PDA

View Full Version : Election Day!


Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

24champ
11-06-2012, 10:15 PM
I love my country. Even had Romney won, I planned on making this statement.

This year over 100 Million votes. Although power did not change hands, we live in a country where it can change through the vote of the people. And every few years it does change without violence or bloodshed and with minimal amounts of tampering or fraud. This is a great country and a good system. It has some flaws, but it can be changed.

God bless America.

Well said.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:16 PM
Whats the complete failure, pray tell? You guys have painted amercia as this failing flea market. We have problems, big ones, but things have NOT gotten WORSE over the last four years. Theres nothing to suggest it has. So, yes,you apparently live in a fictional world if you think you have to arm yourself against A BOOGEYMAN!


So because I was never in the army, im less american than you?No, you are every bit as much of an American as I. However, what does this Country want to become? One who supports welfare and social rights? Are you kidding me?

Do we really want to support those who choose to have 3-4 kids without the means to suppor them....and whine about the fact that they can't become miliionaires?

Fact is...this is a "Lazy Country" and Obaman is the leader...the figure head of "LAZY". The rest of the world sees that.

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 10:20 PM
No, you are every bit as much of an American as I. However, what does this Country want to become? One who supports welfare and social rights? Are you kidding me?

Do we really want to support those who choose to have 3-4 kids without the means to suppor them....and whine about the fact that they can't become miliionaires?

Fact is...this is a "Lazy Country" and Obaman is the leader...the figure head of "LAZY". The rest of the world sees that.

The American people are the hardest working people on Earth. You don't gain any political points for insulting your countrymen.

Bronco Yoda
11-06-2012, 10:21 PM
I have been watching the returns for the last 5 hours. You have to give the Obama GOTV team a ton of credit. Their data mining and hundreds of millions invested in GOTV infrastructure really won it for the President. Romney's Project Orca and GOTV effort was okay, but it wasn't much of a match for the organization that Obama built over the course of several years.

I think this is good for the GOP, BTW. I was and remain (even when I casted my ballot for him via write in) a supporter of Jon Huntsman. He's the best candidate we had, because he was the most thoughtful, reasonable, experienced and well rounded. He combined alot of the things people like about the GOP (fiscal conservatism), along with moderate stances on social issues, the environment and foreign affairs where most of America is. I said when he was basically forced out that it was a mistake that would be rued....and it was. Demographics are changing, and you have to tack to the center to win. And the center is where most reasonable proposals are anyway. Kicking out the one true centrist means another loss....just as I predicted here, even in a relatively weak economy. We need to focus on the guys like Huntsman, like Mitch Daniels, like Jeb Bush and other moderate Republicans. Nominating extremist candidates like Akin, like Mourdock etc. when those seats were locks is the reason for the loss. That's what it is. That is what I've been saying all along. They need to learn a lesson.

Romney didn't lose because he was a "Massachussets Moderate". He lost because he was forced by the base into extreme positions in the primary just to win and Obama used that to paint an effective narrative. Come to the center and adjust to reality and we can move forward as a party. I'm glad this got hammered into the party's head. This is the only way. It's the Nixon way and the Eisenhower way and the Bush I way...its the only way to win.

Props to Obama for his victory. I hope he continues to try and push a grand bargain for debt reduction as I continue to view that as the biggest issue. In exchange, we should be grateful that he is willing to compromise (when the House GOP has not) and should offer compromises on tax issues and global warming issues in consideration. There is much room to get stuff done....if they are willing to work with the President. As a moderate Republican, I hope they finally try to work with him.

JMO I think Jon Huntsman would have won this going away.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:21 PM
No, you are every bit as much of an American as I. However, what does this Country want to become? One who supports welfare and social rights? Are you kidding me?

Do we really want to support those who choose to have 3-4 kids without the means to suppor them....and whine about the fact that they can't become miliionaires?

Fact is...this is a "Lazy Country" and Obaman is the leader...the figure head of "LAZY". The rest of the world sees that.

Why do people still fall for the welfare queen argument? As if thats the issue in this country.

First off, youre talking to a democratic socialist, so we can just agree to disagree on the purpose of government, but the problem with this country isnt welfare. At all. If you are concerned about debt, the things that need reform are Social Security (everyone gets this), Medicare (everyone over 65 gets this), and defense. And, obviously, we need to spur job creation (theres still fall out from 08...its growing (check the numbers), but not at the rate it needs to.

If youre complaining that America is "lazy," its not because of Obama. And, the rest of the world? They all SUPPORT Obama. They often see us as religious zealots that have ass backwards healthcare.

BowlenBall
11-06-2012, 10:21 PM
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/222591_3377915505714_54490169_n.jpg

Dude just flat out crushes those polling numbers.

Good for him... the GOP was particularly nasty the last few weeks with him, and I think an apology is in order. Dude is very bright and very non-partisan.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:22 PM
By the way, california now requires condoms in its porn.

BOOO

gunns
11-06-2012, 10:22 PM
I have been watching the returns for the last 5 hours. You have to give the Obama GOTV team a ton of credit. Their data mining and hundreds of millions invested in GOTV infrastructure really won it for the President. Romney's Project Orca and GOTV effort was okay, but it wasn't much of a match for the organization that Obama built over the course of several years.

I think this is good for the GOP, BTW. I was and remain (even when I casted my ballot for him via write in) a supporter of Jon Huntsman. He's the best candidate we had, because he was the most thoughtful, reasonable, experienced and well rounded. He combined alot of the things people like about the GOP (fiscal conservatism), along with moderate stances on social issues, the environment and foreign affairs where most of America is. I said when he was basically forced out that it was a mistake that would be rued....and it was. Demographics are changing, and you have to tack to the center to win. And the center is where most reasonable proposals are anyway. Kicking out the one true centrist means another loss....just as I predicted here, even in a relatively weak economy. We need to focus on the guys like Huntsman, like Mitch Daniels, like Jeb Bush and other moderate Republicans. Nominating extremist candidates like Akin, like Mourdock etc. when those seats were locks is the reason for the loss. That's what it is. That is what I've been saying all along. They need to learn a lesson.

Romney didn't lose because he was a "Massachussets Moderate". He lost because he was forced by the base into extreme positions in the primary just to win and Obama used that to paint an effective narrative. Come to the center and adjust to reality and we can move forward as a party. I'm glad this got hammered into the party's head. This is the only way. It's the Nixon way and the Eisenhower way and the Bush I way...its the only way to win.

Props to Obama for his victory. I hope he continues to try and push a grand bargain for debt reduction as I continue to view that as the biggest issue. In exchange, we should be grateful that he is willing to compromise (when the House GOP has not) and should offer compromises on tax issues and global warming issues in consideration. There is much room to get stuff done....if they are willing to work with the President. As a moderate Republican, I hope they finally try to work with him.

You nailed Huntsman. Most amazing politician I've seen. If the Repubs want to change their face he is definitely the model.

24champ
11-06-2012, 10:23 PM
I have been watching the returns for the last 5 hours. You have to give the Obama GOTV team a ton of credit. Their data mining and hundreds of millions invested in GOTV infrastructure really won it for the President. Romney's Project Orca and GOTV effort was okay, but it wasn't much of a match for the organization that Obama built over the course of several years.

I think this is good for the GOP, BTW. I was and remain (even when I casted my ballot for him via write in) a supporter of Jon Huntsman. He's the best candidate we had, because he was the most thoughtful, reasonable, experienced and well rounded. He combined alot of the things people like about the GOP (fiscal conservatism), along with moderate stances on social issues, the environment and foreign affairs where most of America is. I said when he was basically forced out that it was a mistake that would be rued....and it was. Demographics are changing, and you have to tack to the center to win. And the center is where most reasonable proposals are anyway. Kicking out the one true centrist means another loss....just as I predicted here, even in a relatively weak economy. We need to focus on the guys like Huntsman, like Mitch Daniels, like Jeb Bush and other moderate Republicans. Nominating extremist candidates like Akin, like Mourdock etc. when those seats were locks is the reason for the loss. That's what it is. That is what I've been saying all along. They need to learn a lesson.

Romney didn't lose because he was a "Massachussets Moderate". He lost because he was forced by the base into extreme positions in the primary just to win and Obama used that to paint an effective narrative. Come to the center and adjust to reality and we can move forward as a party. I'm glad this got hammered into the party's head. This is the only way. It's the Nixon way and the Eisenhower way and the Bush I way...its the only way to win.

Props to Obama for his victory. I hope he continues to try and push a grand bargain for debt reduction as I continue to view that as the biggest issue. In exchange, we should be grateful that he is willing to compromise (when the House GOP has not) and should offer compromises on tax issues and global warming issues in consideration. There is much room to get stuff done....if they are willing to work with the President. As a moderate Republican, I hope they finally try to work with him.

Agree with your premise but I don't see the GOP working with Obama, there wasn't any mandate tonight. In fact, nothing really changed tonight. The only thing that will change is the fact the republicans are going to move further to the right. They are already smearing Romney for being a liberal and moderate etc etc.

Just going to be gridlock the next four years.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:28 PM
The American people are the hardest working people on Earth. You don't gain any political points for insulting your countrymen.Obviously 50% of the American people are idots!

Look at the map...you will see that 75% of the map was "Red"

What does that mean?

To me?

50-51% of the Country are the people who want things given to them...who don't want to earn them, and who live a true "Fictional" life.

Believe what you want. But, Obama does nothing but "Spend, spend, spend". Watch our deficet expand...and then go smoke your doobie!

Who cares...right?

Wes Mantooth
11-06-2012, 10:28 PM
No, you are every bit as much of an American as I. However, what does this Country want to become? One who supports welfare and social rights? Are you kidding me?

Do we really want to support those who choose to have 3-4 kids without the means to suppor them....and whine about the fact that they can't become miliionaires?

Fact is...this is a "Lazy Country" and Obaman is the leader...the figure head of "LAZY". The rest of the world sees that.

You make it sound as though the lack of work ethic was born the moment Obama walked into office.

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 10:28 PM
Interesting to see the camera scanning the crowd of Obama supporters in Chicago compared to Romney's in Boston. Romney's crowd was overwhelmingly white. Obama's crowd is almost remarkably diverse.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:30 PM
Obviously 50% of the American people are idots!

Look at the map...you will see that 75% of the map was "Red"

What does that mean?

To me?

50-51% of the Country are the people who want things given to them...who don't want to earn them, and who live a true "Fictional" life.

Believe what you want. But, Obama does nothing but "Spend, spend, spend". Watch our deficet expand...and then go smoke your doobie!

Who cares...right?

You are off your rocker. Most of its red? Like 3 people live in Wyoming, why is space suddenly indicative of anything.

Seriously, i dont know what world you live in. Youre scared of a boogeyman that simply doesnt exist.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:30 PM
By the way, california now requires condoms in its porn.

BOOOCalifornia....Biggest BLUE state in the country!

Remind me....what state is the worst fiscally in the nation??? Hmm?


