Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Predictions

Posted 7 years ago on Nov. 4, 2012, 11:44 p.m. EST by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Many of us have been posting here for while now. How bout we have some predictions for next Tuesday and a short explanation as to why someone won or lost. Let's at least try to keep it civil. I believe Romney will win a close one because democrats failed to take raising the minimum wage seriously. Bad advisors.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by George1234 (82) 7 years ago

Romney has no chance. Media is jacking up his % on polls to create confusion in voters' mind. Obama will win more than 300 electoral votes.

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

I predict the pro corporation anti civil liberties candidate will win. What I don't know is if he will be republican or democrat.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

What you should know about mittens: Undecided voters need to see this video NOW! Please share it with your social networks.

Please share/circulate.

[-] 1 points by Renneye (3874) 7 years ago

I predict the elections will be postponed due to them dragging their feet and chaos with Sandy, and another storm coming in. We'll see, I guess.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

Could happen I guess but NY and Jersey were a lock for Obama.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago


It needs to end tomorrow. I'm looking forward to seeing how many of the party hacks leave the forum after the election.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 7 years ago

most of them

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

The corpoRATist shills will just shift their focus. Same-old-same-old.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Sad but more than likely true.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

They need to keep messing with us - or they will have to change how they do business - because we will make them change - be healthy - and hell that means they will have to be responsible as well as accountable.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 7 years ago

“The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.” Karl Marx

[-] 1 points by gsw (3324) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 7 years ago

Way to Call It.

"In the first voting system, the general public is allowed, every few years, to put a tick on a voting ballot that almost totally prevents them from having any say whatsoever with regard to controversial issues of the day. Prior to the election, discussion of important controversial topics is avoided wherever possible in favor of discrediting one's opponent, or getting lost behind a patriotic smoke screen.

In the second and somewhat covert voting system, roughly 23,000 lobbyists swarm over Capitol Hill every day to fight for favors on behalf of the "special interest groups" that can afford to hire them. On a daily basis, the economic elite can send their legion of lawyers to talk directly with specific congressmen to make bargains with the legislators behind closed doors.

What kind of favors do the wealthy bargain for? Well, they bargain for such goodies as personal or corporate income tax concessions, or a means of getting around the inheritance tax, or for price subsidies, or write-offs for any number of things, or to have the capital gains tax reduced even further, etc., etc.,.

Why do the elite have so much power over the legislators? ...two reasons. To get elected, a politician requires votes. To get votes a candidate requires campaign support in the form of money and publicity. Nowadays, getting elected is a very, very costly business. Even though most politicians have small personal fortunes, few politicians would be willing to personally fund their own campaigns and risk losing the bulk of their personal wealth just for an opportunity to unselfishly serve the public. In big states like New Jersey or Illinois, a candidate in the 1990 elections can easily require $10 million to compete. {B106} In 1988, the average Senator spent $4 million to campaign. {B107} So even those with a few million can end up on the payroll through the need for election campaign support.

Therefore a politician doesn't even get to first base without the support of a sympathetic media and without financial contributions from benefactors with money to spare. This, for all intents and purposes, excludes the bottom 90%, and leaves corporations, wealthy individuals, and other business interests."


[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 7 years ago

“I believe that there will be ultimately be a clash between the oppressed and those who do the oppressing. I believe that there will be a clash between those who want freedom, justice and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation. I believe that there will be that kind of clash, but I don't think it will be based on the color of the skin...” ― Malcolm X

[-] 1 points by gsw (3324) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 7 years ago
[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

Do communists believe in voting? I wouldn't know. I believe voting can be postive if you can get money out of the political process. Voting isn't doing us any good right now.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 7 years ago

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." Josef Stalin

Money has little influence over power. So much money is spent attempting to attain it.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 7 years ago

We won, but we lost. They won, but we lost. And now...? Apathy beats malaise by a whisker. I'm to tired too go to the rally, if they have one.

[-] 1 points by Ache4Change (3340) 7 years ago

I predict that Corporate Money and The Bankers will win the election!

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

LOL. That'a a given.

[-] 3 points by Ache4Change (3340) 7 years ago

So that makes our 'democracy' a sham, right?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Obama wins- the bombs are still dropping, the banks are still robbing, and the people are still being oblivious to it. No need to replace.

House and Senate stays as is.

Debt celing deal, auto cuts from the last one, and the Bush cuts and payroll tax cut all coming into focus end of year will show how broken this system is.

The people will still be oblivious.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 7 years ago

Bush won by a mere 500+ votes in Florida.

Look at how many lives, homes, families, jobs and treasuries were lost as a result!

Vote the 1%-Cons OUT!!

