Never mind your Party affiliation or who you’re rooting for… this is you livelihood we’re talking about now. You’re a handicapper: Who do you bet will be sworn in on 1-20-13?

What if he scheduled a state of the union speech the week before election day. I bet that would help him. I could do a speech right before the 2010 midterms and right before the 2012 presidential race. that would guarantee him a victory. I mean look at these numbers: 48% had a “very positive” impression of his speech. an additional 30% said “somewhat positive.” and last year 68% said “very positive.” He should schedule his speeches right before election day.

Why? What characteristics does he have that the others don’t? What did you like about his platform? Do you think he would be the one to change the country? Would you vote for him?

. How could we possibly expect a corrupt, murderous, ineffective, ex-Taliban-sympathizing operator like Hamid Karzai — a political pimp who fraudulently/openly stole the presidential elections — to: 1- Combat Corruption (LMAO); 2- Form and support strong state institutions; 3- Form a professional and independent Afghani Military; and 4- Put up a valiant fight against the Taliban forces; so we could save face and victoriously pull out of Afghanistan??? And guess what: Although they call him the puppet of the U.S., just today Karzai announced that his number one objective [during his second presidential term] is to negotiate a peace treaty with the Taliban! LMAO Are we putting the lives of our brave soldiers in harms way, so the Karzai’s of this world can negotiate a peace agreement with a bunch of Islamic extremists? Is placing all our eggs in the Karzai basket the most viable Afghani plan that the best and the brightest of our Political Strategists/Intelligence Analysts can come up with?!! .

I’m pretty sure if you had an in-depth understanding of the intelligence of “youtubers” or just viewer age demographics you could easily make a dumb who ha video explaining 911 was needed to go into Iraq when obviously they would not go through all that trouble to get the George Bush / Iraq war aprooval raiting for high of 90 percent for what ? like 6 months and at a low of 22% for fucking 7 years ……… Didnt’ we go to war with Vietnam anyways ? There could be a war going on in Antarctica for all we know just as long as the media isn’t down there. Also if they could fake a Presidential Election they could use their same little scheme on voting to go into Iraq, without wasting millions on faking 9/11. Notice how all the youtube hype about 2012 i bet everyone of those fuckers including me will be watching “2012″ this friday. YOUTUBE created by Viacom bitches. associated with vh1 >Viacom> Hollywood Lol that history channel 2012 special…..also owned by viacom Doesn’t that suck how they raped their minds’ ? Inventors make people like their product, 2012 marketed towards conspirators the more 2012 vids and NWO bs the more they rake in . Loose change creators made a quick $50 k + off its views alone + money paid by advertisement agencies ? haha the truth must be, it’s all conspiracy entertainment, advertisement, hoccus-pokus OK fucker since you know everything about this if you had your fucking facts straight you’d know viacom was suing google a few years back because google had links to their shit. VIACOM “was” the owner of youtube.com but until google bought it . So fuck you KYS i despise jerks like you. fucking idiot no points to you !!!!!!!!!!!! sdfgsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfgsdfgdsfgsfgsfdgsdfgsdfgsdfg

US Democrats have played down their defeat to the Republicans in two key gubernatorial races. The Republicans say the results, a year after Barack Obama was elected, signal voters’ discontent with his presidency. But Democratic Party chairman Tim Kaine said Mr Obama remained popular and that the party’s losses reflected voter anxiety about the economy and jobs. Both Virginia and New Jersey voted for Mr Obama in the 2008 presidential race, but will now have Republican governors. In New Jersey, the incumbent Democratic Governor, Jon Corzine, was ousted by Chris Christie, while in Virginia, Republican Bob McDonnell beat Democrat Creigh Deeds by a comfortable margin. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8342784.stm From the news — I gather there is some sort of connection - An implied comment on the party in power etc What in your own words is the relationship between State Governor voting patterns and the office of President ? All I can say is that here in this Province typically we appear to split the parties — If the Conservatives are in power Provincially the liberals will be voted for federally — It is a pattern but I wouldn’t bet anything on it continuing It might it might not Politics between the federal and Provincal elections are more or less seen as very separate things The US appears to blur the lines — is this in accordance to a legal text ? Or just speculation or something else ?

im betting its not a high percentage.

Let�s see, the drug war is still raging in Mexico. There are now estimates that H1N1 flu could become a global pandemic, which entered the United States from…Mexico. A bunch of terrorists plotting attacks on Americans have just been arrested, indicating that that threat is as current as ever and leads one to believe that other terrorists might just try to enter our country from…Mexico. And, the Obama Administration�s response is to reduce manpower on the number 1 illegal alien entry point into our country, which would be the border with…Mexico. Of course. It makes perfect sense, doesn�t it? Well, it does if you’re the president. President Obama doesn�t want effective patrolling of our southern border. Neither did President Bush or President Clinton. Let�s all agree on that. But, this president has made a lot of promises to what I call the Illegal Alien Industrial Complex - IAIC. His early actions, effectively ending worksite enforcement and the meetings in the White House with supporters of amnesty, were very encouraging and led that movement to believe that there was going to be a for-real amnesty. The supporting cast included Representative Luis Gutierrez D-Chicago who toured 17 cities around the country earlier this year, encouraging the production of victim stories about loved ones being deported. He focused on anchor babies, American citizens born to illegal aliens, as the ones worst affected. By using children this way the whole movement would be to help Americans, not illegal aliens. You remember the tour. In San Francisco, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi told the illegal aliens in attendance that they were “very, very patriotic” for taking responsibility for our country�s future. While some of the pro-open border advocates were cautious not to raise expectations, the less sophisticated on their side were ebullient. And the fact that they had one of their own, Cecilia Munoz of La Raza, in the White House gave them confidence that it was just a matter of time, amnesty was just around the corner. But, a funny thing happened on the way to the Forum; healthcare reform (or healthcare insurance reform, I forget) became a priority for the president and the congress and everything got sort of jammed up. And the presidential claim that illegal aliens were not covered by the healthcare bill followed by the protocol breaking challenge to that assertion, and the subsequent acquiescence by the White House to amendments (which had been previously blocked) that did indeed bar illegals from “the exchange”… sort of jarred the open borders crowd. It wasn�t exactly panic, but in the past month there has been a lot of head scratching about what this president is really up to. There has been open questioning of the president�s commitment to amnesty and complaints about his double talk on the issue. And I have heard that some in the illegal alien bloated SEIU, Service Employees International Union (they wear the purple T-shirts, ACORN wears the red ones) have openly asked if they can actually trust the president on amnesty. OK, enough about the issue, let�s talk about the president. President Obama will have to reassure the IAIC that amnesty is still out there on the horizon, still doable, because the president needs their support. He certainly doesn�t want them sitting on their hands next year. He needs them register voters (oops) and get out the vote for his party in the mid term elections. So, he will have to do things that mollify this crowd and keep them thinking that amnesty is still possible. And that�s why it makes sense for the president to reduce manpower on the Mexican border. It is something that he can do that the open borders crowd likes. “No movement on amnesty, but just made it a little easier to sneak in,” is the logic behind that move. His minions are reminding everyone that he effectively dismantled worksite enforcement earlier this year. And as for, “going after the employer” don�t bet on it, they�re not. Now, we know that there are (at least) 8 million illegal aliens working in our country. Unemployment is in double digits in a dozen states and this administration isn�t going to do anything to enforce our employment laws so that American workers can have access to those jobs. This has been quietly repeated to the open borders crowd. However, there will have to be some kind of public discussion about immigration policy and before the congressional election cycle begins early next year. The administration has made too many promises and raised too many hopes. And, Obama�s recent double talk at the Hispanic Congressional Caucus Institute on September 16th was noticed by some who have grown suspicious of Obama�s ability to deliver. The president said, “If someone�s here illegally they won�t be covered under this plan, that�s a commitment I�ve made. But I also want to make this clear. Even though I do not think that we can extend coverage to those who are here illeg