Texas..............the #1 business state in the country. Oh.....guess what...we're a "RED" state.

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 10:31 PM
Obviously 50% of the American people are idots!

Look at the map...you will see that 75% of the map was "Red"

What does that mean?

To me?

50-51% of the Country are the people who want things given to them...who don't want to earn them, and who live a true "Fictional" life.

Believe what you want. But, Obama does nothing but "Spend, spend, spend". Watch our deficet expand...and then go smoke your doobie!

Who cares...right?

Yikes! Okay. Whatever you say.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:31 PM
You are off your rocker. Most of its red? Like 3 people live in Wyoming, why is space suddenly indicative of anything.

Seriously, i dont know what world you live in. Youre scared of a boogeyman that simply doesnt exist.. So, big shot...what Union do you belong to? Are you worried about your welfare payemnts?

SoCalBronco
11-06-2012, 10:32 PM
Agree with your premise but I don't see the GOP working with Obama, there wasn't any mandate tonight. In fact, nothing really changed tonight. The only thing that will change is the fact the republicans are going to move further to the right. They are already smearing Romney for being a liberal and moderate etc etc.

Just going to be gridlock the next four years.

They can't move further to the right. The math doesn't work. 72% white this year....69% is 2016 and so on and so forth. I think there are a select group of Senators (this was Roh's point about the primary) that will still tack very hard to the right because they are in heavy GOP states so they are worried about a primary battle, but I since the Dems have a firm grip on the Senate (BTW, there was no excuse that despite having 10 seats up to defend and the Dems having 23 seats up to depend, that somehow the Dems could GAIN seats in the Senate...this is squarely the fault of the party extremists and Tea Party morons...which I have been bitching about for some time.) But I think in the House which is more fluid, and thats where the GOP power is, they will have to compromise. The primary issue is not as big an issue there.

I think they also can just read math just as well as anyone can. I hope this strengthens Boehner's hand and in turn weakens Cantor's hand a little bit. Everyone can read the results. I'm not suggesting they become Dems lite, but just be a center right party, rather than a right party.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:32 PM
Yikes! Okay. Whatever you say.Keep looking for handouts....old Borack will get those for you....oh yeah!!!


Just hold out your hands....wait....................there coming... Yay!

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:33 PM
. So, big shot...what Union do you belong to? Are you worried about your welfare payemnts?

I dont belong to a union, nor am i poor or receive welfare.

I do quite well, but thanks for implying im a lazy asshole.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:33 PM
Keep looking for handouts....old Borack will get those for you....oh yeah!!!


Just hold out your hands....wait....................there coming... Yay!

lol, youve gone off your rocker.

Go Galt...nothing is stopping you.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:34 PM
They can't move further to the right. The math doesn't work. 72% white this year....69% is 2016 and so on and so forth. I think there are a select group of Senators (this was Roh's point about the primary) that will still tack very hard to the right because they are in heavy GOP states so they are worried about a primary battle, but I since the Dems have a firm grip on the Senate (BTW, there was no excuse that despite having 10 seats up to defend and the Dems having 23 seats up to depend, that somehow the Dems could GAIN seats in the Senate...this is squarely the fault of the party extremists and Tea Party morons...which I have been b****ing about for some time.) But I think in the House which is more fluid, and thats where the GOP power is, they will have to compromise. The primary issue is not as big an issue there.

I think they also can just read math just as well as anyone can. I hope this strengthens Boehner's hand and in turn weakens Cantor's hand a little bit. Everyone can read the results. I'm not suggesting they become Dems lite, but just be a center right party, rather than a right party.

The only problem with the above is...that it makes sense. Youre talking about a party where many think they get their mandates from God.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:35 PM
Good luck to Osama trying to occomplish all of his socialist agenda's. With the House remaining Republican and the Senate a minor Dem's majority..........good luck to Osama!!!

Chris
11-06-2012, 10:35 PM
I have been watching the returns for the last 5 hours. You have to give the Obama GOTV team a ton of credit. Their data mining and hundreds of millions invested in GOTV infrastructure really won it for the President. Romney's Project Orca and GOTV effort was okay, but it wasn't much of a match for the organization that Obama built over the course of several years.

I think this is good for the GOP, BTW. I was and remain (even when I casted my ballot for him via write in) a supporter of Jon Huntsman. He's the best candidate we had, because he was the most thoughtful, reasonable, experienced and well rounded. He combined alot of the things people like about the GOP (fiscal conservatism), along with moderate stances on social issues, the environment and foreign affairs where most of America is. I said when he was basically forced out that it was a mistake that would be rued....and it was. Demographics are changing, and you have to tack to the center to win. And the center is where most reasonable proposals are anyway. Kicking out the one true centrist means another loss....just as I predicted here, even in a relatively weak economy. We need to focus on the guys like Huntsman, like Mitch Daniels, like Jeb Bush and other moderate Republicans. Nominating extremist candidates like Akin, like Mourdock etc. when those seats were locks is the reason for the loss. That's what it is. That is what I've been saying all along. They need to learn a lesson.

Romney didn't lose because he was a "Massachussets Moderate". He lost because he was forced by the base into extreme positions in the primary just to win and Obama used that to paint an effective narrative. Come to the center and adjust to reality and we can move forward as a party. I'm glad this got hammered into the party's head. This is the only way. It's the Nixon way and the Eisenhower way and the Bush I way...its the only way to win.

Props to Obama for his victory. I hope he continues to try and push a grand bargain for debt reduction as I continue to view that as the biggest issue. In exchange, we should be grateful that he is willing to compromise (when the House GOP has not) and should offer compromises on tax issues and global warming issues in consideration. There is much room to get stuff done....if they are willing to work with the President. As a moderate Republican, I hope they finally try to work with him.

Awesome post. Completely agree.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:36 PM
Good luck to Osama trying to occomplish all of his socialist agenda's. With the House remaining Republican and the Senate a minor Dem's majority..........good luck to Osama!!!

Now he's comparing Obama to Osama Bin Laden.


Classy right wingers. SoCal, see why we doubt there will be cooperation?

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 10:36 PM
They can't move further to the right. The math doesn't work. 72% white this year....69% is 2016 and so on and so forth. I think there are a select group of Senators (this was Roh's point about the primary) that will still tack very hard to the right because they are in heavy GOP states so they are worried about a primary battle, but I since the Dems have a firm grip on the Senate (BTW, there was no excuse that despite having 10 seats up to defend and the Dems having 23 seats up to depend, that somehow the Dems could GAIN seats in the Senate...this is squarely the fault of the party extremists and Tea Party morons...which I have been b****ing about for some time.) But I think in the House which is more fluid, and thats where the GOP power is, they will have to compromise. The primary issue is not as big an issue there.

I think they also can just read math just as well as anyone can. I hope this strengthens Boehner's hand and in turn weakens Cantor's hand a little bit. Everyone can read the results. I'm not suggesting they become Dems lite, but just be a center right party, rather than a right party.

Boehner has issued a statement that said if there is any mandate in this election, it's a mandate for the two parties to come together and solve the nation's problems. Hope he means that. You're right, he has to lever Cantor (who is one of the radicals) out of the way.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:36 PM
I dont belong to a union, nor am i poor or receive welfare.

I do quite well, but thanks for implying im a lazy a-hole.Then, you must have family that recieve welfare or are in Unions? Otherwise...damn are you stupid!

Miss I.
11-06-2012, 10:37 PM
California....Biggest BLUE state in the country!

Remind me....what state is the worst fiscally in the nation??? Hmm?


Texas..............the #1 business state in the country. Oh.....guess what...we're a "RED" state.

Do you recall who the governantor was who destroyed California's economy? He was Republican and his policies truly set back the world's 8th largest economy. Do I blame all Republicans for the fact that Schwarzenegger is a moron? No and he was voted in by what you keep calling a liberal state? If they only ever vote Democrat how did he get in to office?

gunns
11-06-2012, 10:37 PM
No, you are every bit as much of an American as I. However, what does this Country want to become? One who supports welfare and social rights? Are you kidding me?

Do we really want to support those who choose to have 3-4 kids without the means to suppor them....and whine about the fact that they can't become miliionaires?

Fact is...this is a "Lazy Country" and Obaman is the leader...the figure head of "LAZY". The rest of the world sees that.

You keep falling for the stereotypical welfare argument. First off the people receiving TANF, which is what welfare is, is at an all time low. Since welfare reform and time limits it's almost inconsequential. Yes the food stamp rolls tripled in 2009. This wasn't because of Obama, it was because of Bush. They have dropped significantly since and new requirements are removing more from the rolls. If there is anything that is costing this country it's medicaid. Medical has always been up there with defense costs and that includes Medicare. It's why something needs to be done because no one except the upper crust can afford catastrophic medical costs, let alone normal medical costs. Maybe Obamacare isn't the answer but one needs to be found quickly. Your argument is very very stereotypical....and lazy.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:37 PM
Boehner has issued a statement that said if there is any mandate in this election, it's a mandate for the two parties to come together and solve the nation's problems. Hope he means that. You're right, he has to lever Cantor (who is one of the radicals) out of the way.

Seriously, need to get rid of the radicals.

theAPAOps5
11-06-2012, 10:37 PM
I think we have moved into the meltdown portion of tonights festivities. LLLLLEEEEEETTTTT'S GET READY to RRRRUUUUUUMMMMMMBBBBLLLEEEE

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Gcyyc8owqoM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:38 PM
Given that I'm a business owner...this is great that my taxes will be raised and that I will now have to lay off several workers.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:38 PM
Then, you must have family that recieve welfare or are in Unions? Otherwise...damn are you stupid!

Nope, I was raised upper middle class, non union family (though we are pro union)

We just have brains and realize we live in a society.

SoCalBronco
11-06-2012, 10:39 PM
Boehner has issued a statement that said if there is any mandate in this election, it's a mandate for the two parties to come together and solve the nation's problems. Hope he means that. You're right, he has to lever Cantor (who is one of the radicals) out of the way.

Boehner very much wants to get something done, but yeah, its been Cantor and also the group of House GOP freshman that has made it a non-starter from a votes perspective. We'll see what happens. I really want something done on the debt issue, thats my No. 1 issue.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:41 PM
Do you recall who the governantor was who destroyed California's economy? He was Republican and his policies truly set back the world's 8th largest economy. Do I blame all Republicans for the fact that Schwarzenegger is a moron? No and he was voted in by what you keep calling a liberal state? If they only ever vote Democrat how did he get in to office?O.K. smart one.....whose the Countries #1 economy? Do you even know? Have you been educated and understand who that is???

Let me educate you....it's TEXAS. How does Texas vote??? How do they always vot???

They vote for businesses...they vote for less government!

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:41 PM
Boehner very much wants to get something done, but yeah, its been Cantor and also the group of House GOP freshman that has made it a non-starter from a votes perspective. We'll see what happens. I really want something done on the debt issue, thats my No. 1 issue.

