Election Eve Projections

Battleground Watch: Romney 331, Obama 207

Ali A. Akbar: Romney 285, Obama 253

Karl Rove: Romney 285, Obama 253

Joe Trippi: Obama 303, Romney 235

James Pethokoukis: Romney 301, Obama 237

Michael Barone: Romney 315, Obama 223

Baseball Crank: Romney 271, Obama 267

UPDATE: In anticipation of lots of Election Day coverage off the blog, I’ve added my Twitter feed and Ali Akbar’s to the sidebar.

UPDATE , by Mark Noonan:  Well, here we are – on the eve.  Yes, I’ve had the jitters – but one must keep things in perspective.  Prayer calms the soul.  Try it, if you’re feeling nervous.

Obama’s rally today was half empty – the sure sign that the bloom is completely off the rose and this is not 2008.  Only a 2008 type turnout (or a completely unexpected collapse in GOP voting) can really pull it off for Obama.  Obama’s team and their lapdog media are playing a gigantic mind game with us – touting their early vote and their ground game not so much in confidence that they have it in the bag but in hopes that it will depress us and lower our turnout.  The truth of the matter is that the Democrat early voting totals have collapsed from 2008 – Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Michigan genuinely are in play…and even if they do wind up falling to Obama it will be by tiny margins…and that drop in vote will translate all across the nation, ensuring that Obama loses every 2008 State he won by 10-12 percentage points or less – that, by itself, gets Romney to 266 electoral votes, which is the bottom I see for him tomorrow:  he won’t get less than that (yes, Obama will lose Ohio).  This means that all Romney need do is win one of NH, PA, MI, MN, IA, WI, CO and NV.   Romney is leading in CO, tied in PA, WI and IA and within the margin of error (with Obama under 50%) in the rest.

But, still, there is that chance that Obama wins.  So be it.  If the American people want four more years of Obama, then God bless us all and we’ll just have to endure it.  It will be real bad next year no matter who wins – but if Obama wins then it will not only be much worse but much more extended in time.  And we’ll get to look forward to utterly crushing the Democrats in the 2014 mid-terms (always deadly for the party in power in the 2nd term of a President – see 2006 for confirmation).  And then as 2016 we’ll get to choose between Ryan, Sandoval, Rubio, Santorum, Jindal, Haley, West, Perry…while Democrats get to choose between Hillary, Biden and Cuomo.  I’m telling you, nothing but fun for us in there (and this leaves aside the fact that Benghazi is already a cancer eating at the Obama Presidency…if he “wins” tomorrow then he loses).

I don’t think that will happen.  I trust my fellow Americans – I trust the fact that Democrats I know are nervous and “confident” that Obama will win it narrowly while Republicans are thinking it may even come out as a landslide.  I am encouraged by Latina Americans I know personally who are voting for Romney…talk about Obama’s demographic collapsing in front of his eyes.  It could be a landslide – it could be a big win; we’ll have to see.

God bless you all (yes even you liberals out there) and good luck to all of us tomorrow.

 

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Election Eve Projections

  1. GMB November 5, 2012 / 8:21 pm

    I have no idea who Joe Trippi is. Should I?

    Mitt 340 plus. Nuff said.

    • Matt Margolis November 5, 2012 / 8:36 pm

      Joe Trippi was Howard Dean’s campaign manager.

      • GMB November 5, 2012 / 8:47 pm

        Dean’s campaign manager is predicting a barky win? Thanks Matt. I needed a good LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

      • Matt Margolis November 5, 2012 / 8:49 pm

        Trippi did concede that it comes down to which voter turnout model is correct. Trippi, compared to most other liberal pundits, is one of the more reasonable ones.

      • GMB November 5, 2012 / 9:17 pm

        I have not bothered to read Mr. Trippi. Is there a need to? Is there anything he has said that Thomas/James has not? In thirty hours we will know who is right.

        Go vote. Wear red.

