Comedy Goldmine VII: Straight-to-DVD Christmas Special

[Sensei]

What's the difference between a hockey mom and a deluge?

the deluge has teeth

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I tried Wal-Mart. I tried K-Mart. I tried the Dollar Store. I tried Circle K.

No ****ing Yoo-Hoo. This is the type of thing that will occur in an Obama-Biden Administration. They will say, "Drink Passion fruit, not Yoo-Hoo".

Think about it America. Think.

[Keystone Phil]

I tried Wal-Mart. I tried K-Mart. I tried the Dollar Store. I tried Circle K.

No ****ing Yoo-Hoo. This is the type of thing that will occur in an Obama-Biden Administration. They will say, "Drink Passion fruit, not Yoo-Hoo".

Think about it America. Think.

His other comments in the thread - https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=85200.0 - were great as well.

[Meeker]

By this point in time, Barack Obama had given his convention speech and was widely seen as a future star of the Democratic Party. 2008 looked too soon for him, but he was definitely known as an individual, and not just a state senator.

He wasn't that well known. Either way, he was still just a State Senator/first term U.S. Senator. No one saw this coming this soon.

He still isn't.

[Хahar 🤔]

"Are you intellectually curious?"

not enough to sit through that test

[Joe Republic]

Haha, I love this term; "Krutt-kynslotin". I think it deserves to be used more widely.

I agree, but only if we can select our own definition and application of it.  For example:

"Carl, did you scratch my Krutt-kynslotin?  Damn it Carl, that cost me a hundred bucks.  I oughta punch you in the mouth."

Back home it usually cost me around $100 to get my krutt-kynslotin scratched. 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

President Romney being sworn into office as President of the United States in January, 2013.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

"After you the deluge."  Basically, the party that wins this one will be destroyed in 2010 and 2012.

[Eraserhead]

"After you the deluge."  Basically, the party that wins this one will be destroyed in 2010 and 2012.

He's spinning McCain's loss already? Dear lord...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

"After you the deluge."  Basically, the party that wins this one will be destroyed in 2010 and 2012.

He's spinning McCain's loss already? Dear lord...

Months. He's been doing it for months.

[Lunar]

Oh it is, that's why it has its own acronym

Still, for people who want to buy influence, it might not be surprising that they are giving more and more money to the Democrats.

Looking forward to the 20th when we get all of the details.

The question is, how much money did people give (and why isn't Obama telling us)?

The GOP announces $66 M and the Obama campaign/DNC even announces $70 M it doesn't change the dynamics too much, so why not say so?  It will only be it they can raise more than $100 M that they have a shot at rough parity. Even then Bush out raised Clinton in the last months, and still lost.

[J. J.]

"After you the deluge."  Basically, the party that wins this one will be destroyed in 2010 and 2012.

He's spinning McCain's loss already? Dear lord...

Actually, I said it well before McCain was the nominee.  And if McCain wins, I'll still say it.

[CARLHAYDEN]

JJ,

I think the term "destroyed" is a little bit strong.

However, as I have previously posted, I suspect the "winner" of this year's election will find it a very hollow triumph, filled with so many problems that the "winning" party will sustain substantial defeats in the next few years.

[J. J.]

Oh it is, that's why it has its own acronym

Still, for people who want to buy influence, it might not be surprising that they are giving more and more money to the Democrats.

Looking forward to the 20th when we get all of the details.

The question is, how much money did people give (and why isn't Obama telling us)?

The GOP announces $66 M and the Obama campaign/DNC even announces $70 M it doesn't change the dynamics too much, so why not say so?  It will only be it they can raise more than $100 M that they have a shot at rough parity.  Even then Bush out raised Clinton in the last months, and still lost.

Only 100 million will give him a SHOT at parity? 

omg dude

Lunar apparently forgot about about the matching funds, the RNC fund raising and the RNC's cash on hand.

[J. J.]

JJ,

I think the term "destroyed" is a little bit strong.

However, as I have previously posted, I suspect the "winner" of this year's election will find it a very hollow triumph, filled with so many problems that the "winning" party will sustain substantial defeats in the next few years.

In all honesty, I think there could be a 1932-36 situation. 

[Sam Spade]

Look, JJ is too forthright (IMO) with his assertion of "what will occur", but it is certainly a distinct possibility regardless of who wins.  Definitely one that I wouldn't ignore.

Basically, the person who enters the White House this year will have one-third of the country who completely detests him, as pollster Peter Hart quite aptly pointed out in yesterday's WSJ. 

As such, it's the middle third of the country who really controls what is going on - at the Congressional level, they appear to be dead set to have strong control by one political party, the Democrats.  They are less sure at the executive level, however.

What's kind of weird, and you see it in the polling, is that the country still clearly leans center-right.  Now, there's much greater hatred of corporations than there was 10 years ago and a few other things have shifted one way or another, but that's basically the target.

However, there's enough flexibility and uncertainty right now in the country to where a successful Democratic President and Congress, that accedes to the will of the independent third, could pull them towards the center-left, like a counter-Reagan.  The trick is figuring out where that dynamic is, and it's not particularly easy (I still can't grasp it yet).

But if they aren't successful to the middle third, you could see a swing further right than now.  It would be a different type of right, but it would be further so.  That's why I say that there's the "short leash" for Congress and a "slightly longer leash" for Obama.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah, I've been to VA enough times to get the dynamic there.  NoVA + Richmond + Charlottesville + Hampton Roads = <50%.

Using Census 2000 population figures, and the Washington and Virginia Beach - Norfolk etc Metro Areas for NoVA and Hampton Roads (but just the cities for RIchmond and Charlottesville because you only named those) = 51.1% of the state, actually.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Look, JJ is too forthright (IMO) with his assertion of "what will occur", but it is certainly a distinct possibility regardless of who wins.  Definitely one that I wouldn't ignore.here's the "short leash" for Congress and a "slightly longer leash" for Obama.

True. Trouble is, he repeats it often enough for it to look like a crutch.

[Sam Spade]

Look, JJ is too forthright (IMO) with his assertion of "what will occur", but it is certainly a distinct possibility regardless of who wins.  Definitely one that I wouldn't ignore.here's the "short leash" for Congress and a "slightly longer leash" for Obama.

True. Trouble is, he repeats it often enough for it to look like a crutch.

I agree.  Now back to comedy...

[Keystone Phil]

I don't know what this is supposed to mean but...

It's really just a dumb average that gets lucky.  Rove isn't doing anything special.

Why you gotta get up in hiz grill? This ain't no BBQ!

[Keystone Phil]

This one was puzzling...

something to think about I don't think America has ever had an Italian catholic president

Especially odd since we obviously haven't had an Italian - American President at all.

[King]

Italian people can't become President.  They'll do well in the polls out of fear (the Godfather Effect), but in the end they will vote against them.

[Хahar 🤔]

Italian people can't become President.  They'll do well in the polls out of fear (the Godfather Effect), but in the end they will vote against them.

LOL.

[Keystone Phil]

Italian people can't become President.  They'll do well in the polls out of fear (the Godfather Effect), but in the end they will vote against them.

LOL.

Yeah, that was a good one.

[Хahar 🤔]

Time for some cough syrup:

Ron Paul would not have picked Perot, its quite possible actually that he would have picked Sarah Palin.  I'll do this scenario.  People see the economy in shambles and that every thing Paul has predicted has come true.  Many ignore his radical stances on foreign policy and social issues in feeling he can rectify the economy.  He makes little inroads in the Bible Belt, his prescene is felt mostly in the Rust Belt and the Northeast.  McCain chooses Romney as his running mate in this scenario.

Sen. John McCain (AZ)/Fmr. Gov. Willard Mitt Romney (MA)   269 EV   42%
Sen. Barack Obama (IL)/Sen. Joe Biden (DE)                         259 EV    40%               
Rep. Ron Paul (TX)/Gov. Sarah Palin (AK)                             10 EV     17%