Gonna be hard to do when republicans all signed Grovers dumb anti tax plan.

gunns
11-06-2012, 10:41 PM
Keep looking for handouts....old Borack will get those for you....oh yeah!!!


Just hold out your hands....wait....................there coming... Yay!

Whew someone is a bitter little man tonight that Gekko didn't get in. Hope your in Colorado, smoke one, mellow out.

ghwk
11-06-2012, 10:42 PM
Obviously 50% of the American people are idots!

Look at the map...you will see that 75% of the map was "Red"

What does that mean?

To me?

50-51% of the Country are the people who want things given to them...who don't want to earn them, and who live a true "Fictional" life.

Believe what you want. But, Obama does nothing but "Spend, spend, spend". Watch our deficet expand...and then go smoke your doobie!

Who cares...right?

Now you are showing every sign of why some republicans are idiots. It's a red and blue world to you, your way or the highway, no shades of grey, one simple answer for everything. No complexity exists in the world, because its too damn confusing for you. You know what, now F you. I'm part of that 51%, no one has handed me **** and I started working when I was 13 chucking newspapers and have been working ever since, I have two kids and own a home and I work hard.

Tough for you, your life sucks.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:42 PM
Nope, I was raised upper middle class, non union family (though we are pro union)

We just have brains and realize we live in a society. In a society that agrees with killing small businesses and increasing our national degt?

ShutDownPoster
11-06-2012, 10:43 PM
Well, on the lighter side of things....

And I quote my Chinese Colleages...' So Peter, how is your ERECTION day?' I kid you not.

24champ
11-06-2012, 10:43 PM
They can't move further to the right. The math doesn't work. 72% white this year....69% is 2016 and so on and so forth. I think there are a select group of Senators (this was Roh's point about the primary) that will still tack very hard to the right because they are in heavy GOP states so they are worried about a primary battle, but I since the Dems have a firm grip on the Senate (BTW, there was no excuse that despite having 10 seats up to defend and the Dems having 23 seats up to depend, that somehow the Dems could GAIN seats in the Senate...this is squarely the fault of the party extremists and Tea Party morons...which I have been b****ing about for some time.) But I think in the House which is more fluid, and thats where the GOP power is, they will have to compromise. The primary issue is not as big an issue there.

I think they also can just read math just as well as anyone can. I hope this strengthens Boehner's hand and in turn weakens Cantor's hand a little bit. Everyone can read the results. I'm not suggesting they become Dems lite, but just be a center right party, rather than a right party.

Sure they can move further to the right. You'll see Palin back in the fray, and the Santorums. But yeah I agree on every point there except the House compromising, I don't see it. Hope there's no gridlock.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:44 PM
In a society that agrees with killing small businesses and increasing our national degt?

Youre like talking to a wall.

get the **** over it, your life isnt gonna change.

ghwk
11-06-2012, 10:44 PM
Given that I'm a business owner...this is great that my taxes will be raised and that I will now have to lay off several workers.

Then your republican mantra should be that you didn't plan well enough. You failed.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-06-2012, 10:44 PM
im going to bed

Jetland
11-06-2012, 10:45 PM
I guess it is for the best the pricejj decided to step away for the evening.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:45 PM
Now you are showing every sign of why some republicans are idiots. It's a red and blue world to you, your way or the highway, no shades of grey, one simple answer for everything. No complexity exists in the world, because its too damn confusing for you. You know what, now F you. I'm part of that 51%, no one has handed me **** and I started working when I was 13 chucking newspapers and have been working ever since, I have two kids and own a home and I work hard.

Tough for you, your life sucks. I would if I were in Colorado! ;D

But....after we step into an even bigge recession...than was seen in 2009...I'll be looking towards this board to hear all of the whining etc...than is to happen with such a lousy leader in the presidency.

ghwk
11-06-2012, 10:47 PM
I would if I were in Colorado! ;D

But....after we step into an even bigge recession...than was seen in 2009...I'll be looking towards this board to hear all of the whining etc...than is to happen with such a lousy leader in the presidency.

And we'll be looking for you to eat crow when you are proven wrong.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:48 PM
Then your republican mantra should be that you didn't plan well enough. You failed.That's right. So, we will move jobs over seas, and we will lay more workers off....and America can continue to try and figure out how to fun welfare and medicare, and unemployment.

You know...the "Blue" way....we are all in it together...like the Russions...I mean the Socialists!

24champ
11-06-2012, 10:48 PM
Do you recall who the governantor was who destroyed California's economy? He was Republican and his policies truly set back the world's 8th largest economy. Do I blame all Republicans for the fact that Schwarzenegger is a moron? No and he was voted in by what you keep calling a liberal state? If they only ever vote Democrat how did he get in to office?

California's economy was destroyed well before Arnie showed up on the scene.

enjolras
11-06-2012, 10:48 PM
Given that I'm a business owner...this is great that my taxes will be raised and that I will now have to lay off several workers.

That's such bullsh*t. How is a higher rate on personal income tax affect your hiring decisions at all? 100% of that income is taken after your business expenses (even if you're organized as an LLC or S-Corp). Even then it's only on income beyond $250k.

I'm a business owner. I'll be directly affected by a tax increase. It won't change my businesses finances at all. Not even a little bit.

Miss I.
11-06-2012, 10:50 PM
O.K. smart one.....whose the Countries #1 economy? Do you even know? Have you been educated and understand who that is???

Let me educate you....it's TEXAS. How does Texas vote??? How do they always vot???

They vote for businesses...they vote for less government!

Don't be such a tool. I don't disagree with everything you posted, but I do get tired of simplistic assumptions made about California and people's political associations in general. I am capable of seeing the weaknesses in all the parties and I personally have never stuck strictly to one party or the other and I grew up in California and most of the people I knew were and are straight up conservative Republicans. Broad generalizations just irritate me is all. Texas has not always been a Republican stronghold, but it is now. If I recall correctly Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat and a Texan and I believe Texas went Democrat for Kennedy (yes I know that was a long time ago, but that says to me they don't and didn't always go Republican).

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:50 PM
And we'll be looking for you to eat crow when you are proven wrong.Ghwk....I hope so. And I'll eat it. Don't forget me...stick it in my face...............please do.

But, I would bet money...............and I have been quite successful in business...that it won't be the case.

Osama is a joke.......and anyone who knows people.....understands that.

Miss I.
11-06-2012, 10:51 PM
California's economy was destroyed well before Arnie showed up on the scene.

fair enough, but part of the point of bringing up Arnold is that it is simplistic and wrong to simply state California is only a liberal bastion. Reagan and Nixon are both products of California and last I checked, Republicans.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:52 PM
Youre like talking to a wall.

get the **** over it, your life isnt gonna change.No, i won't...but, the lives of my employees will!

gunns
11-06-2012, 10:55 PM
Ghwk....I hope so. And I'll eat it. Don't forget me...stick it in my face...............please do.

But, I would bet money...............and I have been quite successful in business...that it won't be the case.

Osama is a joke.......and anyone who knows people.....understands that.

Obama had Osama killed. Damn dude, how could you be successful in business AND have employees after 4 years of the supposed "joke"? And tonight, the majority of Americans disagree with you.

enjolras
11-06-2012, 10:56 PM
States by GDP:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP

California is number 1. For more up to date numbers you have to tease it out here:

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/2012/pdf/gsp0612.pdf

California is #1 and has increased it's lead.

8 out of 10 of the top GDP states went blue tonight.

ghwk
11-06-2012, 10:57 PM
Ghwk....I hope so. And I'll eat it. Don't forget me...stick it in my face...............please do.

But, I would bet money...............and I have been quite successful in business...that it won't be the case.

Osama is a joke.......and anyone who knows people.....understands that.

Actually I'd rather you buy me a beer than my rubbing your nose in it. I don't feel big by making others feel small. I get to pick the beer though. :)

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 10:58 PM
Don't be such a tool. I don't disagree with everything you posted, but I do get tired of simplistic assumptions made about California and people's political associations in general. I am capable of seeing the weaknesses in all the parties and I personally have never stuck strictly to one party or the other and I grew up in California and most of the people I knew were and are straight up conservative Republicans. Broad generalizations just irritate me is all. Texas has not always been a Republican stronghold, but it is now. If I recall correctly Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat and a Texan and I believe Texas went Democrat for Kennedy (yes I know that was a long time ago, but that says to me they don't and didn't always go Republican).Come on, Kennedy and Johnson were a life time ago.

The bottom line is...Texans understand business...they represent about 20% of the Nations GNP....and they are republican. This is about the economy........................................... .................................................. .................not about a bunch of Osama bull ****.

You reply back in 4yrs and tell me wha this ass whipe has accomplished. If you think that he has done anything worht a turd....you tell me how i can make it up to you? A beer? A vacation? etc. This guy is a waste....and he will accomplish making this country more in debt!

theAPAOps5
11-06-2012, 10:59 PM
Ghwk....I hope so. And I'll eat it. Don't forget me...stick it in my face...............please do.

But, I would bet money...............and I have been quite successful in business...that it won't be the case.

Osama is a joke.......and anyone who knows people.....understands that.

Like him or not, don't you think its a little low rent to keep referring to him as Osama. You are equating with him a person responsible for thousands of deaths. Kind of kills the validity of any argument you make, much of which would be great discussion and very much full of merit, as you appear incredibly simple minded. If you run a business then we all know you aren't simple minded. Why dumb yourself down?

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 11:00 PM
Actually I'd rather you buy me a beer than my rubbing your nose in it. I don't feel big by making others feel small. I get to pick the beer though. :)Deal. I hope I'm wrong..............but, I'm seldon so.

Sorry times!

PS. I'd buy you a beer regardless! ;D

Quoydogs
11-06-2012, 11:00 PM
Actually I'd rather you buy me a beer than my rubbing your nose in it. I don't feel big by making others feel small. I get to pick the beer though. :)

After what you guys just passed F' Beer. Light it up.

houghtam
11-06-2012, 11:03 PM
California....Biggest BLUE state in the country!

Remind me....what state is the worst fiscally in the nation??? Hmm?


Texas..............the #1 business state in the country. Oh.....guess what...we're a "RED" state.

Take a look at how much federal aid you receive, vs. how much you pay in taxes, and then get back to us.

You are clueless.

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 11:04 PM
Like him or not, don't you think its a little low rent to keep referring to him as Osama. You are equating with him a person responsible for thousands of deaths. Kind of kills the validity of any argument you make, much of which would be great discussion and very much full of merit, as you appear incredibly simple minded. If you run a business then we all know you aren't simple minded. Why dumb yourself down?I feel like this country was about to go "under". We were in the worst situatin since the great depression. And, what did this idot decide to conentrate on? He pushed through ObamaCare......without any plan (13,000 pages at this time) and any way to accomplish it...with a cost of at least $1Trillion more to our debt. This isn't a leader, he's a terrorist undercover!!!!

Zero business experience..................he was a Union Organizor for Craps Sakes!!!!

