President Barack Obama handily won a second term largely because he ran a superior campaign. Republicans expected a late Reagan-esque surge to propel Mitt Romney to victory. This made Tuesday's defeat an even more crushing blow.

As Romney was conceding defeat, already indignant Republicans were pointing fingers and assessing blame. They were intensely angry, overwrought, and consumed with personal animus for the president. Highly paid Republican consultants cried foul. After all, consultants must protect their reputation and future income.

Republican strategist Mary Matalin blew a fuse and personally attacked President Obama in an article for the conservative National Review. "What happened? A political narcissistic sociopath leveraged fear and ignorance with a campaign marked by mendacity and malice rather than a mandate for resurgence and reform," Matalin wrote. "Instead of using his high office to articulate a vision for our future, Obama used it as a vehicle for character assassination, replete with unrelenting and destructive distortion, derision, and division."

Her hate and bitterness toward the president oozed through every word. To call him a sociopath is to call him a person whose behavior is, "often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience." Outrageous.

Perhaps Matalin suffers from a case of Romnesia because the Republican primary was filled with negative and personal attacks on Romney. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich even called the governor a "liar" on CBS. All the Obama campaign had to do was repeat the attacks on Romney from fellow Republican candidates earlier in the year.

For Instance, last year Texas Gov. Rick Perry told the National Journal, "There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business, and I happen to think that's indefensible." Gingrich told Mediate last December, "If Governor Romney would like to give back all the money he's earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years, then I would be glad to then listen to him." And last March Rick Santorum told CBS This Morning, "He doesn't have a core... He's been on both sides of almost every single issue in the past 10 years."

But when it comes to mendacity, Gov. Mitt Romney set the standard. Apart from the constant flip-flopping on issues, Romney regularly leveled dishonest attacks against the president throughout the campaign. The worst lie, which probably cost him a win in Ohio, was the false ad about Jeep moving its operations to China.

Matalin's vituperation was not the least of the GOP blowback to President Obama's reelection. Donald Trump's Twitter response was emphatic: "We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty... Let's fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us." The aging rocker Ted Nugent tweeted, "Pimps whores & welfare brats & their soulless supporters hav (sic) a president to destroy America... Goodluk (sic) America u just voted for economic & spiritual suicide. Soulless fools."

Tuesday's biggest loser, Republican strategist Karl Rove, who spent $365 million of donor money trying to defeat the president, had the best excuse. He actually accused the Democratic and African American president of interfering with the election. "He succeeded by suppressing the vote, by saying to people, 'you may not like who I am, and I know you can't bring yourself to vote for me, but I'm going to paint this other guy as simply a rich guy who only cares about himself," Rove told Fox News Thursday.

But the most disturbing reaction to the president's reelection may have come from Peter Morrison, the Hardin County Texas Republican Party Treasurer. "We must contest every single inch of ground and delay the baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists at every opportunity," he wrote on his Facebook site. "But in due time, the maggots will have eaten every morsel of flesh off of the rotting corpse of the Republic, and therein lies our opportunity." That "opportunity" is secession, "Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government? Let each go her own way in peace."

Everybody hates to lose. Yes, the Republican party went though a brutally divisive primary that nominated Mitt Romney. Yes, Romney was gaining momentum, while President Obama remained vulnerable because of a weak economic recovery. But somewhere along the line Republicans lost touch with reality. Their expectations blew way out of proportion. And suddenly their balloon popped on election night.

President Obama's resounding victory has exposed a core problem within the Republican Party: It is filled with anger and hatred brought on by an identity crisis. Republican leaders will be meeting over the next few weeks and months to determine what went wrong this election and what can be done to fix the problem.

Perhaps a great first step would be to stop the whining and the ridiculous personal attacks. Tantrums and snit fits will not win over any converts. Nobody likes a sore loser.

Ten years ago, I authored an unconventional analysis about the future of American democracy. I was concerned about the civic health of the United States; and I posed a rhetorical question -- "Is America Dying?"*

Now -- as we ponder Election 2012 -- it seems appropriate to revisit the uncertain future of our national experiment in democratic ideals.

Is America Dying?

The message of my original essay was simple: America is changing in ways that are important, exciting, and unsettling for the future of American democracy. We are undergoing a democratic metamorphosis that, for better or worse, is transforming our nation and the world; therefore, we owe it to coming generations to deal constructively with these challenges.