[-] -2 points by Nowsmichigan (-310) 7 years ago

In 2010 the dems suffered a severe blow because of Obama and now two years later the dems are going to get an ass whoopin that they will never forget when "We The People" start hitting the poles on Tues. Buckle up it is going to be a very rough ride for all you dems / libs

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 7 years ago

In 2010 millions of petulant newbies who voted in 2008 pouted because they could not understand that one skinny black man could not reverse 30+ years of RW extremist RepubliCon entrenched regression in two years.

Vote the Cons Out!

[+] -4 points by Nowsmichigan (-310) 7 years ago

Vote the Cons Out!////////////////////////////////////// Thanks for the advice and I will be voting the "con" obama out on Tuesday

[-] 0 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

Everything Marx & Engles said about Capitalism Came true in the USA. Hate to say it. We had Status Quo when Obama Won.

At some point in US History Milton Friedman, Chicago School of Economics, won over a significant number of Politicans. His Neoliberal Ideas took hold when Allan Greenspan become Federal Reserve Chairman in 1987.

But back further there were big pressures in the 1970s, worker rights, union benefits, OSHA Safety Rules. 1980s was the decade of the Yuppie, Young Urban Professional, who wanted to make money. Just a demographic trend, except those guys are now leading corporations.

And everything we see today as Corruption in Washington and Wall Street and in Coporations ... was visible during the 1980s, S&L Crisis, Keating Five Scandal, Stock Market Crash, formation of the Idea of NAFTA and Building Auto Plants in Mexico and Central America.

Well Don't Shoot me. It is a Trend we all should have seen and Remembered and Fought When Ross Perot was Running as Third Party Candidate for President of the USA.

Capitalism requires Checks & Balances.

Or You Get Corruption ...and any place with money is a Target by Slick Con Men in Politics and Business.

You need Regulations to Discourage Crime and Fraud. There will always be Fraud and Crime... as per William K. Black. Who also Said the best way to Rob a Bank is to Own One.

So Let's Enforce regulations and Simplify Law, and Simplify Taxes, so that we can all see that the rich are paying their Share.

[-] -1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

People have to show they can control elections. It happened when Perot supporters gave it to Clinton. In 2000 Nadar supporters gave it to Bush. Now Johnson supporters have to give it to Obama.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

It could be True. But People will get what they Deserve.

1) US Demographics place people ready to retire or elderly in the most likely to vote area (you can correct me here, I'm stretching a point) ...therefore, I would think the biggest voting block would try to protect their retirement by voting for Obama. But I don't really know if Elderly feel vulnerable to price in Obama Care. My parents will vote for Obama. I'm thinking Republican touched the Third Rail of Politics by even mentioning Social Security and Health Care.
2) Romney wants to Invest more in Defense, the Largest Voting block should know we have the Highest Investment in defense Ever and We don't need any investment in Defense At All, 100%, and it is clearer than any other time in our History.
3) Romney is so Obviously an Authoritarian and a Liar. He is no different from any Past President.
4) Obama has Follow the Tracks Laid out by Georgie W. Nobody really has anything to Compain about. He pursuited War. He showed himself Strong in War, Kill Lists, Guantanamo, Spying, ... I think the Biggest Voting Block see him as Status Quo, the Devil you know, ...Biggest issue with Obama is Obama Care, but after 4 years, the people know where the money is coming from.
5) You make a big point with the idea that you have a lot of Pissed off Conservatives that are going to make sure they will vote... versus... I'm not sure the Democrats will make sure they vote.

How would a Strategic Plan to Control the Election Go?

Looking back at Nixon, Reagan, I just sense that Republicans are more Militant and get 100% behind their Candidate. I don't know that I saw that at the little I saw of the republican convention. Perhaps the Republicans felt a little polarized by Romney. I guess they kept the Libertarians supressed a bit.

How was the Machine behind Romney? I guess I should know. Thinking it was the NeoCons that were behind Bush. But who are the other Republican King Makers? There must be a Divide between King Makers...

Seems to me the Republicans always win unless they screw up because their strategy is be 100% behind the Candidate. Romney is not a perfect candidate. But did he screw up?

1) talk about Abortions
2) Talk about reducing SS and Medicare
3) Did not speak out on any Real Issue at all
4) Doesn't care about the Integrity of Wall Street or Coporations
5) Doesn't care about Money in Politics
6) Took advantage of the System to get Low taxes
7) Set up Trust Funds and Off Shore Accounts to "Game the System"
8) His whole spiel about the Economy is heartless, flimsy, no passion, full of half truths, worst parts trace back to him (unemployment & layoffs), and doesn't really stick to Obama other than Obama is the Commander In Chief. And Romney has no Plans that he made Public, None. His Economic Plan is to Spend on Defense and shred Regulations ... not thinking that is what we were doing for since President Clinton and All through Georgie W.
10) Romney did Screw up, He remind us of what got us into the Shambles of What is Now the Banana States of America (BSA). Because his plan is to do what Georgie W. did and What Obama is doing now.

SO MY PREDICTION is ... Obama should win since the Challenger didn't show anything, offer any plan, and could not distinguish himself.

That is my analysis attempt for 2012.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 7 years ago

I believe Romney will be the winner - if you have been following the campaigns Romney pulls in thousands more the Obama at their campaign speeches.

Obama doesn't have the same "voter enthusiasm" as he did in 2008.

Besides if Obama is re-elected it is going to be the "same ol, same ol" with him because he doesn't know what needs to be done to get the economy up and running.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

If Obama wins it will be business as usual. I'd like to get back to supporting people that are smart, not presidents. People like Kucinich and Nadar know what needs to be done so they chug along.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

That is a good point. Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, ...Well maybe that is all we can say. Barny Franks actually explains the government and what is going on, an educator, he is retiring. Dodd was on that bill but don't know about him. I guess I never learned about our senators since they usually corrpt the system like Phil Gramm, The Keating Five senators – Alan Cranston (Democrat of California), Dennis DeConcini (Democrat of Arizona), John Glenn (Democrat of Ohio), John McCain (Republican of Arizona), and Donald W. Riegle, Jr.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Jill Stein and other candidates less than 1%

Gary Johnson 3%

Romney 47%

Obama 49%

That's my prediction.

Gary could have more even. If you look back at the primaries among republican voters, the Ron Paul/Libertarian movement was a substantial size and most of them didn't like Romney either.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

I keep forgetting that a lot of republicans/libertarians just don't like Romney. I'm seeing some apathy among 20-somethings on the left but polls have Obama ahead.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

I play poker with a libertarian supporter and he trashes on Romney as much as he does Obama.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

If libertarians want to be the new Nadar 2000 voters that's OK with me. I voted for Nadar and dems remind me of it every frickin' day.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

First of all.... corruption is the reason Bush won. It had nothing to do with Nader.

The root of the problem with Bush was money in politics. It's not always what you know.... it's who you know. Bush was a great example of that.

Also if Gore wanted the Nader vote... he should have added important areas of the Green Party platform to his.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

Dems blame everything on Nadar 2000 voters. They'll continue to do it after this election no matter who wins.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

That is an example of Dems being Autoritarian, not democratic. There is a cognitive error there. Elections as everyone knows is about making a free choice. Choosing who you think would be best.

But it is more than that. It is about speaking your mind on government. It says how you want to the government to operate.

Choosing Candidates by Fear is a Bias toward Fear. But... I guess NEOCONs are the Scaryist MFO in the Valley .... based on what they did to Iraq and Afghanistan ... and in Africa in the Global War on Terrorism. NeoCons are terrifying! Wait...SO IS President Obama!!

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

they don't like competition and they don't like democracy.

People have to vote for their party or they are responsible for all the problems in the world. It's a theory the republicans push and a theory democrats push to keep their stranglehold on elections.

Paul Ryan says "If you vote for Gary Johnson you might as well vote for Obama"

Democrats say "If you vote for Jill Stein you might as well vote for Romney"

Notice the downvotes for us discussing third party candidates like Nader and Jill Stein. The downvotes and hate are from party hacks trying to hate and blame you into voting for their candidate.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

The right is absolutely blasting anyone who is going to write in RP or vote for GJ. Same shit, different side of the isle.

They are pulling all the strings in the realm of mass mind control perfectly.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

It would probably be better for me if Obama wins. Maybe Johnson will be the new Nadar but only if it's close. I say enjoy your new hobby my Libertarian friends- being a scapegoat.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

lol... scapegoats!

it would be better for me if Jill Stein wins!

3 leading positions of Jill Stein, End the Wars Now, Living Wage, Money out of Politics.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

What are Libertarians planning to do if it plays out that way? I think Bill Maher is OK but do we need 20 million more Bill Maher's? If they think Obama will free the weed it ain't going to happen. What else do they want? Maybe they'll demand more strip clubs.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Well considering Maher despises the republican party and says their candidates have sold their souls to the corporations and banks behind them.... I don't really think it would be too bad. I'd rather have a conservative opposition like libertarians who oppose war than the republicans who constantly work for it as well as for inequality and oppression. I also agree with Maher on his stance toward republicans as well.

I'm not a big BIll Maher fan. I usually like the guests he's had on his show. Like Tom Morello.

Also I'm pretty sure Maher is voting Obama and not Gary Johnson, So he's not really even a libertarian. He donated a million dollars to the Obama super pac.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 7 years ago

I don't watch Bill anymore. I wised up and stopped paying for TV. Libertarians can have Bill if they want. Not my problem.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

I also think it would be better for the majority if Jill won - as long as other good "people supporting" politicians were elected to office to support us and her.