Hamrob
11-06-2012, 11:09 PM
Take a look at how much federal aid you receive, vs. how much you pay in taxes, and then get back to us.

You are clueless.No federal aid here buddie. Do you know anything about business? Do you have a business degree....MBA?

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 11:10 PM
Boehner very much wants to get something done, but yeah, its been Cantor and also the group of House GOP freshman that has made it a non-starter from a votes perspective. We'll see what happens. I really want something done on the debt issue, thats my No. 1 issue.

Mitch McConnell sent a far less conciliatory message. Basically, he's still saying, "My way or the highway." The way the numbers are shaping up, this is an ass kicking of the Republican Party. Sounds like their leadership is just going to stay in their bubble and pretend it didn't happen. If I was to characterize this election, I would say the people are sending a very clear message: They are sick of extremists and sick of gridlock. IMO, the Right in Washington is just going to ignore it.

theAPAOps5
11-06-2012, 11:11 PM
I feel like this country was about to go "under". We were in the worst situatin since the great depression. And, what did this idot decide to conentrate on? He pushed through ObamaCare......without any plan (13,000 pages at this time) and any way to accomplish it...with a cost of at least $1Trillion more to our debt. This isn't a leader, he's a terrorist undercover!!!!

Zero business experience..................he was a Union Organizor for Craps Sakes!!!!

Why not stop here? Again valid points lost because of over the top hyperbole. I know how it is when you are angry and frustrated coupled mixed with being very passionate about the subject, its easier said than done to not blow your top. Just seems to me calling him Osama and terrorist is more a poor reflection of you than Obama.

I won't bring it up again, just thought I would ask why you would continue saying it. Good luck and hopefully it isn't as bad as it looks right now

houghtam
11-06-2012, 11:19 PM
No federal aid here buddie. Do you know anything about business? Do you have a business degree....MBA?

Talking about the state of Texas, douchenozzle.

DenverBroncosJM
11-06-2012, 11:25 PM
One reason I didn't vote for Mitt... Magic underwear, it's really hard to believe in someone who everyday decides to wear his magic undergarments

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 11:29 PM
NBC just declared Virginia for Obama. That's something of a surprise.

24champ
11-06-2012, 11:33 PM
Mitch McConnell sent a far less conciliatory message. Basically, he's still saying, "My way or the highway." The way the numbers are shaping up, this is an ass kicking of the Republican Party. Sounds like their leadership is just going to stay in their bubble and pretend it didn't happen. If I was to characterize this election, I would say the people are sending a very clear message: They are sick of extremists and sick of gridlock. IMO, the Right in Washington is just going to ignore it.

Boehner pretty much said the same thing, higher tax rates is a non starter. Looks like the House is digging in.

Nobody is holding hands and singing kumbya after the election.

Rohirrim
11-06-2012, 11:40 PM
Boehner pretty much said the same thing, higher tax rates is a non starter. Looks like the House is digging in.

Nobody is holding hands and singing kumbya after the election.

I think most Americans realize we can't go on much longer with the worst income disparity in our history and an economy that keeps shoveling the wealth to the top 1% while leaving everybody else high and dry. 60% agree with Obama that it's time the rich started paying more. The Right took a pretty big hit in this election. If they want to go scorched earth, they're going to obliterate their party.

Hulamau
11-06-2012, 11:45 PM
Well Nate Silver is looking like the Bodhisattva of pronosticators and poll analysers about now! Hes the only one who turned Florida light blue last night making it a true toss up saying it was about 57% likely to go to Obama now and judged it almost a flip of the coin with a slight lean toward the POTUS.

Basically he hit it out of the park across the board when all is said and done ....its a lesson in the power of mathematics and reason over mis-informed partisan 'projection' and wishful thinking.

Time for a restart and I hope Obama gets a little cooperation this time around .. for all of our sakes.

houghtam
11-06-2012, 11:47 PM
Well Nate Silver is looking like the Bodhisattva of pronosticators and poll analysers about now! Hes the only one who turned Florida light blue last night making it a true toss up saying it was about 57% likely to go to Obama now and judged it almost a flip of the coin with a slight lean toward the POTUS.

Basically he hit it out of the park....its a lesson in the power of mathematics and reason over mis-informed partisan 'projection' and wishful thinking.

Time for a restart and I hope Obama gets a little cooperation this time around .. for all of our sakes.

QFT

24champ
11-06-2012, 11:52 PM
I think most Americans realize we can't go on much longer with the worst income disparity in our history and an economy that keeps shoveling the wealth to the top 1% while leaving everybody else high and dry. 60% agree with Obama that it's time the rich started paying more. The Right took a pretty big hit in this election. If they want to go scorched earth, they're going to obliterate their party.

That's the route they are taking, unfortunately. More Akins, Murdochs, O'Donnel, Palin...the list goes on, they never learn.

Play2win
11-07-2012, 12:04 AM
Hopefully, this forces the issue to the SCOTUS and they amazingly discover that there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to outlaw pot, and therefore, by the 10th amendment, it's up to the states to decide.

Hear, hear.

I think there are a lot of issues that the states should decide.

wolf754life
11-07-2012, 12:25 AM
lol, dems thinking things will get better.......

fdf
11-07-2012, 12:47 AM
Mitch McConnell sent a far less conciliatory message. Basically, he's still saying, "My way or the highway." The way the numbers are shaping up, this is an ass kicking of the Republican Party. Sounds like their leadership is just going to stay in their bubble and pretend it didn't happen. If I was to characterize this election, I would say the people are sending a very clear message: They are sick of extremists and sick of gridlock. IMO, the Right in Washington is just going to ignore it.

If they were sick of extremists, they would not have elected a man who thinks cutting 1% off federal spending several years in the future is "draconian" and regards trillion dollar plus deficits as a political problem, not an economic problem.

That said, I wish the Republicans had lost the house tonight too. America is going over the cliff and it's very important that Americans know who is to blame. It's far better to have a coherent opposition party than for everyone to share responsibility for what is coming.

In any event, now we are Greece. And we have no German sugar daddy to bail us out. Hold onto your hats.

So go Broncos! If we are going to have to live thru the endgame of the modern progressive state, at least the Broncos could win one more Superbowl.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 12:50 AM
If they were sick of extremists, they would not have elected a man who thinks cutting 1% off federal spending several years in the future is "draconian" and regards trillion dollar plus deficits as a political problem, not an economic problem.

That said, I wish the Republicans had lost the house tonight too. America is going over the cliff and it's very important that Americans know who is to blame. It's far better to have a coherent opposition party than for everyone to share responsibility for what is coming.

In any event, now we are Greece. And we have no German sugar daddy to bail us out. Hold onto your hats.

So go Broncos! If we are going to have to live thru the endgame of the modern progressive state, at least the Broncos could win one more Superbowl.

Jesus Christ, drama queen.

Or you could contact your reps and let them know that working with the (now two-term) President won't be the end of the ****ing world as we know it, and maybe now that they don't have that be-all end-all goal of denying Obama a second term they should, you know, WORK FOR THE ****ING COUNTRY INSTEAD OF THEIR ****ING SELVES.

But sure. Giving up and bitching about the end of days seems like a much easier proposition.

24champ
11-07-2012, 12:52 AM
Donald Trump, unhinged.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

Durango
11-07-2012, 01:08 AM
Donald Trump, unhinged.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

Honestly, I think Trump has come unhinged. Doesn't he have handlers or family to tell him to shut the hell up? He sounds like a fool.

KevinJames
11-07-2012, 01:15 AM
saw someone say

"Trump sounds like hes ready to turn against USA completely and invest in a super power."

:lalalala:

beardedwonder
11-07-2012, 01:37 AM
trump 2016?

it would be another 4 years of democrats

ColoradoDarin
11-07-2012, 04:04 AM
Mitch McConnell sent a far less conciliatory message. Basically, he's still saying, "My way or the highway." The way the numbers are shaping up, this is an ass kicking of the Republican Party. Sounds like their leadership is just going to stay in their bubble and pretend it didn't happen. If I was to characterize this election, I would say the people are sending a very clear message: They are sick of extremists and sick of gridlock. IMO, the Right in Washington is just going to ignore it.

Really? I don't think the results say that at all. Obama will run up a good count in the electoral college, but the popular vote total is almost a split, while the House remains solidly in Rep hands, Dems gain in the Senate and Reps gain another governor (maybe 2 more as those are still to close to call).

Take all of that together and it sounds like people voted for gridlock, a continuation of the last 2 years.

Drek
11-07-2012, 04:29 AM
Really? I don't think the results say that at all. Obama will run up a good count in the electoral college, but the popular vote total is almost a split, while the House remains solidly in Rep hands, Dems gain in the Senate and Reps gain another governor (maybe 2 more as those are still to close to call).

Take all of that together and it sounds like people voted for gridlock, a continuation of the last 2 years.

Obama will win by 1-2%, and be over 50%. He's the first Dem to win >50% of the popular vote, now in both elections, since FDR. 1-2% popular vote with no legitimate 3rd party is a solid win, breaking 50% is also a solid win.

Obama's views (higher taxes on the wealthy to bring down the debt, leveling military spending out and stopping it's rapid growth, etc.) are all views that have bee strongly supported in election polls and are key reasons he got elected.

The senate and congressional seats in play favored GOP pickups and the GOP failed to gain any ground, instead losing more to the Dems.

The fringe right has been denounced this election as a traditionally red seat was given up by Murdock and a very weak McCaskill destroyed Akin. If the GOP fails to realize that social conservatism is being repudiated by mainstream America they'll lose more ground in the 2012 midterm.

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 05:17 AM
Obama will win by 1-2%, and be over 50%. He's the first Dem to win >50% of the popular vote, now in both elections, since FDR. 1-2% popular vote with no legitimate 3rd party is a solid win, breaking 50% is also a solid win.

Obama's views (higher taxes on the wealthy to bring down the debt, leveling military spending out and stopping it's rapid growth, etc.) are all views that have bee strongly supported in election polls and are key reasons he got elected.

The senate and congressional seats in play favored GOP pickups and the GOP failed to gain any ground, instead losing more to the Dems.

The fringe right has been denounced this election as a traditionally red seat was given up by Murdock and a very weak McCaskill destroyed Akin. If the GOP fails to realize that social conservatism is being repudiated by mainstream America they'll lose more ground in the 2012 midterm.

That's a convenient read and all. But as of now President O still counts 3 million less votes than GWB got in 2004. Even as the nation has grown larger over 8 years. So let's not pretend that O is building any bridges. Some people just stayed home.

BroncoInferno
11-07-2012, 06:03 AM
So you're saying he did okay, except for the races he didn't? And I think you mean Nevada instead of AZ (he predicted Angle to win by 3 and Reid won by 5.5). There were only 5 close races in the senate that year and he got 3 wrong, including 1 massively wrong (8.5% off). He gave the Republicans as much chance of picking up 60+ seats as he has given Romney to win (R's picked up 63).

So yeah, he's not all that great.

