patrick.net

Very sneaky!

Of course this was tongue and cheek and not true at all.
But I would like to ask Patneters how do you think the storm will effect voter turn out, in those states that every election map has already colored blue?

How will this effect electronic voting in Manhattan?
If this is true it looks like Red Hook and Rochester will be claiming NY as a Red state a week from now.

Some 7.5 million customers remain without power as of Tuesday morning, according to CNN estimates.

In Manhattan, a massive explosion at a ConEdison plant along the East River left a big chuck of the island in the dark.

Throughout the region, downed trees and flooding have taken out power lines that serve millions. Utilities say it could take 7 to 10 days to repair the damage, even with extra crews that have been brought in from other parts of the country.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/30/news/economy/hurricane-sandy-power-duplicate-2/index.html

Another question will be on what difference could be had given the President has the advantage of being in office during a major natural disaster. If he handles it well then that could be advantageous. If Romney wins due to low voter turnout due to a natural disaster then that would be a very sad thing.

Yeah but you gotta admit, the irony of electronic voting machines biting the very people championed it, in the ass.

Romney has it in the bag anyway. This would just give those Republicans in upstate a nice reprieve from being called a blue state. For them this will be a good thing.

edvard2 says

If he handles it well then that could be advantageous.

The last president that handled it well was H.W. Bush. He didn't stand in the way of free enterprise and the economy flourished not only from Andrew but from all of the Midwest flooding. There wasn't a factory in America that wasn't working overtime by time Clinton came in office. Where do you think all the income Clinton was able to raise taxes on came from? Before those disasters America was still crawling along from Reaganomics in a stagnate funk.

CaptainShuddup says

The last president that handled it well was H.W. Bush. He didn't stand in the way of free enterprise and the economy flourished not only from Andrew but from all of the Midwest flooding

That's supposed to be a joke... right?

NO I was there, and have been in every disaster since.
Hurricane Andrew and the flood put the whole nation back to work.
Hungry people weren't bussed off or sent formaldehyde trailers to live and watch from the sidelines.

p.s even though Bush handled it right, it still didn't win him a second term.
Also I don't think Obama can do anything in one week that will make a difference.
The writing is already on the wall. IF anything, lack of voting access for those effected will cost him more than anything else.

edvard2 says

Another question will be on what difference could be had given the President has the advantage of being in office during a major natural disaster. If he handles it well then that could be advantageous. If Romney wins due to low voter turnout due to a natural disaster then that would be a very sad thing.

At least you're not politicizing this nat disaster. It would be good if the storm is good for obama, and its bad if its good for romney. Hilarious

I'm wondering how many of the domestic Fukushimas got close scares over the storm and all the flooding. Has the media been reporting on all the events surrounding the nuclear PPs in the area?

I was wondering about that too. Displaced New York City dwellers may not be back in time to vote, even if voting machines make it into their regular district v
Poll sites. Will NY go red?

CaptainShuddup says

The writing is already on the wall. IF anything, lack of voting access for those effected will cost him more than anything else.

Yes- I agree. Polls show Obama with a solid electoral lead.errc says

I'm wondering how many of the domestic Fukushimas got close scares over the storm and all the flooding. Has the media been reporting on all the events surrounding the nuclear PPs in the area?

From what I'd read all of the local nuclear power plants were equipped to handle conditions worse than what had occurred. Latest I've read was that so far all of the plants handled the storm fine.

Do you read any honest news sources that would be capable of reproting any troubles, if there were any, with any of the nuclear facilities? I don't know who is a trustworthy news source here in the states these days,,,

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=17598503

Remember japans domestic media outlets, as fukushima unfolded? "Nothing to worry about here",,,don't want to create panic

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/politics/sandy-voting-election-day/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Storm damage, power outages from Maine to South Carolina raise questions about Election Day voting
Unlikely Congress would extend voting nationwide due to problems in storm-struck states
N.J. Gov. Christie doesn't "give a damn about Election Day" with emergency on his hands
States on the outskirts of Sandy's wrath will fare better on November 6

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/opinion/ghitis-superstorm-voting/index.html

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Frida Ghitis has seen disasters around the world change people's vote
Approval ratings soar or plummet depending on disaster performance, she says
Ghitis: Both political camps are handling the aftermath of Sandy with exact care
Voters must keep in mind all the candidate stood for before disaster happened, she say