As of Monday, the Real Clear Politics average of presidential polls had President Obama five points ahead. Based on what he was hearing, Nate Silver, the New York Times' poll specialist, had granted Obama 316.9 electoral votes and Mitt Romney 221.1. Intrade, "the world's leading prediction market," had Obama's chances figured at 59.7 percent, versus a sobering, if not a gimme-a-double-scotch-depressing...
Both parties represent the shared we're-all-in-this-together. Any contrary representation is a falsehood. One party prioritizes all collective needs (above the collective ability to pay), and the other prioritizes the collective ability to pay (as a cap upon the ability to grant to the collective needs). I find the repeated characterization that Republicans advocate "you're on your own" as offensive. Recognizing a limit of how much working Americans can grant to sick non-working Americans is an attribute of fiscal responsibility, not a expression that they want sick people to die. Since when did limiting grants to a level of affordability transform into the fiction of wanting to eliminate social programs altogether?
Well, that sure was a short campaign. Two conventions, a few speeches and that's it? Obama-Biden beats Romney-Ryan like a drum and we get back to whatever it was we were doing before the election so rudely interrupted us?
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 10 hours ago
- On notice: Mitch McConnell is ready to “crush” the Tea Party Jazz Shaw 11 hours ago
- Noonan on latest ObamaCare delay: Is there even an ObamaCare law anymore? Erika Johnsen 13 hours ago
- Video: Gates sees defense cuts as showing a lack of seriousness by US Jazz Shaw 14 hours ago
- CPAC: Fred Thompson and Persecuted Ed Morrissey 16 hours ago
- WH: Hey, Obama golfing in Key Largo during this crisis is the same as if he were in DC, only warmer Jazz Shaw 17 hours ago