LOL Silver slapped the taste out your right-wing mouth. Once again, he nailed the election.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 06:03 AM
California....Biggest BLUE state in the country!

Remind me....what state is the worst fiscally in the nation??? Hmm?


Texas..............the #1 business state in the country. Oh.....guess what...we're a "RED" state.

9 of the 10 highest per capita income states in the country were won by Obama.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 06:19 AM
Anybody watch Faux News last night? I didn't but am reading this morning that it was high comedy. A good tween on the subject:

Someone should let Karl Rove know that while he's questioning the result in Ohio, Obama is winning in Florida, Colorado, and Virginia.@jonlovett

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 06:25 AM
9 of the 10 highest per capita income states in the country were won by Obama.

...he says without mentioning how much of that is indicative towards cost of living (NY, CA, etc)

Kaylore
11-07-2012, 06:34 AM
Really happy the house is still GOP. I'll be honest with you, this actually bodes well for the 2014 elections for Republicans. Typically the party that wins the white house wins decently in congress. Obama barely moved the needle.

So either Republicans will back the senate and more of the house next election, or the economy will (hopefully) have improved enough that we hold steady at the very least.

I am disappointed but not without hope. I just really would like to see both parties put in a decent bi-partisan effort. And hopefully Obama won't go off on some pet project and put together a real economic plan for this country.

gunns
11-07-2012, 06:40 AM
That's a convenient read and all. But as of now President O still counts 3 million less votes than GWB got in 2004. Even as the nation has grown larger over 8 years. So let's not pretend that O is building any bridges. Some people just stayed home.

LOL! I think it was 2004 that helped out last night. People had it pretty damn good in the 90's, got something different in the 2000's, had a national tragedy, and after the 2004 election found that what they had elected had created a clusterfuc based on lies and ineptness. They also realized that party had handed the next President a mess of porportions unseen by these generations and he hadn't done such a bad job in handling it and feared going back to a party that has tried to hand us a stereotypical Democrat when it's actually them that are doing exactly that.

GreatBronco16
11-07-2012, 07:01 AM
Well I tried to fire the President yesterday, but I got over rulled. Now that this is over, I'll sit and wait to see if I'm one of the unlucky ones to be laid off now. Hopefully I have enough time in to make it.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 07:01 AM
...he says without mentioning how much of that is indicative towards cost of living (NY, CA, etc)

8 out of 10 of the highest GDP states as well, if I'm not mistaken. Says at least a little something. But keep ignoring that data. It's what the GOP did the last two elections. Maybe they finally learned their lesson? I guess we'll see.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 07:03 AM
8 out of 10 of the highest GDP states as well, if I'm not mistaken. Says at least a little something. But keep ignoring that data. It's what the GOP did the last two elections. Maybe they finally learned their lesson? I guess we'll see.

...I'd bet a good chunk of money that 80%+ of the high income rural counties were red and that the lower income but much higher populated urban settings went blue, so don't pretend it's nearly as cut and dry as you're smoke&mirrors-ing it to be.

baja
11-07-2012, 07:05 AM
I think the demographics of the relative constituencies is interesting.

Romney - White men & Seniors

Obama - Women & Latinos & Blacks

Kaylore
11-07-2012, 07:06 AM
This election was hardly and indictment of the GOP. I think overwhelmingly the populace felt like Obama inheritted at least some of this and Romney was demonized enough that they felt they will give what they know more time. The fact that many people voted a split ticket is clear on this. If Dems won across the board, that would be one thing. They didn't. And nothing substantively changed.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 07:13 AM
Blart posted this in the WRP. Worth a read.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2012/11/obama_the_moderate_republican_what_the_2012_electi on_should_teach_the_gop.html

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 07:47 AM
LOL! I think it was 2004 that helped out last night. People had it pretty damn good in the 90's, got something different in the 2000's, had a national tragedy, and after the 2004 election found that what they had elected had created a clusterfuc based on lies and ineptness. They also realized that party had handed the next President a mess of porportions unseen by these generations and he hadn't done such a bad job in handling it and feared going back to a party that has tried to hand us a stereotypical Democrat when it's actually them that are doing exactly that.

I think you're missing the point. There were less actual votes cast last night then in 2004. By a wide margin. President Obama's actually about where John Kerry was in number of votes cast.

He even currently has less votes than McCain did in 2008. He didn't win by big-tent coalition building. He won because a lot of people stayed home rather than vote for either one of these two.

Don't get me wrong, the scorched earth tactics proved brilliant in the end. It may have won what would otherwise have been a tough election to pull out. But let's not pretend this is part of some vast political realignment. Based on current count, 12 million voters that voted in 2008 didn't show up this time, even though the election was tighter. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of either candidate.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 08:02 AM
Beavis, you can spin it any way you want to make yourself feel better. You can ignore reality just like Dick Morris, Peggy Noonan, Michael Barone, George Will, Laura Ingraham, and Karl Rove, and a host of others chose to. But the facts on the ground are that women, Latinos, young, and African Americans supported Obama. If you're interested not only in a political present but a political future you need to take note of those demographics. Winning white men, evangelicals, and the south isn't going to get it done any more. Need not only a bigger tent, but perhaps a whole new one.

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 08:07 AM
But the facts on the ground are that women, Latinos, young, and African Americans supported Obama.

And they did so by turning out 10 million fewer people than last time.

Interesting method of "support"

Fewer votes than McCain is now a super-mandate. You were saying something about spin?

baja
11-07-2012, 08:11 AM
Beavis, you can spin it any way you want to make yourself feel better. You can ignore reality just like Dick Morris, Peggy Noonan, Michael Barone, George Will, Laura Ingraham, and Karl Rove, and a host of others chose to. But the facts on the ground are that women, Latinos, young, and African Americans supported Obama. If you're interested not only in a political present but a political future you need to take note of those demographics. Winning white men, evangelicals, and the south isn't going to get it done any more. Need not only a bigger tent, but perhaps a whole new one.

That's what I saw. The republican party is in trouble going forward.

baja
11-07-2012, 08:12 AM
And they did so by turning out 10 million fewer people than last time.

Interesting method of "support"

Fewer votes than McCain is now a super-mandate. You were saying something about spin?

I don't think anyone sees this election as a mandate.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:13 AM
If they were sick of extremists, they would not have elected a man who thinks cutting 1% off federal spending several years in the future is "draconian" and regards trillion dollar plus deficits as a political problem, not an economic problem.

That said, I wish the Republicans had lost the house tonight too. America is going over the cliff and it's very important that Americans know who is to blame. It's far better to have a coherent opposition party than for everyone to share responsibility for what is coming.

In any event, now we are Greece. And we have no German sugar daddy to bail us out. Hold onto your hats.

So go Broncos! If we are going to have to live thru the endgame of the modern progressive state, at least the Broncos could win one more Superbowl.

Huge drama queen.

Greece? You clearly know nothing about the eurocrisis

Beantown Bronco
11-07-2012, 08:15 AM
Huge drama queen.

Greece? You clearly know nothing about the eurocrisis

To be fair, he got that part from his "source".

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:17 AM
This election was hardly and indictment of the GOP. I think overwhelmingly the populace felt like Obama inheritted at least some of this and Romney was demonized enough that they felt they will give what they know more time. The fact that many people voted a split ticket is clear on this. If Dems won across the board, that would be one thing. They didn't. And nothing substantively changed.

Well, i think its both. You hit on something when you said they voted a split ticket, they wanted to preserve some sort of balance, but its no secret that the right has moved VERY FAR to the right, and i dont think the nation has much desire for that.

I doubt a ton changes, it doesnt look like republicans in congress are any more willing to make deals than they were last night, but hopefully we can get something done.

But this idea that America has suddenly fallen off a cliff, when ummm, all we've been doing is growing (not at a great rate, but it hasnt been getting worse) is absurd. We aren't greece, far from it. I dont know where these guys get this stuff from

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:18 AM
Not to mention "the modern progressive state" we live in still looks like a republican haven to me. The crazies in the republican party shifted the entire nation to the right with them.

fdf
11-07-2012, 08:18 AM
Jesus Christ, drama queen.

Or you could contact your reps and let them know that working with the (now two-term) President won't be the end of the ****ing world as we know it, and maybe now that they don't have that be-all end-all goal of denying Obama a second term they should, you know, WORK FOR THE ****ING COUNTRY INSTEAD OF THEIR ****ING SELVES.

But sure. Giving up and b****ing about the end of days seems like a much easier proposition.

The progressive movement will have to be allowed to destroy itself before things can get better. Bipartisan cover for that process only confuses things. Conservatives have no power to stop what is coming. America firmly rejected smaller, limited government as an option last night. That's the big picture of this election. Small government advocates should not participate in shaping the particulars of how the endgame plays out--that only confuses what is going on.

End of days? No. Endgame of the modern progressive state? Yes. We ARE Greece now. Except without a German sugar daddy to bail us out.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:21 AM
The progressive movement will have to be allowed to destroy itself before things can get better. Bipartisan cover for that process only confuses things. Conservatives have no power to stop what is coming. America firmly rejected smaller, limited government as an option last night. That's the big picture of this election. Small government advocates should not participate in shaping the particulars of how the endgame plays out--that only confuses what is going on.

End of days? No. Endgame of the modern progressive state? Yes. We ARE Greece now. Except without a German sugar daddy to bail us out.

YOU ARE ABSURD!

First off, we are not Greece. Not even close. Plus, one of greece's major problems was that it couldn't devalue its currency during its crisis because they were on the Euro. We'll never have that problem and American bonds are still the best bet around. We also seem to have pretty much zero inflation threat at this point.

Second, for a "progressive" state, we arent all that progressive. At all. Our stimulus was small (and it did exactly what economists said it would...great growth, but growth too slow) and the healthcare bill you guys love to bitch about didnt even involve any sort of public option.

You guys have created this boogeyman that simply doesnt exist. And now youll bitch about it and probably start the "obama is taking our guns" **** again

TonyR
11-07-2012, 08:21 AM
And they did so by turning out 10 million fewer people than last time.

Interesting method of "support"

Fewer votes than McCain is now a super-mandate. You were saying something about spin?

For all of our sakes I hope and pray the GOP isn't in as much denial as you, and many of its punditry, clearly are. The party needs to moderate and support a platform that these growing demographics can support. And nobody said anything about a "super-mandate".

TonyR
11-07-2012, 08:24 AM
You guys have created this boogeyman that simply doesnt exist.

^ This is pretty much it. The caricature of Obama that has been created, and believed by many, doesn't remotely match up with reality.

Crushaholic
11-07-2012, 08:31 AM
I don't think anyone sees this election as a mandate.

You're right, baja. All this election says is that the challenger failed to convince America why he should replace the sitting president...

24champ
11-07-2012, 08:32 AM
For all of our sakes I hope and pray the GOP isn't in as much denial as you, and many of its punditry, clearly are.

