True ... Obama has to get busy if he wants to catch up to the number of executive orders Bush issued. And even busier if he wants to get into Bill Clinton range. I know this will be an ongoing talking point but just to present the facts - Obama has issued executive orders at a lower rate than any president in the past 125 years.

I never said anything about the number he has signed, I merely pointed out what we will be bickering on. You disagree?

I would liked to have seen the old turtle lose, however, I enjoy winning watching Dems win those Presidential races and nominating Supreme Court justices a lot more. Should be many more years to come to enjoy that.

Congrats to the Turtle; condolences to the country.

 

Somebody woke up from his after school nap awfully cranky.

What does frustration sound like?

 

 

 

I would liked to have seen the old turtle lose, however, I enjoy winning watching Dems win those Presidential races and nominating Supreme Court justices a lot more. Should be many more years to come to enjoy that.

SurveyUSA is very good at polling and they are objective. They had the race close a couple weeks out but I don't think they ever had Grimes leading. In their poll a week or so before the election they showed momentum shifting fast to McConnell and had him with about a 5 point lead. I believe people wanted to vote McConnell out, and perhaps even told pollsters they were leaning to Grimes, but when the election got here they couldn't vote Grimes despite their disdain for McConnell. She was never able to pin an issue on McConnell that gave voters the reason they needed to vote for her.

 

I would love to see the internal polls around that time. The timing of 'the lead' and the national party pull out are just to coinky-dinky.

SurveyUSA is very good at polling and they are objective. They had the race close a couple weeks out but I don't think they ever had Grimes leading. In their poll a week or so before the election they showed momentum shifting fast to McConnell and had him with about a 5 point lead. I believe people wanted to vote McConnell out, and perhaps even told pollsters they were leaning to Grimes, but when the election got here they couldn't vote Grimes despite their disdain for McConnell. She was never able to pin an issue on McConnell that gave voters the reason they needed to vote for her.

According to WRDB-TV in Louisville, they had Grimes leading by 2 points in early October.

So, now that he's won, and President Obama can't win a 3rd term, what are we going to bicker about?

 

With the election, my guess is the Keystone Pipeline will be a bill taken pretty early. The Pipeline should have 61 for it in Senate assuming all GOP Senators vote for it and the Democrats who approved it last time are still for it. The still isn't enough to make it Veto Proof but they think some more democrats could back it to get to the 67 mark.

 

That is a pretty contraversial bill for environmentalists so it will probably make the news.

I never said anything about the number he has signed, I merely pointed out what we will be bickering on. You disagree?

 

No sir, I agree with you that there will be bickering over EO's.

I would love to see the internal polls around that time. The timing of 'the lead' and the national party pull out are just to coinky-dinky.

 

I do recall Mitch's camp saying all along that their polling showed Mitch with more of a lead ... looks like their polling was more accurate.

So can I expect the EKY coal fields to fire up?

 

That decline has been going on since the '70s. Mitch can do all the proclamations he wants and that's still not coming back. Regulations or not, there's no cheap-and-easy-to-get-to coal left in those hills without privatizing the Daniel Boone National Forest. It's just not worth the monetary effort for the coal barons to go after.

 

All I have to do is sit on my folks' back porch and watch countless coal barges going upriver from WKy — and see zero going the correct way — to know the "War On Coal" rhetoric is garbage.

I saw an article in the paper today about how polling was off in races all across the nation by 5-10 points from what the final results proved to be. That is interesting and strange. How do you explain that?

I saw an article in the paper today about how polling was off in races all across the nation by 5-10 points from what the final results proved to be. That is interesting and strange. How do you explain that?

 

Not new. 2012 POTUS election had it as a tight race. Wasn't.

I saw an article in the paper today about how polling was off in races all across the nation by 5-10 points from what the final results proved to be. That is interesting and strange. How do you explain that?

 

I think as land lines continue to go the way of the dinosaur, the accuarcy of polls will continue to decline.

I saw an article in the paper today about how polling was off in races all across the nation by 5-10 points from what the final results proved to be. That is interesting and strange. How do you explain that?

 

People would not admit they would vote Repub. NSA/IRS may be listening in...:lol2:

 

I know that I did refuse to answer polling calls that came over the last few weeks and during the entire cycle. Just not into FEMA camp food...:lol2: