shystee-

these maps are among the easiest to comprehend i have run across.

after going to the electoral-vote.com site and looking at these maps there,

with that great little "quick window" that instantly tells you by how much clinton or obama would win/lose vs. mccain,

i have one a question that nags at me:

if george bush is so damned unpopular,

and if the republicans in congress are so damned unpopular,

why is john mccain doing, relatively, so well against clinton/obama?

when is the anger at bush going to turn into support for a democrat?

ever?

maybe never?

i know media types tell us "after a democratic nominee has been chosen".

but what has that got to do with anything?

if bush is unpopular now, and he is,

why isn't mccain similarly unpopular?

any thoughts?

From this map, if she picks up WA, WI and MI - which she will - then she doesn't need Florida; or West Virginia!

For Obama, well; he needs to introduce himself to a lot of people, and convince them to like him. He's looking at a very busy five months; hope he doesn't get too tired.

There's that word again; Hope.

Is that they list all of the polls taken so you can see the trend.

White.

Male.

That's why he's competitive. Don't you believe any polls that say otherwise.

i suspect you are right, bringiton.

and, in addition, mccain has that soldier/war-hero background to use. god knows he earned that status the hard way - at the hanoi hilton.

obama, with the effete personality he has revealed so far in this campaign, cannot come close to matching the mccain "machismo".

clinton i would argue,

PRECISELY BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN,

can counter mccain's machismo and render it useless.

good lord, what am i saying, is this sexism about males?

is this worse than anti-obama "racism"?

i don't know or care.

what i do know is that, like it or not,

in a "man-to-man" match-up,

barack obama cannot compete with mccain on any masculinity scale.

i haven't heard this issue i'm raising here discussed before, but if it doesn't raise its head in the gen elec,

then karl k. rove is not half the political genius he's purported to be.

somebody who knows how greek suffixes and prefixes as used in english, help me out with "malesogyny".

that "word" is not what i had in mind.

"gyn" is a greek reference to "female".

maybe "mysohomes"?

making up new words is frustrating? it's a wonder our english vocabulary isn't still 2000 anglo-saxon words.

Hate/slander against men? If so, it's "misandry."

The May 24 electoral college numbers are impressive. However, upon closer look, it shows Kerry winning New Mexico, Iowa and Ohio while losing Wisconsin and Michigan.

The May 25 map has Kerry up 320 to 218.

The last predictive map, posted on election day November 2, has Kerry winning 262 electoral votes to Bush's 261 with no result predicted for New Jersey. Kerry was expected to lose Wisconsin and Hawaii while winning New Mexico, Iowa, and Florida.

There's only so much polls can do in a close election.

That said, I remember watching this site closely in 2004 and it is very useful.

people like me? i told you so. i warned you this would happen. goddamit, why does our side have to be so stupid? i told you so...

sorry for the rant. but i live in MI, i knew this would happen. how in the fuck, given this economy here, given the degree to which this state, even the 'rural' parts, are integrated, given the fact that we have a vaginal-gov, could *even* be considered, "marginally" or "barely" dem? i'll tell you how: the national party told the voters of this state to get fucked, and they are going to pay back, with interest, that insult. and it'll cost the dems the fucking election in the fall, or be a big part of why they lose. so many of these "mccain is still viable" conversations we have wouldn't be taking place if the egocentric pricks and cunts running the national party could get over themselves and their Village drama already and come up with a sane, rational, fair solution. which actually, isn't that hard. either fund a "revote" (ick) or accept the results as is. those are choices that will satisfy, and perhaps even motivate, the people who right now, are telling pollsters how much the dem party can stuff itself.

if you shit on me, do you expect me to come back and ask for more? perhaps, but i won't. i'm not a loser. nor do i vote for them. wake the fuck up, national dems. i've been saying it for, like, ever. i'm sick and tired of the fact that you all seem to be living in a fantasy world and can only pretend you don't hear people like me, and therefore have the right to be "surprised" when you lose...

arg. sorry for the rant. i saw this one coming a mile away. as did we all.

But hey, at least other states won't fuck up the primary schedule in 2012 when the democratic party AGAIN refuses to address the legitimate complaint about the primacy of New Hampshire and Iowa.

It doesn't matter that we lose, so long as we follow the rules. And by follow the rules, I mean selectively enforce them, up the penalty above the minimum required for two large critical swing states, and then have half the party squeal like stuck pigs over the mere possibility the party will re-seat some delegates as permitted by the rules.

Idiotic doesn't even begin to cover it. The democratic party could fuck up a one-car parade and then pat itself on the back for its noble commitment to following the rules.

there was a study i came across, long ago, but it reasonated with me b/c i lived it, in my youth. it said, paraphrasing, 'when there are only a few black people in a group of almost all white folks, those black people are Popular and considered attractive/good/able/whatever. but when there is more than 10% of the population that is black, the white folks start to hate them in the way that white american racism against black folks is commonly expressed.' my sister is actually the most proof of that theorem i can think of; the only black person in her class, she was captian of the team, class president, teacher's pet, prom queen, etc. it's true, she's shockingly beautiful, but still- i'm fairly sure that if she'd had a lot of fellow not-quite-white folks in her graduating class, it would've been a different story.

look at the states w/o a big af-am population. OR, WA, ME- they are all OK with obama. look at the states with problematic relations with their large or fairly large af-am populations: IN, VA, FL. they all swing for clinton, given the choice between a cunt or a nigger for prez. yep, makes sense to me. when white folks are 'forced' to live near or among us, the racism is viable, real, meanspiritied. but where white folks can just dream about us, or see us on teevee, well, at least some of them are willing to give us a chance. sigh.

wake me up when it's time for us to hate each other over our choice of perfumed cones of fat on the head vs. face paint made of woad. the skin color thing is Boring, i'm ready for a new kind of hate.

I read a study that whites prefer living in neighborhoods that have some African Americans so long as they don't have too many African Americans. Because apparently diversity is great so long you remain in the overwhelming majority.

As for all white states going for Obama, I don't think that's a surprise. Part of the way the rich have stayed rich and powerful is by pitting poor whites and blacks against each other economically. We can now see the Republicans trying to do the same with immigrants. It's not Corporation X's fault for hiring all those undocumented workers and paying them squat, it's the undocumented workers fault for taking the jobs. So states that don't have significant black populations also don't have significant competition between poor and working class black and whites for jobs.

Corporatism is the biggest threat to this country and it infects Democrats almost as much as it infect Republicans. Look at all those nice "progressive" bloggers pronouncing that $30 wouldn't make a difference in anybody's life.* When the sad fact is that there are way too many Americans for whom $30 is quite a bit of money. If you earn $300 a week, $30 starts to look pretty damn good.

* There are other reasons to argue against the gas tax holiday, the main one being that the political capital it might cost would be better spent on legislation that might return even more money to consumers. I thought it was telling that so few Blogger Boiz chose to make this argument and instead went with $30 isn't worth anything to anyone and mocked people who thought it was. That's nothing but privilege.