Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

Obama Wins 2008, In All Likelihood Loses 2012

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/11/01


Below are the 2008 election results from US Election Atlas.org.

Note the Republican states are in blue while the Democrat states are in red. Republicans being red and Democrats being blue wasn’t always the case. Not until those folks at MSNBC switched it around (for propaganda benefits, since red is the color of Leftism and Communism and Socialism). It is my goal that here, at Truth Before Dishonor, the Democrats are once again reverted back to being red and the Republicans are once again reverted back to being blue. Because it is far more in keeping with the Truth about their respective political leanings.

Below is the 270 To Win Battleground States map (with my adjustments for Republican and Democrat. The Battleground states are unchanged.)

Compare the two maps. (singing)Do you see what I see?(/singing) That’s right, folks. Every Republican state in 2008 is Republican in 2012. Every Battleground state was Democrat in 2008. And Indiana, which was Democrat in 2008, with less than 50 percent of the vote (despite Obama having an ACORN-led 105 percent Registered Voter vs Adult Resident advantage in Indianapolis in 2008), is Republican in 2012.

The charts show what everyone in the know has known to be true: Obama is on the defensive, desperately trying to cling to territory he won in 2008 and losing ground. That has been the case since the day he was inaugurated. He has been doing his best to cling to territory won and hoping against hope that he doesn’t lose too much. That’s what happens when you push a lie-filled, anti-American, anti-Christian, Socialist agenda down the throats of American citizens, the majority of whom oppose what you’re doing. (ObamaCare: the majority of the population was against it before it became Law, the majority of the population wanted it repealed immediately after it became Law, the majority of the population wanted it repealed in 2010 when they swept 700 Democrats out of office nationwide, and the majority of the population wants it repealed today.)

How big is this inability to win states Obama won his first time through? Let’s look at previous two-term Presidents.

2000: George W Bush won 271 Electoral College votes.
2004: George W Bush won 286 Electoral College votes.
George W Bush gained 15 Electoral College votes for his second term in office.

1992: Bill Clinton got 370 Electoral College votes.
1996: Bill Clinton got 379 Electoral College votes.
Bill Clinton gained 9 Electoral College votes for his second term in office. (Ross Perot went from just under 19 percent of the overall vote to under 9 percent.)

1980: Ronald Reagan, a true Conservative I could back (but wasn’t Conservative enough on some issues, and I was ineligible to vote regardless), got 489 Electoral College votes.
1984: (The first year I was eligible to vote.) Ronald Reagan got 525 Electoral College votes (losing only Minnesota by 18/100ths of a percent and DC by a huge margin).
Ronald Reagan gained 36 Electoral College votes.

In fact, the last time a sitting President won re-election despite shedding Electoral College votes was the election year of 1944, when Franklin Delano Roosevelt won a fourth term with 432 Electoral College votes, compared to his third term win of 449 Electoral College votes and his second term win of 523 Electoral College votes. But even FDR improved his second term EC votes over his first term EC votes. To find a President who won a second term with fewer EC votes than his first term, you have to go all the way back to the wholly destructive “Progressive” Democrat Woodrow Wilson who won 435 Electoral College votes in 1912, but only gained 277 in 1916, a loss of 158 Electoral College votes for “Progressivism”. He also only garnered 49.24 percent of the popular vote. (Too bad for this country that he couldn’t have lost 170 instead of only 158. Our country would have turned out far better for it.)

The Socialist Barack Obama? He doesn’t have a 168 EC vote cushion to lose. And lose EC votes, he will. Even the pinko Democrat operatives will tell you that. Even the pinko polling firms with their “Democrats will vote in higher proportions than they did in 2008″ polling numbers, will tell you that. Independent voters, who gave Obama an 8 point advantage in 2008, are giving Romney a 15 to 20 point advantage in 2012. And the above “battleground” map shows it. Obama has already lost Indiana. Obama cannot win any state he lost in 2008. The Census has reduced the EC number in states Obama won while increasing the EC number in states Obama lost. And every Battleground State is a state Obama won in 2008.

Will this be the first time in 96 years that a sitting President won re-election to a second term while shedding Electoral College votes? I think not. And since, it’s a foregone conclusion that Obama will shed Electoral College votes, I have declared Obama the loser of the 2012 election.

(Truth Before Dishonor intends to do its version of live-blogging the 2012 Presidential Election this upcoming Tuesday night. Tune in to TBD for the 2012 Presidential Election results as they happen. (hopefully))

About these ads

2 Responses to “Obama Wins 2008, In All Likelihood Loses 2012”

  1. […] Obama Wins 2008, In … on Communism, Socialism, Progress… […]

    Like

  2. […] 2012 Presidential El… on Obama Wins 2008, In All Likeli… […]

    Like

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 234 other followers

%d bloggers like this: