being inherited from the Bush 1 era.

NTM

Ponster

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

19 October
FOX News/Rasmussen 1000 LV 3.0 Obama 48 McCain 49 (McCain +1)
...

Cheers, I was a little out of date with my info...


Rasmussen Reports for FOX News
Added: 10/14/08
Barack Obama 51%
John McCain 46%


Rasmussen Reports
Added: 10/9/08
Barack Obama 50%
John McCain 47%


Strategic Vision
Added: 10/10/08
Barack Obama 52%
John McCain 44%


Research 2000 for Sun Sentinel
Added: 10/11/08
Barack Obama 49%
John McCain 44%
Unsure 4%
Other 3%


Rasmussen Reports for FOX News
Added: 10/6/08
Barack Obama 52%
John McCain 45%



I must admit though that I expected McCain to have this state 'in the bag' as opposed to have to spend cash in TV and ads just to defend it.

Hobbes

As long as they keep McCain out of Ohio. I see he just recently accidently called all the people at his rally racist, then realising his mistake (and that everyone stopped cheering) he says the reverse about the crowds which just reinforced the mistake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVSURlFoQs

Benedict XVI

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm just pointing out that the playing field is equal and opposite in those two high-profile swing States. Both have people running the elections who are openly aligned with the major parties. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I'm going to take both officials at their word that they will perform their duties in an honest manner regardless of who appointed them. By way of example, Greenspan, a self-proclaimed life-long Republican, appointed by Reagan, seemed to have little trouble being trusted by Democrats after being inherited from the Bush 1 era.

NTM

Well you see NTM on Boards.ie anything that favors the GOP, underhanded or not is seen as conspiracy and bad news, where as anything that favors the Dems, underhanded or not, is Ok and good news for humanity in general.

Hobbes

Benedict XVI wrote: »

adds no value

I've been watching pollster. Keeps everything up to date.

http://www.pollster.com/

Ludo

Benedict XVI wrote: »

Well you see NTM on Boards.ie anything that favors the GOP, underhanded or not is seen as conspiracy and bad news, where as anything that favors the Dems, underhanded or not, is Ok and good news for humanity in general.

That coz the Dems are the good guys and the Reps are the bad guy...doesn't everyone know that by now

Trojan

Hobbes wrote: »

I've been watching pollster. Keeps everything up to date.

http://www.pollster.com/

Hobbes, when quoting others please use the actual quote. If you disagree with the quote, put forward an argument.

Same goes for everyone, please make positive contributions rather than taking cheap shots.

Trojan

Benedict XVI wrote: »

anything that favors the Dems, underhanded or not, is Ok and good news for humanity in general.

You hit the nail on the head. I believe that anything that kicks the Republicans out of power will actually be good news for humanity in general. Personally I don't care for the Democrats but they're the only ones who can do it.

What's interesting from a Republican point of view should be: why do the majority of the world (according to most polls) want the Republicans out of power in the US?

Otacon

Trojan wrote: »

why do the majority of the world (according to most polls) want the Republicans out of power in the US?

The US Foreign Policy under George W. Bush for the last 8 years would be a good place to start.

is_that_so

Otacon wrote: »

The US Foreign Policy under George W. Bush for the last 8 years would be a good place to start.

Strikes me that a few trained monkeys would beat Bush in any type of poll.
And therein lies the problem. How much of that desire for change comes from the urge to forget about the last eight years and how much is based on the perceived or real quality of the two aspirants?

Disappointed to see Obama yet again throw in the "Vote for me 'cos he's just like Bush" line. Two weeks before and the shadow still looms large.

molloyjh

Trojan wrote: »

why do the majority of the world (according to most polls) want the Republicans out of power in the US?

A lot of it has to do I think with the fact that the Republicans have gone further and further right wing over the last decade in particular. PNAC, for example, from an international point of view was a terrifying think tank and a number of the high profile members of the Bush Administration were either part of or formerly part of the group. I think Colin Powell was completely right in his assessment of the GOP.

Additional to that is the damage that GWB has done over the last 8 years and now the choice of Palin (who is quite similar to GWB in many ways from a style and natural ability perspective) as VP only serves to increase concerns over the direction of the Republican party. Personally I was delighted to hear that McCain was nominated as the GOP candidate. He does have a fairly decent non-partisan history, and I thought it may have marked a return to a less extreme position for the party. However his campaign shattered any belief I had in him.

I was over in the US for a few weeks in September and paid close attention to the campaigns - at the time I was losing faith in McCain and hadn't really developed any in Obama, he seemed all talk etc - and I came to the conclusion then (and it has been re-enforced since) that he is a far better choice than McCain. That's not to say of course I think he'll "save us all" or anything so dramatic. :pac:

Trojan

molloyjh wrote: »

the Republicans have gone further and further right wing over the last decade in particular.

Additional to that is the damage that GWB has done over the last 8 years and now the choice of Palin

Absolutely, those are the reasons 100%. I'm not asking the question because I want the answer - I'm asking the question because I want the Republicans to think about it.

It really interests me that we see Republicans everywhere, here on boards, on Fox news, on forums and blogs online, and many, many of them seem to think that it's all about "Obamamania" and people being pro-Democrats.

I'll capitalise it so there's no confusion: The World Is Not Pro-Democrats. We Are Anti-Republican. Because They Suck.

That's my point.