The US Presidential Elections.

[THEFATBASTARD]

Yes I've seen a picture of the magic underpants! It's like an all in one vest/Y-Front type thing with funny symbols on it.

Well at least I have one thing in common with this clown, I wear magic underpants, they stop my knob dragging the floor...

[Jordan]

[The Doctor]

Don't know if this has been posted before.. but if romney wins he will be the first president who wears "special" underpants. and so will the first lady. morons, sorry I mean mormons wear them as part of their faith..

You got it right first time round.

Anyone who would consider voting for someone who believes in magic underpants, is incapable of seeing the most blatant charlatan in history for what he was, who believes black skin is a curse from god, and who sees polygamy as right but homosexuality as bad needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

Before we even get onto policies, Romney's religion shows him to be an absolute mongol who should not hold any position of power.

[Carl the Llama]

Late to the party and apparently radically left (or right since we're talking about the states):

[Jordan]

You got it right first time round.

Anyone who would consider voting for someone who believes in magic underpants, is incapable of seeing the most blatant charlatan in history for what he was, who believes black skin is a curse from god, and who sees polygamy as right but homosexuality as bad needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

Before we even get onto policies, Romney's religion shows him to be an absolute mongol who should not hold any position of power.

I'm no fan of the Church of LDS, and I'm not trying to make this thread a discussion on religion, but what you wrote about blacks and polygamy represents either outdated or extremist Mormon views.

Only fringe group Mormons practice polygamy (and do so illegally), and today's racist Mormons aren't racist because the Church of LDS believes black people are inferior; they're mostly just racists that are Mormons. It is sad that it took so long for the Church to disavow a lot of its institutional racism, but it is worth nothing that today, there are about a half a million black Mormons throughout the world.

[Alf Bentley]

I will post my final predictions either later tonight or tomorrow morning.

Thanks for your detailed replies to my questions, Jordan - fascinating! It remains one of my dreams to have a proper wander around over there to try to get my head round the place...taking several months. Better start earning a bit more or spending a bit less, then!

I'll be interested to hear your predictions. I gather that some experts think that the polls in the battleground states may overstate Obama's level of support, meaning that Romney may be more likely to win than those polls suggest. As a left-of-centre voter, I find that scarily reminiscent of the British general election of 1992. Going into the last week, the polls showed Labour ahead by 3% or so, and even the exit polls on the day had them 1% ahead (theoretically enough to be largest party, though without a majority)....but the Tories ended up a few percentage points ahead, enough for a small majority.

In the 1992 UK election, as I recall, a small but disproportionate number of Tory voters either refused to speak to exit pollsters or fibbed about how they'd voted, because they'd swung to the Tories out of fears that they'd suffer a big hike in their personal taxes and didn't want to admit that. As I understand it, though, the US scenario is different and relates more to pollsters making insufficient allowance for Democrat voters being less enthused than in 2008 and staying at home in greater numbers. Does that sound right?

So, if Romney may be more likely to win than the UK media seem to think, could the Republicans also win the Senate? As I understand it, they're pretty certain to win the House of Representatives. Presumably a clean sweep of all 3 elections would leave them well-placed to introduce some more right-wing policies than would be the case if there was the usual stalemate between institutions in the hands of 2 different parties (though I appreciate that moderate Republicans in Congress might limit that)? There could be some pretty serious global consequences from that, couldn't there? I'm imagining scenarios where swingeing cuts tip the US back into a more serious recession, damaging international trade...or where the US takes a more aggressive attitude to trade negotiations with China, or even starts bombing Iran... Romney doesn't come across as gung-ho as Dubya, but obviously many other Republican politicians and voters are, so if he's inclined to blow with the wind...

Could be a very important night for the rest of the world, not just the US. Fingers crossed that I don't have any urgent work to do early Wednesday and I'll be able to sit up half the night watching all the votes come in. Here's hoping that it doesn't come down to those "hanging chads" again (remember them?!) or disputes about people prevented from voting...and that Obama sneaks to victory. If so, will it be the "presidential" response to the storm that wins it for him (e.g. the nice photo opportunity hugging a distressed middle-aged white woman)? Of course, we often forget (from a white perspective) that Obama is actually mixed-race, not black, as his mother was white, wasn't she? Funny the way we see things racially...I once knew a pair of mixed race brothers; to "gringo" eyes, one of them looked 100% black and the other 100% white.

[Fez of Mahrez]

[BoneDog]

Is nobody shocked that Jill Stein got tied to a chair for 8 hours?!

[Captain...]

Is nobody shocked that Jill Stein got tied to a chair for 8 hours?!

I'd "tie her" to a chair for 8 hours.

[THEFATBASTARD]

I thought we had some thick cants over here, but when you see some of these yanks being interviewed, my god... hope this isn't us in twenty years..

[Webbo]

Is nobody shocked that Jill Stein got tied to a chair for 8 hours?!

I have no idea who she is, nor the others apart from the 2 main candidates.

[BoneDog]

I have no idea who she is, nor the others apart from the 2 main candidates.

Not many people do, but that's because of a media blackout on them.

They are all worthy candidates but aren't getting media backing - probably because the other two have spent around $1billion each on their campaigns.

[Guest Bilo]

[Jordan]

Is nobody shocked that Jill Stein got tied to a chair for 8 hours?!

No, because Jill Stein gets arrested every week.

[Ross-Kemp]

Spent the best part of the day at 30 rock. Looks absolutely fantastic.

Definitely gonna pop down tomorrow, get a feel for it.

Can't believe how serious the Americans take it to us Brits.

[Jordan]

Spent the best part of the day at 30 rock. Looks absolutely fantastic.

Definitely gonna pop down tomorrow, get a feel for it.

Can't believe how serious the Americans take it to us Brits.

I just saw some shots of it on NBC Nightly News... they've predictably named it "Democracy Plaza," and it looks like they've set it up nicely. It is American extravagance at its finest.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

[Jordan]

OK... I'm finally ready to make my official 2012 election prediction:

I've been flip-flopping on Colorado. Despite good recent polls for Barack Obama--and despite Latinos perhaps being under-represented in those polls--early voting indicates much enthusiasm for Mitt Romney. I had it blue yesterday, and I want to have it blue now, but I have Romney squeaking it out by something like 1.5 points--I see Romney voters as also more likely to hit the polls tomorrow.

Florida is also very much up for grabs, but it looks like Republicans have narrowed the early voting gap compared to 2008. I'm concerned about obstructions to voting in Florida, as Gov. Rick Scott & Co. do not seem the least bit interested in ensuring that voting is easy there. Some early voters waited up to nine hours to cast their ballots this weekend, which is a disgrace.

Obama's support is perking up in Virginia; I predict Obama will win those 13 EVs narrowly.

I see Romney fading in Nevada and struggling to break through in Iowa--solid GOTV operations will deliver those states to Obama.

I believe North Carolina will actually be a closer race than the Romney camp believes, but I don't think Obama has enough to win that state twice.

I think Ohio is close to being a lock for Obama unless there are voting irregularities there. Both sides have lawyers in the state ready to file a lawsuit at the first whiff of something they think smells fishy.

New Hampshire will be close, but I don't see much elasticity in that race. Obama will hold by a small margin--something like 2.5-3.0 points--but it's probably been like that in NH for months.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin might wind up close--perhaps within 5 points--but I still don't think those states are in play. Those might be Romney's best chances for a surprise state win, though.

I predict voter turnout to be down nationally, to about 58%, compared to 61.6% in 2008. I don't expect the aftermath of Sandy to have a significant effect on the Presidential election, but it could effect some downballot voting. I predict Obama to win the national popular vote by 1.6 points.

As for the Senate, I expect a net change of zero in the balance of power, so I predict 53 seats in the Democratic caucus and 47 seats on the GOP side of the aisle once the results are in. I only expect a modest net gain in the House for the Democrats, but not enough to give the gavel back to Nancy Pelosi: 236 R/199 D (+6 for the Dems).

Now that I've made my picks public, you'll all go back to my post on November 7 after I've been proven wrong, scratch your heads, and wonder why you all bothered to read a thing I've written this whole time. I am confident that Obama will win, but I know I'll wake up tomorrow nervous as f__k. I'm pretty sure, wherever I am, I will be pacing with a beer in my hand at 7:00 p.m. when the first state polls close.

[MPH]

OK... I'm finally ready to make my official 2012 election prediction:

I've been flip-flopping on Colorado. Despite good recent polls for Barack Obama--and despite Latinos perhaps being under-represented in those polls--early voting indicates much enthusiasm for Mitt Romney. I had it blue yesterday, and I want to have it blue now, but I have Romney squeaking it out by something like 1.5 points--I see Romney voters as also more likely to hit the polls tomorrow.

Florida is also very much up for grabs, but it looks like Republicans have narrowed the early voting gap compared to 2008. I'm concerned about obstructions to voting in Florida, as Gov. Rick Scott & Co. do not seem the least bit interested in ensuring that voting is easy there. Some early voters waited up to nine hours to cast their ballots this weekend, which is a disgrace.

Obama's support is perking up in Virginia; I predict Obama will win those 13 EVs narrowly.

I see Romney fading in Nevada and struggling to break through in Iowa--solid GOTV operations will deliver those states to Obama.

I believe North Carolina will actually be a closer race than the Romney camp believes, but I don't think Obama has enough to win that state twice.

I think Ohio is close to being a lock for Obama unless there are voting irregularities there. Both sides have lawyers in the state ready to file a lawsuit at the first whiff of something they think smells fishy.

New Hampshire will be close, but I don't see much elasticity in that race. Obama will hold by a small margin--something like 2.5-3.0 points--but it's probably been like that in NH for months.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin might wind up close--perhaps within 5 points--but I still don't think those states are in play. Those might be Romney's best chances for a surprise state win, though.

I predict voter turnout to be down nationally, to about 58%, compared to 61.6% in 2008. I don't expect the aftermath of Sandy to have a significant effect on the Presidential election, but it could effect some downballot voting. I predict Obama to win the national popular vote by 1.6 points.

As for the Senate, I expect a net change of zero in the balance of power, so I predict 53 seats in the Democratic caucus and 47 seats on the GOP side of the aisle once the results are in. I only expect a modest net gain in the House for the Democrats, but not enough to give the gavel back to Nancy Pelosi: 236 R/199 D (+6 for the Dems).

Now that I've made my picks public, you'll all go back to my post on November 7 after I've been proven wrong, scratch your heads, and wonder why you all bothered to read a thing I've written this whole time. I am confident that Obama will win, but I know I'll wake up tomorrow nervous as f__k. I'm pretty sure, wherever I am, I will be pacing with a beer in my hand at 7:00 p.m. when the first state polls close.

already there are claims of irregularities/ fraud whatever you want to call it , here in North Carolina. On the news there have been several people who claimed that they voted for Romney, and it registered for Obama.

[MPH]

I must say, I am really disliking American politics... the commercials they put out are all about attacking the other person the debates were very rude - especially Joe Biden. He was just repulsive..... approx $2 billion spent capaigning at a time when they are both claiming they want to get the economy back on track..

It just hasnt been a very plesant esperience for me....

[Jordan]

Thanks for your detailed replies to my questions, Jordan - fascinating! It remains one of my dreams to have a proper wander around over there to try to get my head round the place...taking several months. Better start earning a bit more or spending a bit less, then!

I'll be interested to hear your predictions. I gather that some experts think that the polls in the battleground states may overstate Obama's level of support, meaning that Romney may be more likely to win than those polls suggest. As a left-of-centre voter, I find that scarily reminiscent of the British general election of 1992. Going into the last week, the polls showed Labour ahead by 3% or so, and even the exit polls on the day had them 1% ahead (theoretically enough to be largest party, though without a majority)....but the Tories ended up a few percentage points ahead, enough for a small majority.

In the 1992 UK election, as I recall, a small but disproportionate number of Tory voters either refused to speak to exit pollsters or fibbed about how they'd voted, because they'd swung to the Tories out of fears that they'd suffer a big hike in their personal taxes and didn't want to admit that. As I understand it, though, the US scenario is different and relates more to pollsters making insufficient allowance for Democrat voters being less enthused than in 2008 and staying at home in greater numbers. Does that sound right?