For rabid partisan readers, my blunt inquiry is not a rant about the reelection of Barack Obama or the rejection of Mitt Romney. I published my basic essay during George W. Bush's administration, after intense involvement in Washington politics during the Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush years. This is a systemic analysis derived from long-time experience as a political scientist, public official, and "American Dreamer."

Necessity for National Dialogue.

When I left Congress in 1997, I decided to pursue my rhetorical concern -- the possible "dying" of America -- that had intrigued me for many years and that I considered critical as we journey into the 21st century. Consequently, I have spent much of my time lecturing, writing, and trying to encourage a national dialogue about the civic future of American democracy.

I realized the constructive current value of my disturbing proposition about the course of American democracy within the past few months when I started getting calls from various media persons (like a Pulitzer Prize-winning editor here in Alabama and an international politics columnist from London) about my assessment of American democracy in light of the 2012 election campaign. My standard response to such inquiries was that the United States is a decade further along a mindless course toward the "American Federation."

I hope that this series of discussions will rekindle dialogue among interested citizens; more specifically, I hope that it will help readers understand, not only the strengths, but also the fragilities and limitations of the "Great Experiment" of American history.

At this point, it may be useful for me to re-state, very briefly, my unconventional thesis about the evolving experiment of American democracy.

My Thesis of American Democracy.

The original existence of an open natural environment and the subsequent popular expansion of national public authority, working together, have been central to the history and progress of American democracy. The open frontier of the New World established an indelible character of freedom, individualism, and independence; and the popular growth of national public authority created a supportive political environment for equality, security and justice in our young republic. (No one can overlook our history of slavery and discrimination; however, that's a topic for another discussion, which I have written about in a two other books.)

These central forces have shaped America's "Great Experiment" (our progressive pursuit of democratic ideals through limited, representative governance) for two centuries. Combined they provided a favorable systemic setting for American democracy (our magical mix of people, politics, and government) to pursue progressive ideals (such as freedom and equality) while balancing the somewhat contradictory strains of those ideals for a diverse society.

However, America is changing in ways that, while exciting, are unsettling for the future of American democracy. Inevitable limitations of the aforementioned natural environment and national authority -- and growing philosophical tensions over democratic ideals, cultural values, and principles of governance -- are transforming the American democratic system. With the two central forces of American democracy -- a favorable natural environment and expanding national government -- gone awry, our civic mix of people, politics, and government no longer works the way it has in the past. Battered by economic stress and international ill winds, we seem to be tiring of the "Great Experiment" itself.

Elusive Bridge to the Twenty-First Century.

If this discussion is not about political machinations of the moment, then how does my analysis relate to Election 2012? What leads me to revive my unconventional question about the future of American democracy?

The explanation is that, since the end of the Cold War, our country has struggled through almost a quarter-century of divisive elections, with all four presidents -- two Democrats and two Republicans -- aspiring to lead us into a new and better but challenging world. Bush Sr. tried to lead us into a New World Order; but economic problems derailed his service. Clinton yearned to be the leaderly link to a different tomorrow; but personal and political issues distracted him from that mission. Bush 43 proclaimed a new era of compassionate conservatism; but 9/11 plunged him into global and fiscal morass. Obama swept into the White House with inspiring grandeur; but economic crisis and divisive politics have raised questions not only about his vision but the functionality of our national capital.

Unfortunately, the American people seem to be stubbornly split into two camps about what we want America to mean and how we want America to work in a changing world. At the mid-point of Barack Obama's self-declared transformational presidency, we seem even more troubled about the meaning of "America" in the 21st century.

So, Here We Are in 2012.

Thus my original question -- Is America Dying? -- is an even more pressing systemic concern as we contemplate the uncertain fruits of Election 2012.

A fundamentally divided nation has, in its collective wisdom, voted to continue schizophrenic government in Washington. The most important issue, from my perspective, is whether we have learned anything from the past quarter-century. Will President Obama, the House, and the Senate define their conjoined mandate as helping a divided nation in search of the practical civic good? Or will entrenched feudalists interpret electoral success as license to forge their particularistic ambitions and dreams? Will the American people embrace a broader, more civic calling? In the final analysis, can and will we restore the future of American democracy?

Upcoming Posts in This Series.

In following discussions, I will present step-by-step elaborations of my unconventional analysis, updated for America post-Election 2012.

For example, I will explain how I dare ask such an outrageous question about American democracy; I will offer my definitions of "America," "American Democracy," and "dying"; I will argue four propositions about how American may be dying; I will answer the question about whether America is really going to die; and I will conclude with a transformational challenge for our new national leadership.

