[clue-talk] it's over!

[Greg Knaddison - GVS]

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Michael Fierro <miguelito at biffster.org> wrote:
>
> The cycle would be Republican moving towards control of congress in 2010, Obama being re-elected in 2012. I somehow doubt that the Republican party is going to be able to do ANYTHING in 2010, though. This was a thorough trouncing, a complete rejection of the Republican party on almost all levels of government. It's going to take a long time for the Republican party to recover.
>

I was going to say this in response to David Wilson:

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:45 PM, David L. Willson <DLWillson at thegeek.nu> wrote:
>
> This is a clear mandate for the Dems.

But now both of you who have said basically the same thing, so...

Am I looking at the wrong news sources?  As far as I can tell:

Obama got 52% of the popular vote while  McCain got 46% of the popular
vote. In 2004 Bush got 51% to Kerry's 48%.  We didn't call Bush's win
in 2004 a mandate. Are 3 percentage points really that big of a
difference?

Certainly the popular news media is calling this a mandate, but that's
no surprise.  From a critical perspective: is this a mandate?  And
which numbers make it clearly so?

Greg


-- 
Greg Knaddison
Denver, CO | http://knaddison.com | 303-800-5623
Growing Venture Solutions, LLC | http://growingventuresolutions.com