      • neocon01 November 6, 2012 / 9:17 am

        Ayeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee….BANG (explodes)

  2. Cluster November 5, 2012 / 9:27 pm

    I am really surprised that not a single pundit has mentioned the fact the three of the big swing states, WI, OH, and PA recently elected conservative governors, in WI’s case – twice. Those elections WERE referendums on the Obama agenda, as is this election.

    • 02casper November 5, 2012 / 11:09 pm

      “Those elections WERE referendums on the Obama agenda, as is this election.”

      No they weren’t. For one thing, all three ran as moderates rather than the right wingers they are. Secondly, midterm elections draw a different crowd than presidential elections, as will be proven tomorrow.

      Personally, I agree with Joe Trippi’s prediction, although I still think Obama has a good chance to pick up both NC and FL.

      • Amazona November 6, 2012 / 9:46 am

        Nice try, casper. It might be just a little bit more convincing if you could even tell us what “moderate” IS, much less a “right winger”.

        That is one of the really obnoxious things about you, other than the vile and despicable cesspool of a mind and heart you have, as evidenced by your dismissal of Benghazi and the crude way you expressed it.

        But you toss around words like “moderate” and “right wing” with no clue as to what they mean. It’s even worse with you because you are a teacher.

        But then your ignorance about our nation and our politics has been showcased here many other times, such as the time you announced that we would be able to vote in all those national elections, or your truly asinine belief that someone who believes in the Constitution as it is written also believes we should have slavery and deny rights to women.

  3. GMB November 5, 2012 / 10:34 pm

    Thomas/James must be so proud of barky now. He was right on top of this hurricane mess.

    Lets send Thomas/James a autographed barky bomber jacket to wear on a trip to Colorado.

    Think he would get it?

  4. GMB November 5, 2012 / 11:13 pm

    Hmmm, early/absentee votes down almost 60 % in Crook County.

    barky by a landslide.

    FORE!!!ward

    • GMB November 5, 2012 / 11:26 pm

      What ever you say Thomas. You’re the smart one right? teehee

    • GMB November 5, 2012 / 11:50 pm

      LOLzer again. Those numbers come directly from the Illinois Board of Elections. Maybe if you try you can find them too? No? Oh well, you can lead a proggie to the truth but you can not make him believe.

      Mehrtz Hashem

    • GMB November 6, 2012 / 12:16 am

      What ever Thomas. Again the GOP is getting those numbers directly from the IBE. So can you, if you use those vaunted search skills you claim to possess.

      barky will feel the fang.

    • GMB November 6, 2012 / 12:05 am

      Contrast.

      Mitt could only pack the place full. Doesn’t he know he is DOOOMMMMEDD!!

    • M. Noonan November 6, 2012 / 1:14 am

      Hey, you know better! Obama wants smaller, more intimate crowds so they can better commune with The One…Obama with 539 electoral votes tomorrow (1 extra because we love him so much!).

    • bozo November 6, 2012 / 6:41 am

      Facts don’t matter when there’s fake blood in the water. Besides, apologizing when you realize you were dead wrong is a sign of weakness, and will soon be vilified by those who refuse to let facts distort their world view…

      Thanks for the link, though. Interesting stuff.

    • Cluster November 6, 2012 / 7:47 am

      Patriotdad,

      That link is just deliciously delusional on the writers part, but moreover yours. The conclusion that it is the fault of “faulty intelligence” blatantly ignores the FACTnthat Susan Rice and Jay Carney clearly laid the blame at the feet of producer of the you tube video, without any reason to do so. That FACT is undeniable. Secondly, I don’t recall anyone giving Bush such a gracious pass on “faulty intelligence” when it was discovered that the CIA was wrong about WMD in Iraq.

      So forgive me if I laugh at this feeble attempt of yours. But I do see that you got a fan in Bozo. Not exactly good company.

      • Retired Spook November 6, 2012 / 9:14 am

        But I do see that you got a fan in Bozo. Not exactly good company.

        No, actually, they deserve each other.