Special Request for Readers.

I expect many of you will disagree with what I say and will engage in hearty reaction and debate among yourselves about Election 2012. I would especially appreciate your comments about the long-term, systemic, civic future of our "Great Experiment." If you're so inclined, I also suggest that you take a look at my full discussion of these important issues as presented in the original book.

*Disclosure and Acknowledgement: This series includes edited, updated material from my book, The Future of American Democracy: A Former Congressman's Unconventional Analysis (2002). I'm grateful to University Press of America for allowing me to borrow from that publication for my discussions on Huffington Post.

Will Marshall, CNN
(CNN) -- Republicans are consoling themselves with the claim that President Barack Obama didn't win a mandate Tuesday night, even if he did renew his White House lease for another four years. They are fooling themselves, however, if they think the 2012 election merely ratified the political status quo. More than just a personal victory for Obama, the outcome was an unmistakable defeat for GOP ideology.Disgruntled conservatives, of course, are already dressing Mitt Romney for the part of fall guy. But this is the politics of evasion. Sooner or later, GOP realists will have to reappraise...

Haberman & Burns, Politico
Over at Aces of Spades HQ, a Mitt Romney Election Day worker details the massive failure of the ORCA Project, the campaign-designed voter-tracking app that was supposed to rival the Obama campaign's ground-game efforts:It would take a lot of planning, training and coordination to be done successfully (oh, we'll get to that in a second). This wasn't really the GOP's effort, it was Team Romney's. And perhaps "unprecedented" would fit if we're discussing failure.

Victor Davis Hanson, Orange County Register
Barack Obama won a moderately close victory over Mitt Romney on Tuesday. But oddly, nothing much has changed. The country is still split nearly 50/50. There is still a Democratic president, and an almost identically Democratic Senate at war with an almost identically Republican House, in a Groundhog Day America.Obama's win did not really reflect affirmation of his first term, given that the president made only halfhearted efforts to defend Obamacare, the stimulus, huge Keynesian deficits, and his attempts to implement cap-and-trade. So if there is a second-term agenda, even Obama...

The private timeshare mogul and Mitt Romney supporter who swore mass employee layoffs if President Barack Obama won reelection has had a change of heart.

Earlier this year, David Siegel, the founder of Central Florida Investments and Westgate Resorts, emailed a letter to his employees warning them to vote for Romney or else. However, after Obama won the election on Tuesday, instead of firing some of his 65,000 employees, Siegel decided to give them raises.

The anti-Obama Siegel opened up about his change of heart. "I’m going to work my hardest to keep the company going and expand the best I can," Siegel told Bloomberg Businessweek. "We’ll see what happens. Meanwhile I gave everybody in the company a raise this week—the average was 5 percent. I wanted to help them handle the additional burdens the government will put on them."

Siegel, whose 90,000-square-foot Florida "Versailles" mansion may be the biggest in America (once it's finished being built), insists he did not influence his employees to vote in any way.

"I didn’t do a thing," he told Businessweek. "I just wished employees luck. I didn’t do anything to encourage or discourage employees, to find out who their preference was. I had said enough. If they believed me, they knew what to do. If they didn’t believe me, they knew what to do."

In October, Siegel emailed a letter to his employees warning them that a vote for Obama could mean mass layoffs.

"The economy doesn't currently pose a threat to your job," he wrote in the letter, obtained by Gawker. "What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration. Of course, as your employer, I can't tell you whom to vote for, and I certainly wouldn't interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose." Later adding, "If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company."

Siegel contacted Gawker and confirmed that he wrote the layoff letter and that it was based on a popular chain letter circulated around the time of the 2008 election.

The moneyed real estate mogul previously denied strong-arming his employees. “I wanted to inform my employees of what their future would hold if they make the wrong decision,” he said on CNBC. “I wasn’t threatening any of the employees. If they vote for Obama they’re not going to lose their jobs.”

In 2007, Siegel's net worth was calculated at $1 billion, according to Forbes. But he's not the only billionaire who expressed his anti-Obama sentiments before the November election.

David Trump, who has been a vocal Republican advocate since hinting at his own run for president, called for a "revolution" after Obama's reelection. Casino billionaire Steve Wynn also blasted Obama for instigating "class warfare" by "deprecating and calling a group that makes money 'billionaires and millionaires who don't pay their share.'"

I have to admit, I did not write a concession column, just in case I needed it.

