And I would be sad, but unsurprised. I see far to much “oh, it’s in the bag already, no WAY can Romney win!” here and from others IRL.
Folks, people said the same thing in 2004. And look how that went. We can’t fight against the corrupt methods of the GOP, so we have to get out and VOTE in big numbers to try to prove the point.
This is going to end up being a closer than I like election, and it won’t be because of Romney being popular, it will be because the Republican party will hold their nose and vote for their guy, no matter what. Democrats don’t do that, and it has hurt them in the past.
In general, I think the individual concession thing is bullshit. I see it as a matter of ceremony with no real meaning. Tell me who got more votes than the other person. That person won. If someone concedes despite having more votes, so what? It’s my vote, and everyone else’s, that matter.
If someone wants to resign from office, that’s something else.
I think the point is that the candidates have much better data than any of us can possibly hope to have, and they have a huge personal stake in the process, so they are in a better position to make the call than we are.
So I guess no one really believes Nate Silver after all? Because if you do, you should be anticipating a 1 in 5 chance of the election going to Romney.
I will be disappointed and a bit surprised if Romney pulls it off, but not truly shocked. If they call Ohio for Romney, I’m going to start preparing myself for bad news. Once all the networks have called enough swing states for Romney to clinch it, I’ll accept it.
Well I have absolute faith in Nate Silver. I will accept that Romney has won when Nate tells me it’s so. As long as he can explain how the votes came together the way they did, I’ll believe it.
I accepted it in 2004. America proved once and for all how incredibly retarded half the country is. I’m only surprised by D victories now. I don’t know where you guys get your faith in the general population. I accepted it enough that I pretty much just believe all the polls are wrong this year, and the stupid will be rearing its ugly head any day now.
According to an ongoing CNN blog, they don’t - they have the lowest voting rate in the country. Partly due to already mentioned factor above, partly because the Democrats have such a stranglehold on local politics that few think it’s worthwhile to bother, a few because they’re Hawaiian sovereign-ists, etc.
For anything that matters, I’ll accept an X win when Y concedes, but for my own judgment I’ll accept an X win if:
a) X wins by at least one state where there is no serious allegation of fraud
b) for states where there may be fraud, it’s resolved by investigation
c) Y concedes
Everyone can find something to complain about. Perot ran interference for Clinton in 1992 and 1996; Florida (just its existence) in 2000; Ohio voting machine irregularities in 2004; they let a foreign national win the race in 2008. I recognize that my being upset at the Ohio irregularities is only a notch or two above the level of the Birthers. Not to draw a false equivalence but unless they uncovered a smoking gun it’s not worth more than being a footnote in history, or as an argument against electronic voting machines.
What sense does that make? I would advise him to avoid fucking a sheep at Dupont Circle, and a host of others things that could change the outcome of the election.
You may be being too literal in your sad effort to poke the liberals in this instance.
