First Prev
of 3
Next Last
The Tuth

Minneapolis, MN

#43 Jan 2, 2013
Consistent wrote:
<quoted text>
Try 52%.
First off, whether it was 51% or 52% is meaningless. The truth is that less than 25% of the citizens voted for Obama. That is NOT a mandate as you are so fond of saying.

Next, according to CBS News, here are the results. 2012 US Presidential Election.

Barack Obama - 51%- 62,615,406 votes
Mitt Romney - 48%- 59,142,004 votes

Lastly, using your criteria, you are a F---ing liar, Bob of Many Names.

“Liberty and Justice for ALL!”

Since: Jun 10

Bloomington, MN

#44 Jan 4, 2013
Some states didn't finish counting until last month. The latest figures I can find are:

Obama 51.06% 65,899,557

Romney 47.21% 60,931,959

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv...

I would call that a mandate, considering that the Democrats picked up seats in the House and Senate, made major gains on the state level (Minnesota being a good example) and won most of their ballot initiatives.

May I remind you that Karl Rove called the electoral college reults a landslide. Heck, our very own Consistent predicted time and time again that Obama would be "crushed" 54% to 46%. Surely a 51% to 47% victory counts as a "solid" victory is 54-46 was a "crushing" victory.

“Liberty and Justice for ALL!”

Since: Jun 10

Bloomington, MN

#45 Jan 4, 2013
The Tuth wrote:
<quoted text>
First off, whether it was 51% or 52% is meaningless. The truth is that less than 25% of the citizens voted for Obama. That is NOT a mandate as you are so fond of saying.
Next, according to CBS News, here are the results. 2012 US Presidential Election.
Barack Obama - 51%- 62,615,406 votes
Mitt Romney - 48%- 59,142,004 votes
Lastly, using your criteria, you are a F---ing liar, Bob of Many Names.
Say which tooth are you? Or did you spell your posting name wrong again? I know, it's tough to keep track of all those posting anmes and the correct spelling of each.
jerry

Minneapolis, MN

#46 Jan 4, 2013
Le Jumbo wrote:
<quoted text>
Say which tooth are you? Or did you spell your posting name wrong again? I know, it's tough to keep track of all those posting anmes and the correct spelling of each.
Why don't you give him a few lessons, troll. Your specialties: lies, hate and hiding behind names you steal. Oh, and don't forget to show him the "correct spelling" of these "anmes". Dumbass.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#47 Jan 4, 2013
Le Jumbo wrote:
Some states didn't finish counting until last month. The latest figures I can find are:
Obama 51.06% 65,899,557
Romney 47.21% 60,931,959
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv...
I would call that a mandate, considering that the Democrats picked up seats in the House and Senate, made major gains on the state level (Minnesota being a good example) and won most of their ballot initiatives.
May I remind you that Karl Rove called the electoral college reults a landslide. Heck, our very own Consistent predicted time and time again that Obama would be "crushed" 54% to 46%. Surely a 51% to 47% victory counts as a "solid" victory is 54-46 was a "crushing" victory.
Mandate? Here are a couple of Mandates - Reagan 489 electoral votes, Carter -49 Reagan 525 electoral votes, Mondale- 13 10 of which were from Minnesota, his home state. Lyndon Johnson vs Barry Goldwater was another Mandate! Your guy, No so much!
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#48 Jan 4, 2013
Le Jumbo wrote:
Some states didn't finish counting until last month. The latest figures I can find are:
Obama 51.06% 65,899,557
Romney 47.21% 60,931,959
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv...
I would call that a mandate, considering that the Democrats picked up seats in the House and Senate, made major gains on the state level (Minnesota being a good example) and won most of their ballot initiatives.
May I remind you that Karl Rove called the electoral college reults a landslide. Heck, our very own Consistent predicted time and time again that Obama would be "crushed" 54% to 46%. Surely a 51% to 47% victory counts as a "solid" victory is 54-46 was a "crushing" victory.
So just a quick question, would 51.06% be called 51% or 52% in the interest of accuracy? The numbers aren't hugely different either way, but Slew has a real need to be right even after proven conclusively wrong.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#49 Jan 4, 2013
Niether of the Above wrote:
<quoted text>Mandate? Here are a couple of Mandates - Reagan 489 electoral votes, Carter -49 Reagan 525 electoral votes, Mondale- 13 10 of which were from Minnesota, his home state. Lyndon Johnson vs Barry Goldwater was another Mandate! Your guy, No so much!
Agreed, and if he is using Karl Rove to base his "mandate" on, the argument falls apart right there.