Seriously, a man running for the most powerful office in the country didn't bother to plan for one of the two contingencies that were guaranteed to happen last night? And he wanted us to let him make crucial decisions for all of us? Willard Mitt Romney's shocking lack of preparedness last night, when it came to speech time, was truly the icing on the sweet, sweet cake of Barack Hussein Obama's second victorious election, at least for me.

Then I looked around at the rest of the election, and saw that America hadn't just re-elected a black man to the White House, but the entire country lurched leftwards last night in a significant fashion. Which is what my title refers to (conceived in homage to the greatest subtitle on a book, ever: Geoff Nunberg's Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times-reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show). Because Obama wasn't the only big winner last night -- so was pot smoking, and gay rights, and women and Latinos. And liberalism. We're now a center-left country, so don't let anyone tell you differently (at least for the next two years).

In the very same election, the citizens of multiple states voted to legalize recreational use of marijuana and to legalize same-sex marriage -- both for the first time ever. That is stunning, when you think about it. It's the beginning of the victorious conclusion to the Sexual Revolution and the triumph of the hippies of the 1960s. Both of which consisted mostly of liberals, as I recall.

Now, states have decriminalized marijuana before, and even flirted with semi-legalization of cannabis previously, but for the first time, Colorado and Washington states have poked a rather large blunt instrument into the eye of the federal government with their vote. Same-sex marriage is legal in a few states, but it has never been approved by voters before now. This is the arc of history -- you can see it bending before you.

Does this mean we're all about to enter a liberal paradise? Well, no. Things never work out quite that easily in the real world. The Justice Department will likely fight back against the concept of legal weed, and if history is any guide, they'll fight back rather fiercely. After all, an entire industry has been built around the "War On (Some) Drugs," and billions of dollars are spent every year to keep this industry humming. So I don't expect it to go away any time soon, or to suddenly declare defeat. The drug warriors are almost religiously committed to their cause, which requires them to have an absolute faith in their beliefs, even when concrete evidence contradicts such beliefs. The number of states which have legalized marijuana for medicinal use was increased yesterday, and is now approaching half of all the United States -- and yet, the federal government refuses to admit that anyone, anywhere is using pot to alleviate suffering. Even though there are people alive who still get marijuana as a prescription for glaucoma from the very same federal government. As I said, it's a matter of faith, not rationality. All of which will lead to a gigantic court fight.

But it's a fight that is long overdue. A legal case of "Scopes Monkey Trial" proportions. Even if the case is ultimately lost at the Supreme Court, it is going to spur a political discussion that every politician since Nancy Reagan's time has been doing their best to avoid (most famously, by Bill Clinton, who "didn't inhale"). That right there is going to turn out to be a good thing, in my opinion, no matter what the outcome. Let's haul the whole subject out into the light of day and have a big political debate. It's about freakin' time.

On the gay rights front, many who voted in this election for the first time may not even remember the recent history of this fight. Back in the 1990s and 2000s, gay marriage (and gay rights in general) were used as a heavy club in elections -- by Republicans. It was the wedgiest of wedge issues they had going for them. Their reasoning was: "The more we say the word 'homosexual,' the more the suburban moderate voters are going to be scared of the liberal Democrats, and they'll reliably turn out and vote Republican." This seems like a stupid thing to do, now, but it surely wasn't back then -- because it worked so well. Want to increase GOP turnout in a weak state? Toss an anti-gay amendment on the ballot. Worked like a charm for them, while gay activists were slowly making ground getting people to accept merely same sex "domestic partnerships" or "civil unions."

The voters would reliably turn out and vote against any sort of rights for gays. Proposition 8 passed -- in California, of all places -- just four short years ago. The same election Barack Obama won the White House, the supposedly-ultraliberal California voted down gay marriage. Anti-gay marriage ballot measures worked for the Republicans thirty-two times, remember. Until last night. Meaning putting gay marriage on the ballot is now going to come from liberals and not conservatives, not just because it's the right thing to do, but because it can indeed win at the ballot box. There are several cases heading to the Supreme Court on gay marriage, and the federal ban on it in particular, and this is going to be another epic legal showdown. And for the first time, gay rights activists can point to victories and say "the voters approve." That wasn't possible before today.

In 2012, the Republicans waged a "War On Women." The knuckle-draggers came out from their dark spots to paint a vision for the future of women's health rights in this country -- moving us all right back to around the 1950s. They lost at the ballot box, and they lost big. By my count, the Tea Party has now snatched defeat from the hands of the Republican Party in five Senate races. The GOP could have five more seats today, to put it another way. Last night, women voters prevented at least two of these candidates from making it to Washington. Women voters everywhere broke in an enormous wave not just for President Obama, but for liberalism on women's health issues.

Finally, the Latinos of America have weighed both political parties in the balance and (not surprisingly) decided to go with the one who wasn't demonizing and demagoguing and scapegoating them constantly. Some Republicans have been crying in the wilderness for years now on this subject, and warning that the Republican Party is dwindling as it relies solely on older white men who really do want to return to the 1950s. Perhaps the Tea Partiers will listen, but I'm betting not. I'm betting that whenever immigration reform gets discussed the first, last, and only word out of their mouths will be "Amnesty!" The only thing that's going to save the Republican Party is when they lose Texas as a reliable state -- and any chance of gaining the White House with it. This could happen in 2016 or 2020, by some estimates. Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush and all the rest of the moderates will be ignored until disaster strikes. And losing Texas would indeed be a disaster, because while Mitt Romney found it hard to put together 270 electoral votes, no Republican will ever be able to do so without Texas' 38 votes. Until the party rejects its anti-immigrant stance, that is, at some point in the far future.

We all woke up to a different country this morning. Barack Obama is going to be our president for the next four years. He'll have his ups and downs, but we know who he is and we all dearly hope he will be less restrained now in his own liberalism because he'll never have to run for any election again. The conservatives will fight him every step of the way, of course. The progressives will likely fight him from the other direction, whenever a compromise is detected. Maybe, through all of this, Barack Obama can finish some of the things he started in his first term.

America woke up more liberal this morning -- it's an undeniable fact. Legal weed. Rocky Mountain high, indeed! Voters approving of marriage equality. Anti-abortion extremists losing easy Senate races. Immigration reform a real possibility. America is, as the Obama campaign slogan said, about to move "Forward!"

But one note of caution. The political winds have indeed shifted, but they can shift right back again in the blink of an eye. America is basically getting sick of our two political parties, because neither ever seems to get much done. What this has meant, since George W. Bush's time, is a whirlwind of tacking back and forth. America's political pendulum swings faster and faster -- from Obama's first victorious wave in 2008, to the Tea Party election of 2010, to now.

Personally, I'm hoping Barack Obama now steals a page from the George W. Bush playbook. Because the obsession inside the Beltway is soon going to become "Does Obama have a true 'mandate' to govern?" You could feel it sprouting and taking root last night, when the idiots who pass for our national political chattering class got all in a tizzy over the fact that Mitt Romney was still leading in the national popular vote count even after Obama had clearly won the Electoral College. "Will Romney win the popular vote?" they all smugly asked themselves -- not noticing that California's votes hadn't been counted yet. I mean, it's pretty predictable that California was going to add millions to Obama's total, but nobody even mentioned this fact. This is inside-the-Beltwayism at its worst, folks.

So I'm hoping that Obama does exactly what George W. Bush did (twice, as I recall) when asked how he could possibly govern without a clear mandate. Bush replied that he had all the mandate he needed, since he won the election... next question, please. That was all it took to shut up the media obsession. He didn't get asked the question much after that point, since all the reporters knew what he would say. Obama should do exactly the same thing, the first time someone uses "mandate" in a question to him. "I won. That's my mandate. Next question."

That way, maybe we actually can move forward, starting immediately.

 

Chris Weigant blogs at:

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Become a fan of Chris on The Huffington Post

 

George Will, Washington Post
America’s 57th presidential election revealed that a second important national institution is on an unsustainable trajectory. The first, the entitlement state, is endangered by improvident promises to an aging population. It has been joined by the political party, whose crucial current function is to stress the need to reform this state. And now the Republican Party, like today’s transfer-payment state, is endangered by tardiness in recognizing that demography is destiny.Perhaps Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election on Sept. 22, 2011, when, alarmed by Texas Gov. Rick...

Jonathan Cohn, The New Republic
Four more years. Four more years. Four more years … of what? That’s pretty much the way the political conversation went Tuesday night, at least based on what I saw on television. Just minutes after the networks declared President Obama the winner, and while Karl Rove was still ranting to Fox colleagues about Mitt Romney's Ohio numbers, pundits were already starting a debate over whether the election gave Obama a mandate—and, if so, what that mandate entailed.It’s a reasonable and important question. But before we get to it, let’s not...

This is where you'll find the Idaho election results for the 2012 presidential election.