They are, and there's no talk of being more moderate or reaching over the aisle to get things done. It's the exact opposite, house leaders have came out immediately last night and said tax increases are a nonstarter. So right there nobody is going to budge on it. Second thing is, a lot of Republicans demonized and spat on Romney last night calling him out for his religion, being a liberal from Massachusetts etc. They threw him overboard and now your going to see the far right move in and take over.

gyldenlove
11-07-2012, 08:39 AM
Well, i think its both. You hit on something when you said they voted a split ticket, they wanted to preserve some sort of balance, but its no secret that the right has moved VERY FAR to the right, and i dont think the nation has much desire for that.

I doubt a ton changes, it doesnt look like republicans in congress are any more willing to make deals than they were last night, but hopefully we can get something done.

But this idea that America has suddenly fallen off a cliff, when ummm, all we've been doing is growing (not at a great rate, but it hasnt been getting worse) is absurd. We aren't greece, far from it. I dont know where these guys get this stuff from

I think it is quite obvious that the republican primaries with the emergence of the tea-party movement have moved sharply to the right. There are a lot of far right activists with anti-federalist views who vote and donate to the primaries, as we saw with Romney and with Mccain before him this forces candidates to move far right during primaries only to later moderate their position.

Mccain was hit by this and Romney was certainly hit by this, he said one thing to get through primaries and then moderated his stance significantly to appeal to voters at large, especially the undecided voters.

There is a shift in the nation, women and young people are voting in greater numbers, minorities are voting in greater numbers and those votes heavily favour moderate and federalist views - if the republicans can not reign in the far right or mobilise evangelicals the way Rove and Bush did they will not be able to defeat a strong democratic candidate in 2016.

It has always confused me how partisan the American political scene is, there is no room for real politics, no room for compromise, no room for efficiency, it is all about partisanism and all about blame. It has gotten to a point where making a bad decision that can be blamed on the other party is better than making a good decision - that is the demise of American politics in my view.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:44 AM
I think it is quite obvious that the republican primaries with the emergence of the tea-party movement have moved sharply to the right. There are a lot of far right activists with anti-federalist views who vote and donate to the primaries, as we saw with Romney and with Mccain before him this forces candidates to move far right during primaries only to later moderate their position.

Mccain was hit by this and Romney was certainly hit by this, he said one thing to get through primaries and then moderated his stance significantly to appeal to voters at large, especially the undecided voters.

There is a shift in the nation, women and young people are voting in greater numbers, minorities are voting in greater numbers and those votes heavily favour moderate and federalist views - if the republicans can not reign in the far right or mobilise evangelicals the way Rove and Bush did they will not be able to defeat a strong democratic candidate in 2016.

It has always confused me how partisan the American political scene is, there is no room for real politics, no room for compromise, no room for efficiency, it is all about partisanism and all about blame. It has gotten to a point where making a bad decision that can be blamed on the other party is better than making a good decision - that is the demise of American politics in my view.

+1 agreed. Its gotten to the point where there is active rooting against parties, which is no good for anyone.

But I have a question for you, personally. How did you manage to grow up and somehow survive your horrible progressive state?? I mean, according to some of the people above, we are doomed because we haven't embraced a far right agenda, and instead will move in a direction that is still far right to much of what is in Europe. So growing up must have been absolute hell for you, right?

chickennob2
11-07-2012, 08:45 AM
They are, and there's no talk of being more moderate or reaching over the aisle to get things done. It's the exact opposite, house leaders have came out immediately last night and said tax increases are a nonstarter. So right there nobody is going to budge on it. Second thing is, a lot of Republicans demonized and spat on Romney last night calling him out for his religion, being a liberal from Massachusetts etc. They threw him overboard and now your going to see the far right move in and take over.

I disagree. Look at what happened in the Senate race in Missouri and Indiana. Akin talks his **** about "legitimate rape" and gets trounced in a very red state. The tea party crazies come out to give the republican nomination to Mourdock in Indiana and essentially surrender a sure GOP senate seat to the democrats. I really think the more moderate 80% of the GOP is starting to realize that aligning themselves with the far right is costing them quite a bit. I sincerely hope that the GOP can move towards the ideological center. Otherwise, the Dems may have a strangle hold on the future of this country.

Archer81
11-07-2012, 08:48 AM
I disagree. Look at what happened in the Senate race in Missouri and Indiana. Akin talks his **** about "legitimate rape" and gets trounced in a very red state. The tea party crazies come out to give the republican nomination to Mourdock in Indiana and essentially surrender a sure GOP senate seat to the democrats. I really think the more moderate 80% of the GOP is starting to realize that aligning themselves with the far right is costing them quite a bit. I sincerely hope that the GOP can move towards the ideological center. Otherwise, the Dems may have a strangle hold on the future of this country.


Republicans need to become more libertarian in their views or they will not win another national election.

:Broncos:

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 08:51 AM
For all of our sakes I hope and pray the GOP isn't in as much denial as you, and many of its punditry, clearly are. The party needs to moderate and support a platform that these growing demographics can support. And nobody said anything about a "super-mandate".

What serious candidate was more "moderate" than McCain was in 2008?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18664285

Conservatives were never wild over McCain, and that goes back to his battles with George W. Bush in the 2000 primaries, his scathing criticism ("agents of intolerance") aimed at Christian conservative leaders, and his championing of overhauling the campaign finance system. McCain also voted against the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 (although now he says he wants to make them permanent), and he opposed amending the Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.

It's a fools' gold game the left likes to play. I remember many of the "independent" people I knew used to talk about (during the Bush years) about how they wished McCain had won the nomination in 2000, so then they could've supported him. Then McCain won, and they had all sorts of excuses why they now wouldn't support him. Even though he hadn't fundamentally changed on anything.

Romney had the same essential base problem as McCain because of his governing years in Mass. I didn't hold it against him so much because I'm mostly pragmatic and I understood that being governor of Massachusetts is a different game than say Florida. But in the end, Romney still lost because his base shrunk. I'm not 100% sure why. But they didn't switch sides. They just didn't vote. That much can't be argued.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 08:56 AM
What serious candidate was more "moderate" than McCain was in 2008?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18664285



It's a fools' gold game the left likes to play. I remember many of the "independent" people I knew used to talk about (during the Bush years) about how they wished McCain had won the nomination in 2000, so then they could've supported him. Then McCain won, and they had all sorts of excuses why they now wouldn't support him. Even though he hadn't fundamentally changed on anything.

Romney had the same essential base problem as McCain because of his governing years in Mass. I didn't hold it against him so much because I'm mostly pragmatic and I understood that being governor of Massachusetts is a different game than say Florida. But in the end, Romney still lost because his base shrunk. I'm not 100% sure why. But they didn't switch sides. They just didn't vote. That much can't be argued.

Why wasnt the base incredibly supportive of Romney? I think the answer is simple: He's a ****ty candidate.

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 09:03 AM
Why wasnt the base incredibly supportive of Romney? I think the answer is simple: He's a ****ty candidate.

Well that's a little broad. But there's some truth to it. He struggled to make a personal connection to people, which is very important to some.

But I think it was that with a combination of things. For some people his record (as a moderate) was a problem. For others the inconsistency as he had to tack right from his record was a problem. Then another small part is the prom king electorate factor. He wasn't as 'fun' to support as the other guy.

And in an election this close, many little problems can make a big problem. At the end of the day I think maybe having a genuine conservative or a genuine moderate is preferable to having an opportunist that switches from one to the other. But my thinking on that keeps evolving.

24champ
11-07-2012, 09:07 AM
I disagree. Look at what happened in the Senate race in Missouri and Indiana. Akin talks his **** about "legitimate rape" and gets trounced in a very red state. The tea party crazies come out to give the republican nomination to Mourdock in Indiana and essentially surrender a sure GOP senate seat to the democrats. I really think the more moderate 80% of the GOP is starting to realize that aligning themselves with the far right is costing them quite a bit. I sincerely hope that the GOP can move towards the ideological center. Otherwise, the Dems may have a strangle hold on the future of this country.

I don't think those losses will have an impact,while I agree last night showed that a majority of Americans don't vote for those candidates, the far right will ignore it and focus on the fact that Romney blew it.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 09:15 AM
On the biggest political story of the year, the conservative media just got its ass handed to it by the mainstream media. And movement conservatives, who believe the MSM is more biased and less rigorous than their alternatives, have no way to explain how their trusted outlets got it wrong, while the New York Times got it right. Hint. The Times hired the most rigorous forecaster it could find.

It ought to be an eye-opening moment.

But I expect that it'll be quickly forgotten, that none of the conservatives who touted a polling conspiracy will be discredited, and that the right will continue to operate at an information disadvantage. After all, it's not like they'll trust the analysis of a non-conservative like me more than the numerous fellow conservatives who constantly tell them things that turn out not to be true. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/how-conservative-media-lost-to-the-msm-and-failed-the-rank-and-file/264855/

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 09:15 AM
God I hate stupid people.

Now more than ever.

Irish Stout
11-07-2012, 09:15 AM
Why wasnt the base incredibly supportive of Romney? I think the answer is simple: He's a ****ty candidate.

I think the Republicans don't have a solid grasp on what their base is. Many in the Republican camp have acknowledged that the evangelical and tea party extremists have pulled them so far to the right on social issues that it makes them a harder political party to identify with for the average Joe America.

gunns
11-07-2012, 09:16 AM
This election was hardly and indictment of the GOP. I think overwhelmingly the populace felt like Obama inheritted at least some of this and Romney was demonized enough that they felt they will give what they know more time. The fact that many people voted a split ticket is clear on this. If Dems won across the board, that would be one thing. They didn't. And nothing substantively changed.

It was the voters thinking that Obama had inherited this and hadn't done allowed us to fall flat on our faces which is where we were headed. Romney was demonized for the party which people associate with the clusterfuc Bush left this country in.

But it was also the entire Republican party with their archaic side remarks and Romney saying one thing and when it slapped him in the face, flip flopping. Plus the fact still wondering what/how the hell Romney was going to do this. He wishy washed on that. And what he did reveal didn't wash.

http://news.msn.com/politics/analysis-in-the-end-obama-won-on-the-economy-2

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 09:22 AM
I think the Republicans don't have a solid grasp on what their base is. Many in the Republican camp have acknowledged that the evangelical and tea party extremists have pulled them so far to the right on social issues that it makes them a harder political party to identify with for the average Joe America.

They havent just moved their party to the right, they've moved the whole government to the right. Because of them, dems don't start the negotiation with a left wing plan that will eventually lead to the middle. They start in the middle with hopes of getting something center-right

SonOfLe-loLang
11-07-2012, 09:24 AM
Well that's a little broad. But there's some truth to it. He struggled to make a personal connection to people, which is very important to some.

But I think it was that with a combination of things. For some people his record (as a moderate) was a problem. For others the inconsistency as he had to tack right from his record was a problem. Then another small part is the prom king electorate factor. He wasn't as 'fun' to support as the other guy.

And in an election this close, many little problems can make a big problem. At the end of the day I think maybe having a genuine conservative or a genuine moderate is preferable to having an opportunist that switches from one to the other. But my thinking on that keeps evolving.

I definitely think his lack of genuine anything certainly hurt him. He was way too all over the place and didnt have a concrete platform. People didnt know what they were voting for.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 09:27 AM
Check out these demos:

What happened last night was a demographic time bomb that had been ticking and that blew up in GOP faces. As the Obama campaign had assumed more than a year ago, the white portion of the electorate dropped to 72%, and the president won just 39% of that vote. But he carried a whopping 93% of black voters (representing 13% of the electorate), 71% of Latinos (representing 10%), and also 73% of Asians (3%). What’s more, despite all the predictions that youth turnout would be down, voters 18-29 made up 19% of last night’s voting population -- up from 18% four years ago -- and President Obama took 60% from that group. http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/07/14993875-first-thoughts-obamas-demographic-edge?lite

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 09:38 AM
Check out these demos:

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/07/14993875-first-thoughts-obamas-demographic-edge?lite

If that doesn't ****ing disgust you, there's something wrong with you.

I mean, those of you that voted (albeit wrongly haha) for Obama because you identify with his policies on the issues, good for you. Those of you that voted for Obama because you identify with his image, you seriously disgust me.

ColoradoDarin
11-07-2012, 09:42 AM
The progressive movement will have to be allowed to destroy itself before things can get better. Bipartisan cover for that process only confuses things. Conservatives have no power to stop what is coming. America firmly rejected smaller, limited government as an option last night. That's the big picture of this election. Small government advocates should not participate in shaping the particulars of how the endgame plays out--that only confuses what is going on.

End of days? No. Endgame of the modern progressive state? Yes. We ARE Greece now. Except without a German sugar daddy to bail us out.

The difference between us and Greece is that we can inflate the dollar and as a way out of debt, Greece is tied to the Euro. Though inflating our way out of anything causes a whole new set of issues.

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 09:48 AM
The difference between us and Greece is that we can inflate the dollar and as a way out of debt, Greece is tied to the Euro. Though inflating our way out of anything causes a whole new set of issues.

Well, the dollar being the reserve currency (or I guess the potential of that changing) could have a similar effect.

An importer nation suddenly having its currency unhinged from world markets could lead down a very dark path.

enjolras
11-07-2012, 09:49 AM
If that doesn't ****ing disgust you, there's something wrong with you.

I mean, those of you that voted (albeit wrongly haha) for Obama because you identify with his policies on the issues, good for you. Those of you that voted for Obama because you identify with his image, you seriously disgust me.

That's quite an assumption that people voted race. Except when you look down ticket you see exactly the same trends (sometimes even more pronounced).

Republicans have taken really extreme stances on topics like immigration (a huge issue in the latino community). They've taken extreme stances on poverty, welfare, and healthcare (big issues in the black community). The Republicans have become a party of rural whites. They care passionately only about the issues that broadly appeal to that group. It's a big group, which makes them competitive, but it's a losing situation. These demographic trends aren't going to change. Until the Republican party reinvents themselves as a more moderate big-tent party they're going to have more and more trouble going forward.

Chris
11-07-2012, 09:54 AM
That's quite an assumption that people voted race. Except when you look down ticket you see exactly the same trends (sometimes even more pronounced).

Republicans have taken really extreme stances on topics like immigration (a huge issue in the latino community). They've taken extreme stances on poverty, welfare, and healthcare (big issues in the black community). The Republicans have become a party of rural whites. They care passionately only about the issues that broadly appeal to that group. It's a big group, which makes them competitive, but it's a losing situation. These demographic trends aren't going to change. Until the Republican party reinvents themselves as a more moderate big-tent party they're going to have more and more trouble going forward.

The funny thing is they used to be a centre right big tent party but they sold their soul for power.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 09:55 AM
That's quite an assumption that people voted race. Except when you look down ticket you see exactly the same trends (sometimes even more pronounced).

Republicans have taken really extreme stances on topics like immigration (a huge issue in the latino community). They've taken extreme stances on poverty, welfare, and healthcare (big issues in the black community). The Republicans have become a party of rural whites. They care passionately only about the issues that broadly appeal to that group. It's a big group, which makes them competitive, but it's a losing situation. These demographic trends aren't going to change. Until the Republican party reinvents themselves as a more moderate big-tent party they're going to have more and more trouble going forward.

93% isn't an "assumption". It's a clearly demonstrated statistical fact.

Drunken.Broncoholic
11-07-2012, 09:57 AM
That's quite an assumption that people voted race. Except when you look down ticket you see exactly the same trends (sometimes even more pronounced).

Republicans have taken really extreme stances on topics like immigration (a huge issue in the latino community). They've taken extreme stances on poverty, welfare, and healthcare (big issues in the black community). The Republicans have become a party of rural whites. They care passionately only about the issues that broadly appeal to that group. It's a big group, which makes them competitive, but it's a losing situation. These demographic trends aren't going to change. Until the Republican party reinvents themselves as a more moderate big-tent party they're going to have more and more trouble going forward.

Basically. America losing its long lived beliefs for a "new" America(Greece). Whats funny is the democratic policies have long been in place out here in California. How does California look? Cities going bankrupt. Businesses moving to Texas. California is a mess. Direct result of failed policies.

I'm so glad I got to live in this country when it was special. I would not want to be a kid and have to live in this place 40 years from now.

24champ
11-07-2012, 10:00 AM
Basically. America losing its long lived beliefs for a "new" America(Greece). Whats funny is the democratic policies have long been in place out here in California. How does California look? Cities going bankrupt. Businesses moving to Texas. California is a mess. Direct result of failed policies.

I'm so glad I got to live in this country when it was special. I would not want to be a kid and have to live in this place 40 years from now.

Btw California is now the highest taxed state in the Union.

Archer81
11-07-2012, 10:01 AM
It is hard for an incumbent to lose. Its only happened 3 times in the last 40 years. People bought the argument to give Obama 4 more years. Congress remains roughly the same. $2 billion spent this election cycle to arrive at the status quo. I do not envy the 45th president. Whoever that poor idiot is, is going to have a sickening mess to contend with.

:Broncos:

TonyR
11-07-2012, 10:02 AM
If that doesn't ****ing disgust you, there's something wrong with you.

As long as you're similarly disgusted by the voting results in the south.

gyldenlove
11-07-2012, 10:02 AM
+1 agreed. Its gotten to the point where there is active rooting against parties, which is no good for anyone.

But I have a question for you, personally. How did you manage to grow up and somehow survive your horrible progressive state?? I mean, according to some of the people above, we are doomed because we haven't embraced a far right agenda, and instead will move in a direction that is still far right to much of what is in Europe. So growing up must have been absolute hell for you, right?

It was absolutely nightmarish, between universal healthcare, free university education, social security and government subsidies I was lucky to survive to adolescence, let alone to adulthood.

The story of my life goes something like this, I was concieved around summer of 1976, but because of universal healthcare and waitlists I Wasn't born until just before the pagan holiday we celebrate in late December in 1980, I was then placed in a government watch program where I was being watched for several hours a day at least 5 days a week and I was regularly subjected to government sponsored tests and injections.

Around the age of 3 I was moved to a larger government facility where I was put into an environment with other children all of whom were supervised by government agents and indoctrinated daily through physical activity such as running, jumping, placing colored blocks on top of other blocks and in some cases being lectured by one or more agents from a wide variety of texts.

At the age of 5, I was chosen to be enrolled in one year program aimed at transitioning me into the largest nationwide government program in the country where children and adolescents are indoctrinated and brainwashed to become part of the system. Between the ages of 6 and 18 I attended 3 different government facilities with different sets of agents. During this time I was regularly subjected to probings in the oral cavity by men and women wearing white coats and using sharp blinding lights, I was also regularly taken for x-ray images to determine I was hiding any subversive materials on or in my person.

At age 18 I was moved from my family to a government funded facility for gifted young adults where we lived in small single bed rooms with only a small adjacent private bathroom and communal kitchen facilities while I attended a government run institution, the government funded my food on a small but sufficient stipend and I was able to supplement the stipend by doing some part time work in a shady part of town away from government agents.

As you can clearly see it is a tale of woe of missery, and frankly it is a wonder of the modern world that I am able to fit into free society on the few trips I have been allowed to take abroad. Fortunately I believe that I can put my knowledge to good use and I hope that my doctorate in medical physics I am about to attain will enable to break the cycle of vicious government abuse - at least I don't have any student loans they can use against me....

Drunken.Broncoholic
11-07-2012, 10:03 AM
Btw California is now the highest taxed state in the Union.

Yep. Gov brown just killed thousands of jobs. Employers out here were already expecting this. We've laid off already and plan more. Downsizing is going to be the new trend. Well at least the lucky businesses. Closed down will be the other

TonyR
11-07-2012, 10:04 AM
It is hard for an incumbent to lose.

Well, with this economy it should have been the GOP's election to lose. They just didn't have a good enough candidate.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 10:06 AM
If that doesn't ****ing disgust you, there's something wrong with you.

I mean, those of you that voted (albeit wrongly haha) for Obama because you identify with his policies on the issues, good for you. Those of you that voted for Obama because you identify with his image, you seriously disgust me.

There are also a combination of factors that you're not taking into consideration. Like the fact that Romney never met an issue he couldn't be on both sides of. The guy is a human flip flop, and about 10000000x worse than Kerry ever was when it comes to changing his mind.

I voted for Obama because of a few things: Gay marriage/civil rights, women's reproductive rights, and economic factors. I specifically could not vote for Romney for those reasons, plus the fact that he never did the math on his tax plan (still doesn't work) and I really don't feel he's ever been in contact with a regular, non-rich person in his life, save for his stable boy and possibly a waiter in a restaurant.

Part of being President is understanding regular folks, the ones who can't buy an election with campaign donations. You really think Romney understands the 47% of America for whom he has such disdain?

houghtam
11-07-2012, 10:09 AM
As long as you're similarly disgusted by the voting results in the south.

This. I wonder what the stats were for Mormons and Evangelicals...

Rev, you're a great guy and everyone loves you. I know you need to hear that right now more than anything. But you're clearly out of your element here.

gunns
11-07-2012, 10:10 AM
If that doesn't ****ing disgust you, there's something wrong with you.

I mean, those of you that voted (albeit wrongly haha) for Obama because you identify with his policies on the issues, good for you. Those of you that voted for Obama because you identify with his image, you seriously disgust me.

So the 59% of white people who voted for Romney disgusts you also.

And then there are those damn women, 54% of the voting populace, who voted on which one was cuter.

In the end I bet everyone gets through their day with or without your disgust and assumptions. ASS/U/ME

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 10:11 AM
As long as you're similarly disgusted by the voting results in the south.

I'm disgusted by ANYONE who voted according to the image they identified with and not the substance they identified with. We saw a resounding example of that in an entire population.

This is easily the least progressive moment for America in decades, imo. I really thought "we" were better than that.

I thought wrong.

