This may have some impact on the election:

"Arkansas State Rep. Jon Hubbard goes and writes a book. It’s called, "Letters to the Editor: Confessions of a Frustrated Conservative," and inside it he espouses a unique view of African-American history, asserting that slavery — and we quote here — "may actually have been a blessing in disguise." Sure, there was all that lynching, beating, raping, shackling, etc. — that part obviously sucked. But once that was over, black people were — and again we quote — "rewarded with citizenship in the greatest nation ever established upon the face of the Earth." Yeah … we’re sure that made it all worth it, Jon."

Why would this have an impact on the election? It's not as if Romneys going to agree with it regardless of what he thinks.

It's not like Romney had African American vote to begin with.

Who knows how things will turn out? I don't. But sometimes little things like that can turn an election because they can cause one side to have to play defense instead of going on offense. They also energize the other side.

Romney is not yet doing as well among white voters as McCain did. It's not just black voters he has to worry about. There are plenty of white voters who will be turned off by such things. There are many independent or moderately conservative white voters that lean Republican or are looking for reasons to vote Republican.

When party leaders continually give indications that they think the wrong side won the Civil War or rape is no big deal or anyone who is darker than Desi Arnaz ought to be stopped and asked to prove citizenship the party risks losing some of those predominantly white swing voters.

Right now the election looks very close and neither side wants its nuts saying stupid things.

I had the impression that that was what Obama or his advisers thought. I guess, these days Obama could only lose during the debates if he had made a major mistake, saying something stupid or attacking Romney on a wrong basis. That's why he preferred to appear boring.
The polls after the debates are usually about what voters think who won the debate. I think the debates won't have a great effect as long as there are no gaffes.

Romney is leading the Rasmussen poll by two points nationally. Moreover, he's got slim leads in Ohio, Florida and Virginia. All key swing states. But that's today. Polls aren't always reliable, and we're still three weeks away from the election. An eternity in close political races.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/romney_leads_obama_by_two_percent_GFK2swe14og9oJa7uBFwzK

There's a good video on the Fox News website that illustrates the Electoral College vote state by state. Surf over to it. It shows the President with about 250 votes and Romney with about 200.

Here in Tampa, swing state Florida, it just does not have that feel like it did in 2008.

Not a single neighbor has a lawn sign up. Far fewer bumper stickers than I saw for 2008 and 2010 midterms.

There are a few crazy billboards though.

According to the Electoral Map of http://www.realclearpolitics.com which condenses the latest polls, Obama is likely to win the election.
There are eight "Toss Up" states:
Nevada, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, Colorado.
If nothing changes in the other states, it would be enough if he wins Florida and loses the others.
If he wins Ohio or North Carolina or Virginia, he needs just one more state.
Romney, on the other hand, needs 89 more votes.
That's why I believe that the only thing that can keep Obama from winning the election is a big mistake, or maybe another mad pastor.

I was following Hoffpost's electoral map and I tell ya, Obama had a better advantage before this debate. Polls certainly have shifted toward Romney after the 1st debate.

http://twitter.com/i/#!/search/realtime/%23IfObamaDontWin

Better hope Obama wins. People talking about civil disobedience if Obama loses.

Oh, come on! It's just BS talk from someone who doesn't get up from their ass and just tweets. These people endured Bush administration, and I bet no one from the right aside from Palin could resurrect that nightmare.

the hashtag is over a month old. of course there's a risk of civil disobedience if Obama loses. especially if it's close and his followers think he was robbed. I'm telling friends and family to take a day or two off if they can, just in case.

Yeah, if it was a week old there was nothing to worry about, but now there's. Better than that, tell them to vote for big O to stay safe. Goodness, I want some of what you're smoking.

Civil disobedience? Really?? Believe me, if nobody rose up after the election was stolen from Al Gore by the governor of the brother of the President-Elect, then nobody's going out of their way now.

I don't think Mitt Romney is a bad person, but I do think he and his running partner have some bad ideas. They are against equality, and not just for women or gays, but for seniors, the working poor and immigrants. Hmmmm, I guess that would be roughly 45% of the population!

The challenger to a president almost always gets a boost from the first debate.

The risk of national violence and civil disobedience if Obama loses is crazier than the Y2K hysteria in 1999.

Not the same.

Of course there will be problems in Newark, Oakland, St. Louis, CHICAGO, Atlanta and other cities.

Expect a national walkout from school too.

WOO HOO! We'll get off Election Day AND the next day?! Go MITT!!!

Boy, those darn black people. I don't know why we even have them.

I'm hoping Obama does better in the next debates. Those pauses aren't gonna help him though, I remember Stewart saying that he feels president talks to other universes during those pauses.

And in Bill Maher's Real Time, it was mentioned that Obama probably didn't wanna come across as an angry black man. Oh, the things you have to mind in American politics makes my head hurt.

I always figured you were a grade school student.

Not funny.

As we get closer to election day, if the election looks close, you'll hear about law enforcement preparing for civil unrest.

I didn't say black people. Plenty of white OWS types will probably lead the unrest. They've done it before.

LOL @ angry black man. New Yorker magazine introduced that to the echoing chamber when Obama said, "You didn't build that". Their theory was that it wasn't what Obama said, but how he said it which made white racists wake up and protest. Well, that's NY magazine.

I think Obama will do better because he has been strong on foreign policy. The main reason Obama will win is the demographics in swing states favor him. In the end, that's it.

^^ Botta bing botta boom

Gee, as if that comment wasn't taken out of context! The reason that was an issue, wasn't the way he said it, it was the desperation of a party that has nothing worth while to stand up for and has to make issues out of thin air and make them important too. Like taking God off the coin. As if it was Obama's plan.

Well, at least when Obama wins, you don't have to worry about riots.

Nothing out of context. I agree with Obama to an extent because infrastructure is important. But he pissed off quite a few business people in the process.

That comment was taken out of context. And if businessmen choose to be offended about the comment that they didn't build bridges and roads, let them be offended. Working middle class has to pay 35% tax on payroll, while the businessmen like the late Steve Jobs would get 1 dollar monthly so that they would pay only 15% tax on their share of the company! They don't even pay the same percentage as the least wealthy, but choose to take offense.

This is a cool site. It illustrates how the purchase of certain products may indicate the election victor:

http://money.msn.com/investing/mistrust-polls-try-7-eleven-or-stars

That's better than counting lawn signs and bumper stickers.