Idaho's four electoral votes will go to Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and 2012 Republican presidential nominee. The Republican nominee held a commanding lead going into Election Day and he is expected to win with over 60 percent of the vote.

Click here to check out our interactive election maps and to drill down on the data as the votes are counted.

Below, a live blog of the latest results and election news.

By DINESH RAMDE, ASSOCIATED PRESSS

MILWAUKEE -- Paul Ryan came up short in his vice presidential bid, but his backup plan worked.

The Wisconsin congressman easily won re-election Tuesday night to the U.S. House seat he has held since 1998. He also won his previous congressional elections by comfortable margins.

Even before he was tapped as Mitt Romney's No. 2, Ryan was seen as a rising star within the Republican Party. As chairman of the powerful House Budget Committee, he gained prominence when he drew up an austere budget blueprint that would reshape Medicare for many people into a voucher-like program. He also attracted attention for wanting to keep tax breaks in place that were set to expire for the wealthy.

He was challenged this year for southeast Wisconsin's 1st District by Democratic businessman Rob Zerban, whose grassroots campaign focused on his credentials as an entrepreneur, and Libertarian Keith Deschler. But it was an uphill climb for both challengers.

Ryan crisscrossed the U.S. as the GOP vice presidential candidate, stopping in Wisconsin for high-dollar campaign fundraisers and a handful of rallies across the state. Meanwhile, Zerban relied on grassroots efforts to introduce himself to local voters. The former Kenosha Board supervisor said he would fight for middle-class families where Ryan had failed them.

Zerban tried for weeks to get Ryan to debate him, without success. And he raised less than half the money that Ryan brought in: The congressman raised $4.9 million compared to Zerban's $2.1 million.

Zerban had hoped his campaign would benefit from the heightened scrutiny Ryan was under as a national candidate, but that never happened.

The 1st District stretches from the shores of Lake Michigan through industrial zones, bedroom communities and farm fields until it reaches Ryan's hometown of Janesville to the west. The seat, which also includes some south Milwaukee suburbs, has been in Republican hands since 1995.

State law allowed the 42-year-old married father to run for Congress and vice president at the same time.

If he had won both races, Ryan would have had to resign from Congress and a special election would have been held to fill the House seat.

Below you can find the Kentucky election results for the 2012 presidential election and the state's House races.

Kentucky and its eight electoral votes have been expected to go to GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney for some time, despite little polling leading up to Election Day. With the exception of showing support for southern governors, the state has consistently voted Republican since the 1950s, according to 270towin.com.

In 2008, the Bluegrass State followed that pattern, casting the majority of its ballots firmly for John McCain.

As far as the House is concerned, there's one race worth watching in Kentucky, the 6th District. The incumbent, "Blue Dog" Democrat Ben Chandler there faced Republican opponent Andy Barr in a repeat of their 2010 contest, which Chandler won by just 700 votes.

John Podhoretz, New York Post
If Mitt Romney wins tonight, it’ll likely be because of something revealed by a little-noticed statistic released yesterday by the polling firm Rasmussen — following a similar statistic last week from Gallup.Rasmussen revealed that for the month of October, its data showed that among likely voters, the electorate is 39 percent Republican and 33 percent Democratic.This comes from a survey of 15,000 people taken over the course of a month. Yes, 15,000 people —15 times the number in a statistically significant poll.

Steve Lombardo, Huffington Post
Later on tonight, Mitt Romney will string together a winning coalition with victories in states ranging from Virginia to Colorado, capturing the popular vote by nearly two points and a sizeable majority of electoral votes, making him the 45th President of the United States.We make this projection with full knowledge that a shift of one or two points in any of six key battleground states could hand Obama the election. But there comes a time when you have to make a judgment and that time is upon us.On the one hand, we are well aware that the majority of swing state polling is giving an edge to...

Larry Kudlow, Investor's Business Daily
Putting aside all the voter models, there's one overlooked point worth making with Election Day at hand. Most times in American politics, optimists win, and pessimists lose. I know that's not always the case. And sometimes it's hard to distinguish between the two. But in this election, I believe Mitt Romney is the optimist, and Barack Obama is the pessimist. It's Romney's election to win.Parenthetically, in my lifetime, it was Dwight Eisenhower the optimist, Stevenson the pessimist; Kennedy the optimist ("Get America moving again"), Nixon the...

The battle between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is now the most anticipated film of the year. Take a look at the trailer for Election: The Movie.

(Trailer for The Huffington Post UK by David Schneider and Handface.)

More TOPICALOLs:

• Dylan Tackles The Coalition In 'Subtorynean Homesick Blues'
• Freddie Starr: The Only Headline That Counts
• David Cameron's Surprising New Twitter Follows
• Disney's Star Wars Episode 7: Sneak Preview
• Apple Maps Shows Where Hurricane Sandy Will Strike
• LOOK: Apple's Latest Must-Have Product
• Wayne Rooney Stars In 'Skyfall' Trailer
• Obama Faces New Terror Videotape
• Government's New Food Labelling Proposal
• Nick Griffin Stars In 'Paranormal Activity 4'
• 'The Great British Bake Off' Gets American Remake
• Ahmadinejad's Fury Over 'The X Factor'
• David Cameron And Boris Johnson Do 'Gangnam Style'
• JK Rowling's The Casual Vacancy: Read The First Page

Mitt. Oh, Mitt. Whatever became of you, anyhow? How did you go from being the guy I voted for as governor of Massachusetts to a guy who is this unrepentant and embarrassing liar? I just feel so sad to see a once-decent fellow prostitute himself so blatantly at every turn, willing to say anything that might possibly eke out one more vote. Such total debasement of yourself, Mitt. How can you stand it?

I mean, what do you tell your children? They are smart enough to know you can't produce 12 million jobs just by saying you will. Surely they know the numbers in your tax-cut budget just don't add up. And it must hurt when they see all these top auto executives publicly laughing in your face at your ridiculous lies about the Jeep and China. What do you say to them? Seriously. What do you tell them? Do you make up some lies for them, too?

Wow. All of a sudden, I wonder what you'd say to your dad! Do you realize that if George Romney were still CEO of an automobile manufacturer that he -- a man of innocent honesty -- would probably have to join his colleagues in calling you a liar? Calling out his own son, in public, to condemn your disgraceful and persistent inability to respect the truth? Even about his very own business, the one that made you a rich kid?

But maybe you've long since had to look the other way whenever your dad pops up. You saw him go from popular CEO to popular governor of Michigan where everybody loved him and reelected him with huge majorities. And you were such a massive disappointment to those of us who elected you governor of Massachusetts. You slunk out of office after one term when your approval rating was, what, something like 34 percent? That must have hurt. And the comparison with your dad must have made it hurt even more.

Oh my God! It's just dawning on me. Your dad ran for president, and one day, in explaining his prior stance on Vietnam, he confessed something that was painfully true: "I was brainwashed." That was the beginning of the end of your father's presidential bid. He washed himself out by speaking the truth.

Did you shudder as your dad blew his big shot at becoming the leader of the free world because he was stupid enough to be honest about something? Did you decide at that moment that you would never, ever let speaking the truth get in your way? Is that when, and why, you now find it perfectly sensible to lie through your teeth about anything and everything, just so long as you don't blow your own last shot at the Oval Office? Of course. Of course.

Oh, Mitt. Oh, I do understand how that could have happened. But please, son, for the love of God don't let it end this way. Don't let yourself remain an object of pity by all who once respected you, who wish better for you, who wish better for the father of your children and the husband of your wife. Long after this election is over, you will have to live with your family. And with yourself, the guy you shave every morning.

Time is running out. There are still a few hours left on Election Day. Please tell us that what we see in you today is not really who you are. Blame it on your advisers or your campaign staff or your speechwriters, if you must. Heck, say you were brainwashed. Say anything.

Oh, no. Sorry. That's what you already do. Well, you know what I mean, Mitt. Just, like, disavow some big lie and apologize for it. Confess that you realize that the way Obama saved the auto industry was, actually, the only way it could have happened. Or that Jeep production will not be shifted to China. Tell us you got carried away with the excitement and the ambition. Tell us you just wanted it so much that you lost your bearings for a minute. It would be the truth. We could all identify. We could all understand. We could even sympathize.

Some of us would even forgive you.

The Truth-o-Meter says: Mostly False | Ad claims Mitt Romney made 'over a hundred million dollars' shutting down paper plant

A dramatic TV ad featuring an employee of a plant shuttered by Bain Capital is getting new life in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Virginia and Florida. It claims Mitt Romney "made over a hundred million dollars" by shutting down a paper products factory in Marion, Ind. Priorities USA Action, a pro-Obama super PAC, created the TV ad, which has also been viewed more than 2.7 million times on YouTube since its debut in June. The ad, designed to portray Romney as an enemy of the middle class, tells the story ...

