grodscorp@grods.comGoodness! There’s skullduggery afoot!
 | Posted by John Surname on Friday 14 November 2008, 7:35 pm Categories: Blogosphere, Freaks, Larfs, Mundane Blogs, Politics, Reminiscing, The Internet Tags: BarackObama, JoeBiden, JohnMcCain, SarahPalin, skullduggery, US election |
The US election came and went, and now it’s time to laugh ourselves stupid at those who predicted an overwhelming win for McCain.
So sa (sic) we start this election We (sic) see that Obama starts off with approximately 36.8 million votes and McCain starts with 36.6 million votes. This is a 200,000 vote lead prior to independents being included. If these voters are evenly split We (sic) could have a situation where one candidate wins the popular vote and another wins the electoral college. A split in independents favors McCain. If McCain maintains his slight lead among independent (sic) he wins similar to 2004.
Obama’s biggest problem is that the majority of Americans racially are white. Even Hispanics, racially, are white. Once you get by all the usual politically correct blather about race, the likelihood that whites will vote for Obama is slim to none when they get in the privacy of the voting booth.That is why John McCain, unless he selects a serial killer as his vice president running mate, is likely to be the next President of the United States of America.
So based on the numbers that I curently are seeing and what I know about neuroscience, I will make the frightening conclusion, that it most likely will be McCain, that will win. How the Hell can that be, you’re asking?
Well, firstly it is known that the place where the election is held influences how people are voting. If you regular go to church in the USA, which is mainly anti-abortion, it means that you indirectly supports the republicans. The same is true for the so-called swing voters. When they see a cross on the wall, makes them more likely to vote republican. And as the most common voting place in the USA is a church, that is the first reason.
SO if the one in six rule holds true, then of those 5.1 Mil who say they support the Messiah, 850,000 of them will actually vote for McCain, bringing McCain’s total to a whopping 4.25 Million, EXACTLY THE SAME AMOUNT AS OBAMAS new total!!!
The “MSM” or Main stream media is neither main stream or media.
The MSM is a high technology version of a Karl Marx mind programming
bullhorn that is infested with homosexuals and globalists that hate
capitalism and America.
If you listen to or believe the “Media” in America you are an idiot
When queeried (sic) on what he meant by this, the intrepid poster expanded upon this thesis:
The vast majority of homosexuals are atheist and liberal. That is a
fact. Also journalism is a favorite career path of homosexuals and
socialists.
Journalists are like lawyers. They create their own job via paper and
bullshit. Both are human barnacles on society that produce nothing of value.
Edward David Gil (cached, original deleted):
Here is how “the penny dropped” and I suddenly realized that McCain will beat Obama decisively in this November’s presidential election (as unlikely as it may seem now in July): it was when I read that the city of Denver has been giving the Democratic National Committee’s “Host Committee” members a pass on the city’s tax on gasoline for about four months, before it was disclosed.
Reasons why:
1. Conservatives don’t participate in polls.
2. People have felt intimidated into saying they’re supporting Obama.
3. Sarah Palin will produce a turnout of the base as never seen before.
4. Coal states have shifted toward McCain.
5. God is conservative.
Owned. Every last one.
Friday 14 November 2008, 7:48 pm #Stakes
“God is conservative”
They’re not even subtle about it!
I always thought God wasn’t a human, i.e. ABOVE PETTY POLITICS. But nope… God is some Real American sitting up in Heaven, watching Baseball, planting pipebombs at abortion clinics and hoping like hell Christians make more babies so we can overcome the Hordes of Islam!
Friday 14 November 2008, 7:50 pm #Bruce
Now let’s be fair. Some of their points are correct.
Such as…
Sarah Palin will produce a turnout of the base as never seen before.
It was like the crack-rock smoking, Cirque du Soleil of the conspiracy minded, fundamentalist right!
Friday 14 November 2008, 7:54 pm #Reuben
Journalists are like lawyers. They create their own job via paper and
bullshit. Both are human barnacles on society that produce nothing of value.
