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?
- Rick Perry: It’s entirely possible that ISIS has already crossed the southern border Allahpundit 20 mins ago
- “Today is a miraculous day”: Dr. Kent Brantly speaks after recovering from Ebola Allahpundit 59 mins ago
- YouGov poll: Most Americans, and most Democrats, do not wish Hillary had won in 2008 Allahpundit 1 hour ago
- Report: Obama’s Bergdahl swap violated the law Noah Rothman 2 hours ago
- Journalist quits Ferguson after denouncing the media’s behavior Noah Rothman 3 hours ago
- Ben Rhodes: We won’t necessarily limit our airstrikes against ISIS to Iraq Allahpundit 3 hours ago