    • neocon01 November 6, 2012 / 9:24 am

      unpatriotdoggi1

      YOU LIE!!!!

      Father of Another Benghazi Victim Demands Answers: My Son ‘Dialed 911 for Help and They Wouldn’t Help’

    • Amazona November 6, 2012 / 10:48 am

      I’m not too impressed with patriotslug’s spin on this. For one thing, it starts with a lie, which is that anyone has claimed that the president himself watched the attacks play out in real time. Not only has no one claimed that, I don’t think anyone has even suggested that he would have found this important enough to interrupt his day.

      No, the attacks were monitored in real time in the White House Situation Room, a room Obama evidently only visits for photo ops.

      And the NPR, etc. accounts differ too wildly from those of people in the know. They state that there was no C-130 nearby, yet later reports show that there was one in the air, as well as not one but two drones, one of which was armed

      I find it odd yet interesting to watch and see just who scurries out of the woodwork to cover for the White House. We not only have “patriot”dad chiming in with his spin piece, we have freakzo calling this “fake blood in the water”—tell us, clowny, how much of the blood shed by our people in Benghazi was “fake”—–putting him in the same despicable class of waste of human skin as casper, who was so determined to excuse his man-crush from culpability that he let his sexual identification with the man slip out in a crude claim that conservatives were orgasmic about these senseless deaths. And when I say “White House” this is what I mean, as we have learned that decisions are not made by Obama but by his team, primarily Valerie Jarrett. “patriot”dad seems to be an eager volunteer.

      ‘patriot”dad is just parroting the Leftist line that no one abandoned these people to die, but when freakzo and casper dare to try to dismiss these deaths and the reason they died the way they did as mere political posturing they illustrate their innate lack of decency—and this impression of both of them is permanent in my mind, an irreversible branding of moral degeneracy.

      The Americans in Benghazi got abandoned twice—once by the government too cowardly to do its job and protect them, and again by the mindless minions of the Left who trivialize their deaths. But don’t worry, guys—there is enough disgust to go around, so you can count on getting your share.

      I suppose it is possible that “patriot”dad actually did think Obama said, in his original address, that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attic. However, repeated listenings, and reading the transcript, show the single reference to “terrorist attacks” distant from references to Benghazi and immediately after references to the original 9/11. It is quite obvious from the very careful way this speech was constructed, and from the subsequent tap-dancing around the truth, with so many references to mobs and protests and videos and absolutely none coming right out and calling this an organized terrorist attack to commemorate the original 9/11, that the White House knew they had a problem and were trying to stay on both sides of the issue——strongly implying a protest gone out of control, while not overtly stating this was not the case.

      Hillary Clinton actually had the gall to assure a grieving father, who had just seen his son returned to him in a casket, that she personally would not rest till the maker of this video was brought to justice. The lies just kept flowing.

      I saw a lot of Clintonesque parsing of words in the weeks following the attack, a lot of obvious care given to placement of words in the context of statements, a lot of evasion when a direct question was asked. Not that direct questions WERE asked by the Complicit Agenda Media. When one actual journalist, a young man in Denver, did ask, straightforward and blunt, about the attacks and the statements made, Obama’s meandering evasive gobbledygook was a perfect example of what we had been getting all along. I’ll see if I can find the video of that.

      • Amazona November 6, 2012 / 11:29 am

        I know The Blaze not a credible source, as far as you Lefties are concerned, but I found plenty of links to “kyle clark channel 9 news obama interview” and this is the best link to the video. I just don’t have time to track down a good copy from another site, so get over it—if you even have the courage to watch it.

        Considering that none of the questions were answered, it is still quite informative, showing as it does both Obama’s inability to give a straight answer to a question and his evidently lack of experience at being asked hard questions in the first place. He seems to have been taken aback at having an actual network person ask the kinds of questions that real journalists are supposed to ask.

        http://www.theblaze.com/stories/reporter-obama-would-not-answer-repeated-questions-on-whether-requests-for-help-in-benghazi-were-denied/

Comments are closed.