“Liberty and Justice for ALL!”

Since: Jun 10

Bloomington, MN

#50 Jan 4, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>So just a quick question, would 51.06% be called 51% or 52% in the interest of accuracy? The numbers aren't hugely different either way, but Slew has a real need to be right even after proven conclusively wrong.
You seem hung up on the 1% there, buddy.

Both of us know that anything under a half is generally rounded down, and a half or over is generally rounded up.
Bridgework

Lincoln, NE

#51 Jan 4, 2013
Le Jumbo wrote:
Some states didn't finish counting until last month. The latest figures I can find are:
Obama 51.06% 65,899,557
Romney 47.21% 60,931,959
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv...
I would call that a mandate, considering that the Democrats picked up seats in the House and Senate, made major gains on the state level (Minnesota being a good example) and won most of their ballot initiatives.
May I remind you that Karl Rove called the electoral college reults a landslide. Heck, our very own Consistent predicted time and time again that Obama would be "crushed" 54% to 46%. Surely a 51% to 47% victory counts as a "solid" victory is 54-46 was a "crushing" victory.
You consider 5 million Americans (1.6% of the pop) to be a Mandate? More importantly you feel that the Republicans who won should ignore the will of those who elected them?
VaporVoter Turnout

Minneapolis, MN

#52 Jan 4, 2013
127,000,000 voted of 300 million citizens.

Let's just say 200 million can vote, taking out kids and felons.

Sooo 73 million potential voters didn't vote. Orrrr well over 30% didn't vote.

Soooo Obumer got a mear 30%(MAX) of the total potential votes cast.

Not close to a mandate!
jerry

Minneapolis, MN

#53 Jan 4, 2013
Obama's total was about 3,600,000 LESS for his 2012 re-election.
Logic

Saint Paul, MN

#54 Jan 4, 2013
Not to worry, Obama is dismantling the middle class and making us all poor plus a soon to be 20 trillion in debt for the youth inherit.

Yes we can!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#55 Jan 4, 2013
Logic, hardly... Since, you continue to pretend the bushwhacker didn't HAPPEN and the chair was the preferred "speaker" ! LMAOROFU~!
Slew Bashing

Grantsburg, WI

#56 Jan 4, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Logic, hardly... Since, you continue to pretend the bushwhacker didn't HAPPEN and the chair was the preferred "speaker" ! LMAOROFU~!
(Topix Posters, we are so sorry for this. But we have tried everything. We really hope that this effort will be our last, and that you adults may be able to Shock Slewsie into an Altered State where she can simply drool on herself and be content to ride out her days with a "Nice Bowl Of Jello". We know that you have seen her other Multiple Personalities here, and thus you are aware that keeping her in her Slewsie Personification is the best we can hope for.
Thank you Topix Posters for allowing us to use Topix for Slewsies treatment)

Dr B. Happy
Lead Psychiatrist
Seattle West Asylum
Mike

Saint Paul, MN

#57 Jan 4, 2013
Got Poverty?

Welcome to Obamanomics
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#58 Jan 4, 2013
Funny, bushwhacker didn't happen, right ? The "table" told me so....??
Consistent

Grantsburg, WI

#59 Jan 4, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Funny, bushwhacker didn't happen, right ? The "table" told me so....??
Hampshire,

The Thread is; "Pope Slams Capitalism, Inequality Between Rich And Poor"

Did you have a Comment or a Thought of someone else's that you wished to Cut/Paste so that "we" will feel that you are not an ignorant, abusive pig who only posts because or your evil nature, hideous appearance, and Mental Illness?
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#61 Jan 4, 2013
Funny, bushwhacker didn't happen, right ? The "table" told me so....??

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why? 29 min Nobody 2 Special 1
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 38 min Earthling-1 32,769
Marriage Man and a Woman 49 min move over 8
the NON affordable care act (Oct '13) 2 hr cantmakeitup 263
NFL: Kansas City's Muslim Abdullah should not h... 2 hr cowboy chris 3
Pohlads' $250 million tax showdown with IRS beg... 3 hr boardwalk 3
Drop one word....add one word game 3 hr Bree_Z 131
Minneapolis Dating

more search filters

less search filters

Minneapolis Jobs

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]