>> More

Robert Stacy McCain, The American Spectator
BLUE ASH, Ohio -- Tens of thousands of Republicans were jammed into a Friday night rally in the Cincinnati suburb of West Chester, and Ron Sokol leaned over the crowd-control barricade to talk about what he's witnessed during his door-to-door canvassing expeditions."Between now and 2008, I see a world of difference," Sokol said, explaining how much more enthusiasm there is for GOP nominee Mitt Romney -- and how much less for Barack Obama. Sokol also mentioned that Republican get-out-the-vote operations here in Butler County have been bolstered by an influx of volunteers from...

King & Meckler, Wall St. Jrnl
President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney crisscrossed the country Sunday to energize supporters in key states, as new polls forecast a down-to-the-wire election and both sides claimed they had the momentum to win.The Romney camp, combing through surveys taken in the waning days of the campaign, pointed to strength among independent voters, anxiety over the economy and greater enthusiasm among conservatives as signs that the Republican would win, potentially with victories in states such as Pennsylvania and Minnesota that a GOP presidential candidate hasn't carried for decades. 

They can't possibly win on Election Day, but third-party candidates definitely could matter in the outcome of Ohio's already close presidential election.

Voters in Ohio will find five candidates on the ballot other than President Obama and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. If Obama and Romney are tied, as some recent polls have shown, even 1% of votes cast in this battleground state for a third candidate could mean the difference in winning Ohio.

CASTLE ROCK, Colo. -- Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan told supporters Sunday that running mate Mitt Romney "will become a great president."

Ryan made the comments in a county fairground's barn in Colorado, the fourth of five states he visited Sunday.

He said supporters shouldn't be in a position to regret not working harder to elect Romney as president Tuesday. He said no one wants to wake up Wednesday asking if they did everything they could.

Ryan said he understands why voters loved President Barack Obama's message of "hope and change," but he encouraged the crowd to talk to their unhappy neighbors and urge them to vote for Romney.

Earlier Sunday, during an event in Minneapolis, Ryan promised: "Mitt Romney and I are not going to duck the tough issues. We're not going to kick the can down the road.

"We are not going to spend the next four years blaming other people, Ryan said. "We're going to take responsibility."

Ryan also campaigned in Wisconsin and Ohio on Sunday. After Colorado, he flew to Nevada for an early Monday event in Reno.

JERUSALEM, Nov 4 (Reuters) - New Jersey Governor Chris Christie defended his praise for President Barack Obama's support after superstorm Sandy, but said he would stick with his Republican ticket and vote for Mitt Romney in this Tuesday's election.

"The fact of the matter is what New Jerseyans expect from their governor is to work for them, not to work for any particular political party," Christie told Israel's Channel 2 television in an interview broadcast on Sunday.

"I'm a Republican and I have endorsed Mitt Romney, I support him and I intend to vote for him on Tuesday," said Christie, interviewed in his home state by a visiting Israeli television reporter.

Christie, a popular governor widely seen as a possible Republican contender in 2016, had frustrated some in the Romney campaign who feared he had given what could be a critical boost to Obama, a Democrat.

He referred to Obama's pledge of federal aid during a visit to help New Jersey recover from the storm that knocked out power to some 2.4 million of its residents and said:

"If the president of United States comes here and he's willing to help my people and he does it then I'm gonna say nice things about him because he's earned it."

Obama "provided help to my people at one of the worst crises that this state has ever faced," Christie added. "When somebody does a good job, they deserve credit."

"Anybody who is upset in the Republican Party about this, they haven't been to New Jersey. Come see the destruction, come see the loss."


(Writing by Allyn Fisher-Ilan; Editing by Stephen Powell)

Copyright 2012 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

By PHILIP ELLIOTT, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

GREEN BAY, Wis. — It's football Sunday, so why not a quick stop outside the home of the Green Bay Packers before a hectic day of campaigning for Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan?

The Wisconsin congressman and his family joined up with a tailgating party across the street from Lambeau Field. Two of running mate Mitt Romney's five sons, Josh and Matt, were there along with four of Romney's grandchildren.

Ryan was wearing yellow and green striped ties and a Packers jacket. He didn't make formal remarks during the 10-minute visit and didn't go inside the stadium, where the Packers were taking on the Arizona Cardinals in the afternoon.

Ryan is heading to Ohio, Minnesota and Colorado for campaign rallies.

Last month Ryan dropped in on practice at the Cleveland Browns facility.