For a second there, I thought he was being insulting; now….are Timmeh and Andy socialist homosexuals? Maybe they’re struggling with their own identities…hence their verbal diarrhoea.
Friday 14 November 2008, 8:11 pm #Private 'Baldrick' Tom
The correct word, sir, is ‘pwned.’
Friday 14 November 2008, 8:22 pm #Kevin Rennie
Sometimes the bleeding obvious, such as the election result, puts people in denial. Take global warming…
Bolt et al don’t get either.
Friday 14 November 2008, 11:01 pm #Domino
Ha, shut down. Bit harsh that dildo that had a go at journos.
Friday 14 November 2008, 11:30 pm #Wah
May they dine on exrement and pass away.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 8:53 am #Mikey
“So based on the numbers that I curently are seeing and what I know about neuroscience, I will make the frightening conclusion, that it most likely will be McCain, that will win. How the Hell can that be, you’re asking?”
I wonder how someone with such a stunning level of neuro-scientific knowledge isn’t able to write coherently?
Saturday 15 November 2008, 12:25 pm #John Surname
That “God is conservative” thing is interesting. Wasn’t Jesus all about loving your fellow man, and forgiveness?
Saturday 15 November 2008, 1:40 pm #LuLi
Wasn’t Jesus a zombie?
Saturday 15 November 2008, 2:41 pm #Reuben
Not sure, Luli…but I don’t like his beard.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 6:17 pm #Bron
And he wears thongs.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 6:18 pm #daddy dave
Okay, they were wrong.
That doesn’t mean they were “owned” or “pwned” for that matter. Unless everyone predicts the exact same correct outcome every time, someone’s going to be wrong pretty much every time there’s an election.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 8:22 pm #LuLi
Its not the fact that they were wrong that makes them pwned. Its the very nature of the pwning that elevates them to actual ‘pwned’ status. They were wrong after being loud, righteous, misinformed, arrogant, prejudiced and right winged. Everyone knows that any fuck up on the right is automatically pwned, its why the term was invented. Not only were they pwned, but they are epic failures for the shitness of their opinions.
Although, I can hardly be a proper authority, I’m only doing a homosexual journalism degree.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 8:56 pm #Ant Rogenous
I believe the correct term is “homosexualist”, LuLi.
Saturday 15 November 2008, 9:07 pm #daddy dave
If that’s really the case then being “pwned” is akin to being whipped with damp lettuce.
Sunday 16 November 2008, 10:35 am #Jason
daddy dave you stole that from leftist Paul Keating. And I believe it’s “flogged with a warm lettuce”.
Sunday 16 November 2008, 10:43 am #Mikey
Off topic - but did anyone see that Howard article in the online SMH?
I linked to it from here.
Grrr. Why can’t he fuck off and die?
Sunday 16 November 2008, 11:08 am #daddy dave
because although he’s no longer PM he’s still a living human being, member of society, a highly accomplished individual and someone with rich inside knowledge of Australian politics.
In other words for the same reason that other ex-politicians won’t fuck off and die: because it’s their right not to.
by the way I read your blog post and you completely misunderstood the “road test” comment.
Not “stole,” borrowed.
Sunday 16 November 2008, 1:53 pm #Mikey
“a highly accomplished individual”
Yep. Only the second prime minister to lose his seat (deservedly so) at an election.
Sunday 16 November 2008, 7:07 pm #confessions
not just blogs who got pwned by the media in general, written about 2 weeks ahead of the election:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/23/campaign_myths/
Sunday 16 November 2008, 10:49 pm #gam
“Okay, they were wrong.
That doesn’t mean they were “owned” or “pwned” for that matter. Unless everyone predicts the exact same correct outcome every time, someone’s going to be wrong pretty much every time there’s an election.”
yes they were wrong. however when you say that candidate x will win an election because of secret information that has leaked through your tin foil hat, it is likely that reality will indeed pwn you hard.
Monday 17 November 2008, 6:21 am #richard ryan
Howard only the second PM to lose his seat, but-but the first and only Australian Prime Minister to lose his seat to a former ABC journalist. ALL the rightards will be watching The Howard Years: Change The Government, Change The Country. On the ABC TONIGHT. THESE RIGHTARDS HYPOCRITES, WILL SHED TEARS OF SORROW TONIGHT! GOOD RIDDENCE I SAY.
Monday 17 November 2008, 9:24 am #daddy dave
…that’s very specific, there, Richard. That’s a bit like saying “the only Australian prime minister to lose an election against a man named Kevin Rudd sometime between 2006 and 2008.”
Or it’s a bit like me claiming to be “the only person who has beaten my friend Eddie at chess three games in a row on Halloween while eating corn chips.”
Now, about Howard losing his own seat (his own seat, ladies and gents). Leftoids like you, Richard, say it to try to illustrate the magnitude of the electoral devastation. However, the reason Howard lost his seat is because over the years, the electoral boundaries shifted and demographics changed, and his seat evolved from being a safe seat to a marginal one. He might have lost it even if the Liberals won, it was so marginal.
That doesn’t fit with the breathless panting that “he lost his own seat!” and it undercuts your point somewhat. The election was a solid victory but doesn’t qualify as a landslide, even if Howard did lose his own seat.
Monday 17 November 2008, 9:30 am #Bron
It was a landslide, daddy dave. I’ve had Liberal aides and other folk who work within Parliament in Canberra admit as much to me.
Monday 17 November 2008, 9:54 am #Mondo Rock
However, the reason Howard lost his seat is because over the years, the electoral boundaries shifted and demographics changed, and his seat evolved from being a safe seat to a marginal one. He might have lost it even if the Liberals won, it was so marginal.
Spin, evade, spin, lie, evade. It’s the Howard years all over again.
Those 11 years in power must have left Howard feeling helpless as the electoral boundaries of his own electorate were re-drawn. If only he had the authority to do something to stop his slide into unpopularity.
Monday 17 November 2008, 10:26 am #daddy dave
Alan Ramsay wrote an article before the previous election (which Howard won) pointing out if you take all the booths in his electorate at the State level, they were already voting solid labor. It’s not a lie, it’s a fact that his own electorate was a naturally Labor constituency for some time. Howard’s continued survival in his own seat was an anomaly for several years before he lost.
Monday 17 November 2008, 10:47 am #Mondo Rock
Of course its not a lie DD - Howard’s advisors simply failed to tell him that he was massively unpopular in his own seat. We all know that Howard isn’t responsible for anything that goes wrong.
It’s not his fault that he’s the first PM to lose his seat since the 1920s - he was acting on the best advice available to him at the time.
Also, media bias was undoubtedly partly to blame.
Monday 17 November 2008, 1:04 pm #richard ryan
Howard the ” lying rodent” Sen. Brandis words not mine, met his match when the Australian Chinese punished him for his racist comments back in 1996, came back to haunt him in the last election. Rightards make Howard out to be a great leader, this is wrong, Howard was a follower of his mate George Bush, who now is to blame for the woes of the present day.
Monday 17 November 2008, 1:33 pm #daddy dave
Richard,
Your world is a very simple place, isn’t it?
Monday 17 November 2008, 1:51 pm #Suburban Marxist
“….Howard lost his seat is because over the years, the electoral boundaries shifted and demographics changed…”
DD, according to Howard’s ideology class is a negligible issue in Australia today and so therefore shouldn’t influence voting preferences to any great degree. In fact the Liberals claimed to represent virtually every sector of society as the divisions were mainly ones of personality (go-getters vs the rest) so i fail to see how a change in demographics could have lost him his seat. He should have been able to appeal to everyone. Unless you’re claiming the demographic shift left him presiding over a seat composed primarily of lazy voters living off Centrelink benefits..?
Monday 17 November 2008, 2:19 pm #daddy dave
Nobody, least of all Howard, believes that voting patterns have nothing to do with demographics.
You’re putting up straw men, “suburban marxist.”
Monday 17 November 2008, 4:39 pm #Mondo Rock
Actually DD - he’s using Howard’s own strawman against him.