Those questions are indeed being discussed. Some critics (more so on the right) have alleged that polling is indeed over-sampling Democrats, believing that polls are reflecting turnout similar to 2008 than what we'll see tomorrow (Democratic turnout will certainly be lower). Some on the left allege that Latino voters are strongly under-sampled in polls, Republican-biased pollsters (most notably Rasmussen) do not reflect the true composition of the electorate, and that Gallup has been putting out a lot of outlying polls this year.

On average, though, poll "aggregators" and "averagers" do a decent job of evening things out. Single polls are just snapshots of the electorate, and they may be out of focus. Bias is still possible, but on average, bias doesn't appear to be egregious in most reputable pollsters, and we won't know just how much bias is in the polls (or if there is any) until Wednesday.

FYI, [edit: at the time of this post] Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight gives Obama a 92.2% chance of winning tomorrow. As the race draws to a close, and national and state polls have come into alignment, he's raised Obama's chances dramatically over the past few weeks. As long as Romney has a chance, this election will feel a lot closer to me.

So, if Romney may be more likely to win than the UK media seem to think, could the Republicans also win the Senate? As I understand it, they're pretty certain to win the House of Representatives. Presumably a clean sweep of all 3 elections would leave them well-placed to introduce some more right-wing policies than would be the case if there was the usual stalemate between institutions in the hands of 2 different parties (though I appreciate that moderate Republicans in Congress might limit that)? There could be some pretty serious global consequences from that, couldn't there? I'm imagining scenarios where swingeing cuts tip the US back into a more serious recession, damaging international trade...or where the US takes a more aggressive attitude to trade negotiations with China, or even starts bombing Iran... Romney doesn't come across as gung-ho as Dubya, but obviously many other Republican politicians and voters are, so if he's inclined to blow with the wind...

The Republicans could sneak out a majority in the Senate, but that is highly unlikely now. The GOP had a great chance to pick up enough seats in the Senate this summer, but some of their campaigns have self-destructed because a couple of morons have said some crazy sh*t about rape. Brace yourself for some serious stupidity:

Todd Akin-R was poised to unseat Sen. Claire McCaskill-D in Missouri until he made ridiculous comments that it's highly unlikely that rape causes pregnancies because if it's a "legitimate rape," then "the female body has ways of shutting it down" [i.e. a miscarriage]. Akin resisted pressure to drop out of the race after this, and has kind of been forced to align more with the far right of the party to keep his support.

In Indiana, Richard Mourdock-R made comments in a debate with Joe Donnelly-D about why he wouldn't support exceptions for rape in hypothetical future anti-abortion legislation and said--I sh*t you not--"Life is that gift from God that I think even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." Previous polls suggested the race would be close, but after that, it looks like Donnelly will win by a wide margin.

The GOP would have still needed either two more pick-ups or one pick-up and Scott Brown-R to hold Massachusetts (I think Elizabeth Warren, of whom I am a fan, will win by a slim margin in their rematch tomorrow) to get the majority, so those two ass-clowns have turned a good chance of a GOP majority into a longshot.

As for the balance of power, the Republicans under Bush--during which they held both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court for six years--were able to implement a wide variety of neoconservative policies and shifted the ideology of our government. Likewise, the two years of Democratic control of both houses under Obama saw a lot of different legislation, notably the auto industry "bailout," the "stimulus," "Obamacare," environmental initiatives, banking reforms, and a hastening of the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

I have no doubt that a Romney win + a Republican Congress would mean at least the repeal of "Obamacare," restrictions on abortion, and more aggressive military posturing against Iran. A Romney win + Dem Senate hold + GOP House hold would probably not put too many roadblocks in place for the GOP to pass legislation as conservative Dems would probably cross party lines on a lot of votes. The only way to block legislation for Democratic Senators to filibuster, in which 60 Senators would have to invoke a motion of cloture to end debate and vote on the legislation. However, this could backfire against the Dems as many of them have gone on record saying the filibuster should be removed.

Politicians and pundits are already expressing concerns that the House Republicans would again hold the economy hostage by refusing to pass legislation to raise the "debt ceiling" (and as such, voluntarily put the U.S. government in default of its debt) in exchange for legislation that fits their ideology either in the lame-duck session or in the 113th Congress beginning in January if the Dems hold the White House and Senate while the GOP holds the House.

Could be a very important night for the rest of the world, not just the US. Fingers crossed that I don't have any urgent work to do early Wednesday and I'll be able to sit up half the night watching all the votes come in. Here's hoping that it doesn't come down to those "hanging chads" again (remember them?!) or disputes about people prevented from voting...and that Obama sneaks to victory. If so, will it be the "presidential" response to the storm that wins it for him (e.g. the nice photo opportunity hugging a distressed middle-aged white woman)? Of course, we often forget (from a white perspective) that Obama is actually mixed-race, not black, as his mother was white, wasn't she? Funny the way we see things racially...I once knew a pair of mixed race brothers; to "gringo" eyes, one of them looked 100% black and the other 100% white.

As a news junkie, I'm so happy I've taken this week off! One way or another, I'm going to be a wreck on Wednesday morning.

Public opinion of Obama's handling of the Sandy crisis is overwhelmingly positive, and there have been suggestions in the media that the response to the storm helped Obama's image and by extension his chances tomorrow. Some more cynical responses by some GOP politicians have said Sandy effectively threw a roadblock on Romney's campaign just as they were gaining momentum (I doubt that's so), and worries among some Dems that Sandy will cause a drop in Dem turnout.

However, in NY and NJ, a lot of people are talking about a different aspect of that now-famous photo:

The man to Obama's right is Chris Christie, the Republican governor of New Jersey. Christie's win in 2009 was a preview to the Republican wave of 2010. Christie has become something of a larger-than-life political figure due to his size and his brusque nature--he gets called the Tony Soprano of politics. Christie's star is rising quickly and he being tabbed as a possible future presidential candidate.

Anyway, Christie has been campaigning for Romney, and delivered the keynote speech at the Republican National Convention (during which he ripped Obama). Christie also gave a speech at a Romney campaign event the week before Sandy, in which he criticized Obama for showing a lack of leadership.

As the storm hit, however, Christie gave several TV interviews during which he praised Obama's leadership along with his clear and constant communication. And when Fox News anchors asked Christie if he would let Mitt Romney survey the devastation with him, Christie curtly told them he has no interest in pandering to presidential politics while his state is in such a dire situation. Soon afterwards, Obama flew into Jersey, and he and Christie rolled up and down the coast like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover in Lethal Weapon.

The whole Obama/Christie dynamic was a real moment for America to pause and reflect on a moment of "bipartisanship"--particularly one involving a contentious political rivalry--at a time when such unity is becoming increasingly rare. A cynic may say that Christie (and to some extent, Obama) had his own personal political reasons for such a meeting. However, close coordination between Washington, DC and Trenton, NJ was necessary during this disaster, and both men look better for having put aside differences for the greater good.

As for Obama and race, it is remarkable how differently various people view Obama, and how that has shaped what he's become. Because Obama looks more "black," he has become embraced by America's black community but also vilified by racists that see him more as a caricature than a person.

Obama was embroiled in controversy during the primaries in 2008, when videos were released of the pastor of his church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, making inflammatory statements against the U.S.' treatment of minorities and its military action. That March, Obama gave a speech ("A More Perfect Union") in which he added context to that controversy by speaking of his own upbringing, articulated causes of some of America's racial tensions, and issued a call for America to overcome this anxiety to unite so we can address problems that affect all of us. Out of the many great speeches Obama gave in his 2008 campaign, that one may be his pièce de résistance--and Obama is probably the only politician in this country with the experiences and eloquence necessary to make such a serious speech on racial issues.

[Jordan]

already there are claims of irregularities/ fraud whatever you want to call it , here in North Carolina. On the news there have been several people who claimed that they voted for Romney, and it registered for Obama.

Hmm... interesting... There is also a federal court decision due in Ohio at 9:00 a.m. about an uncertified and untested patch that was added to that state's voting machine and tabulator software at the last-minute. I hope this doesn't start getting ugly.

[ozleicester]

Well at least I have one thing in common with this clown, I wear magic underpants, they stop my knob dragging the floor...

Im sorry, i never realised you didnt have legs. all the best

[Alexikokopops]

I checked Twitter this morning and say a picture of Obama on stage with Jay-Z and the Boss. Whatever you say about each candidate, 'Bronco 'Bama is effortlessly cooler.

[MooseBreath]

When do we find out who won?