Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
"It's not that I disagree with his [Rove's] theory, it's just that his theory is wrong."
Fox are about to get one of their hacks - who called the Ohio election for Obama - to debate their decision to call it with Karl Rove, who disagrees with that call.
This may be hilarious, and so worth watching.
Ditto!Which fox link are you watching? I'm watching this one but yours seem more entertaining http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-election-results/
Which fox link are you watching? I'm watching this one but yours seem more entertaining http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-election-results/
I want this to be true more than anything else ever:
Reading this thread is making me wish I had Fox news (and I never thought I'd say that!)
Source?
Each camp has pollsters, statisticians, tacticians etc who have run every scenario in the book- and are running models now- so that doesn't happen. Thus no concession yet.... It is still not mathematically impossible for Romney to win.Makes sense, cheers.
One thing I've wondered: if the networks call it based on the projected count, and the 'loser' concedes. What happens if the count comes out in favour of the loser? Is it too late because he/she conceded?
Romney's within 1500 votes in Ohio btw. But it's Cleveland and Cincinatti where the uncounted votes lie so basically Obama has definitely won it
Overheard: "And America proves once again, once you go black..."
Oh Myyy...
MassachusettsRecreational Marijuana use voted in in Colorado and somewhere else!