Drunken.Broncoholic
11-07-2012, 10:12 AM
There are also a combination of factors that you're not taking into consideration. Like the fact that Romney never met an issue he couldn't be on both sides of. The guy is a human flip flop, and about 10000000x worse than Kerry ever was when it comes to changing his mind.

I voted for Obama because of a few things: Gay marriage/civil rights, women's reproductive rights, and economic factors. I specifically could not vote for Romney for those reasons, plus the fact that he never did the math on his tax plan (still doesn't work) and I really don't feel he's ever been in contact with a regular, non-rich person in his life, save for his stable boy and possibly a waiter in a restaurant.

Part of being President is understanding regular folks, the ones who can't buy an election with campaign donations. You really think Romney understands the 47% of America for whom he has such disdain?


How's that math all add up out here in Cali? It's the same model Obama uses. Voting for gay rights and women's reproductive issues is your choice. Economic? Listen to Obama in 2008 and tell me what he has promised turned out true. 5% unemployment I was told. Didnt happen. Transparency. Didnt happen. He may be likable and down to shoot hoops with gays and Mexicans, but he is by no means an economic guru. This is why czars were hired to do his job.

Bacchus
11-07-2012, 10:12 AM
Roseanne Barr got 50,000 votes!!

US 2012
98% reporting ( 171368 out of 174234 precincts )
538 electoral votes available
Obama (Dem)
50%
(60,062,291)
Romney (GOP)
48%
(57,380,600)
Johnson (Lib)
0%
(1,155,601)
Stein (Grn)
0%
(403,237)
Goode (AmC)
0%
(113,821)
Barr (PFP)
0%
(49,380)
Anderson (JP)
0%
(35,425)
Hoefling (AmP)
0%
(28,588)
Terry
0%
(12,895)
Duncan
0%
(12,032)
Lindsay
0%
(7,032)
Noneofthesecandidates
0%
(5,753)
Baldwin
0%
(4,704)
Stevens (Obj)
0%
(4,010)
Alexander (SPU)
0%
(3,912)
Christensen
0%
(3,753)
Harris (SWP)
0%
(3,430)
Carlson
0%
(3,174)
Miller (ATP)
0%
(2,598)
Tittle (WTP)
0%
(2,479)
Reed (Una)
0%
(2,373)
La Riva (PSL)
0%
(1,523)
Litzel
0%
(1,196)
White (SEP)
0%
(1,128)
Morstad
0%
(1,108)
Washer
0%
(952)
Boss
0%
(886)
Barnett
0%
(794)
Fellure
0%
(503)

24champ
11-07-2012, 10:12 AM
Yep. Gov brown just killed thousands of jobs. Employers out here were already expecting this. We've laid off already and plan more. Downsizing is going to be the new trend. Well at least the lucky businesses. Closed down will be the other

Democrats think they can tax their way out of this mess when it's just going to compound the problem.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 10:13 AM
So the 59% of white people who voted for Romney disgusts you also.

And then there are those damn women, 54% of the voting populace, who voted on which one was cuter.

In the end I bet everyone gets through their day with or without your disgust and assumptions. ASS/U/ME

No, idiot. History's shown a 59% to 41% is pretty standard for Caucasians regardless of candidates race.

93% is ****ing wrong.

fdf
11-07-2012, 10:14 AM
The difference between us and Greece is that we can inflate the dollar and as a way out of debt, Greece is tied to the Euro. Though inflating our way out of anything causes a whole new set of issues.

Yup. It plays out a little differently. Not much difference in the result except that we take a lot more of the world down with us than Greece could as we inflate the world's reserve currency. But the spending party must go on!

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 10:15 AM
This. I wonder what the stats were for Mormons and Evangelicals...

Rev, you're a great guy and everyone loves you. I know you need to hear that right now more than anything. But you're clearly out of your element here.

Wrong. I have no pre-existing bias. You do. You're extremely vocal about your values in the WRP forum that have a tendency to follow liberal party lines pretty closely.

I do not. I'm NOT conservative nor liberal. I'm conservative in economic and foreign policy while being extremely liberal in social issues. I supported Romney because I don't feel Barack came through on the social reform he promised 4 years ago.

I think my liberalism in social issues is precisely WHY I'm so stunned and disgusted right now.

Bacchus
11-07-2012, 10:16 AM
Democrats think they can tax their way out of this mess when it's just going to compound the problem.

Taxes are at an all time low, and you can blame the problems for the budget on Republicans. When Clinton left office it was balanced! Two Wars, Two rounds of tax cuts and the MedicareB all of which were not paid for is the reason for the deficit. Then the recession and housing crisis all of which were done by the Bush Administration.

Archer81
11-07-2012, 10:17 AM
And I think this thread has run its course.


:Broncos:

Archer81
11-07-2012, 10:43 AM
I've evolved on this thread. Decided to move it and reopen. Happy bickering!

:Broncos:

Play2win
11-07-2012, 10:44 AM
I voted against Romney, because of Arithmetic.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 10:54 AM
Democrats think they can tax their way out of this mess...

Does anyone really think this? I think most everyone worth listening to knows it has to be both spending and revenues.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 10:55 AM
Does anyone really think this? I think most everyone worth listening to knows it has to be both spending and revenues.

And a lot of patience.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 10:57 AM
...I don't feel Barack came through on the social reform he promised 4 years ago.

Although Obama hasn't necessarily directly championed them, huge strides have been made on gay rights over the last few years. What other social reform were you hoping for?

BroncoInferno
11-07-2012, 10:59 AM
93% is ****ing wrong.

89% of blacks voted for Kerry in 2004, Gore got 90% in 2000. In other words, the 93% is simply a reflection of the overwhelming support the black community generally gives to Deomcratic Presidential candidates. A white Democratic candidate would have carried a similar number of that demographic.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-07-2012, 11:03 AM
Does anyone really think this? I think most everyone worth listening to knows it has to be both spending and revenues.

Only Glenn Beck's minions - and the voters rejected them last night.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 11:06 AM
89% of blacks voted for Kerry in 2004, Gore got 90% in 2000. In other words, the 93% is simply a reflection of the overwhelming support the black community generally gives to Deomcratic Presidential candidates. A white Democratic candidate would have carried a similar number of that demographic.

You're only citing opposition to GW Bush WHILE simultaneously ignoring voter turnout.

As popular as Bill Clinton was (especially in the black community), even he only netted 82%.

I'm sorry, but there's nothing defensible about this. It happened and no one should view it as acceptable.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 11:08 AM
Although Obama hasn't necessarily directly championed them, huge strides have been made on gay rights over the last few years. What other social reform were you hoping for?

How about "Any"? The only gay rights strides have come from states' initiatves.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 11:19 AM
What Does Four More Years Mean To You? (http://dailydickpunch.com/2012/11/07/what-does-four-more-years-mean-to-you/)

enjolras
11-07-2012, 11:20 AM
It was absolutely nightmarish, between universal healthcare, free university education, social security and government subsidies I was lucky to survive to adolescence, let alone to adulthood.

That's post of the year material right there...

enjolras
11-07-2012, 11:20 AM
How about "Any"? The only gay rights strides have come from states' initiatves.

Miss the whole repeal of "Don't ask don't tell"?

Miss I.
11-07-2012, 11:25 AM
How about "Any"? The only gay rights strides have come from states' initiatves.

http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/federal-laws/matthew-shepard-and-james-byrd-jr.-hate-crimes-prevention-act

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/26/obama-has-appointed-most-us-gay-officials/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-extension-benefits-same-sex-domestic-partners-federal-emplo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012/05/09/gIQAivsWDU_story.html?hpid=z1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009

http://themiddleclass.org/bill/children039s-health-insurance-program-reauthorization-act-2009

http://www.christopherreeve.org/site/c.ddJFKRNoFiG/b.4506337/apps/s/content.asp?ct=6866203

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Ask,_Don%27t_Tell_Repeal_Act_of_2010

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 11:33 AM
Miss the whole repeal of "Don't ask don't tell"?

That's absolutely a fair example. Repped for correcting me.

This is beside the point.

I'm not upset about the result, I'm upset about how the result came to pass.

BroncoInferno
11-07-2012, 11:40 AM
You're only citing opposition to GW Bush WHILE simultaneously ignoring voter turnout.

As popular as Bill Clinton was (especially in the black community), even he only netted 82%.

I'm sorry, but there's nothing defensible about this. It happened and no one should view it as acceptable.

"Only" 82%? That sounds like a high percentage to me. The bottom line is, blacks overwhelming support Democrats....black, white or other, and they have done so for decades. I don't doubt there were blacks who voted for Obama because he's black, and that's unfortunate, but I think the numbers have more to do with party affiliation than race. Also, I can assure you there were plenty of whites who merely voted against Obama because they believe he's a black nationalist socialist from Kenya. I live and work amongst them.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 11:44 AM
"Only" 82%? That sounds like a high percentage to me. The bottom line is, blacks overwhelming support Democrats....black, white or other, and they have done so for decades. I don't doubt there were blacks who voted for Obama because he's black, and that's unfortunate, but I think the numbers have more to do with party affiliation than race. Also, I can assure you there were plenty of whites who merely voted against Obama because they believe he's a black nationalist socialist from Kenya. I live and work amongst them.

I'm using someone as popular as Clinton was to show the disparity. Even with that conservative figure, it's consistent with the rest of the minority groups and more than enough to swing the election which creates the logical conclusion:

If Barack were white, Romney would have won.

Sad to see 2012 being treated like 1932.

And no, I'm certainly not defending the people you finished your post in reference to. They belong in the same category of shame.

DENVERDUI55
11-07-2012, 11:47 AM
If Barack were white, Romney would have won.

QFT

Meck77
11-07-2012, 11:47 AM
I feel sorry for Obama. He's got to clean up the mess from the last president. That's a tall task.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 11:48 AM
If Barack were white, Romney would have won.

Well, no. I'll look for a link, but I saw a study last week that shows Obama gains 3% from the black vote, but loses 5% from the white anti-black vote, for a net loss of 2%. So if true, if Obama was white he'd win in a landslide.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 11:51 AM
Well, no. I'll look for a link, but I saw a study last week that shows Obama gains 3% from the black vote, but loses 5% from the white anti-black vote, for a net loss of 2%. So if true, if Obama was white he'd win in a landslide.

Can't wait for you to find this "source".

Kaylore
11-07-2012, 11:53 AM
Tailgate nut just left me a neg rep calling me a greedy POS mormon. lol

TonyR
11-07-2012, 11:53 AM
LOL This thread is clearly not going as you had hoped...

Overall, the survey found that by virtue of racial prejudice, Obama could lose 5 percentage points off his share of the popular vote in his Nov. 6 contest against Republican challenger Mitt Romney. However, Obama also stands to benefit from a 3 percentage point gain due to pro-black sentiment, researchers said. Overall, that means an estimated net loss of 2 percentage points due to anti-black attitudes. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-poll-majority-harbor-prejudice-against-blacks

Be careful what you wish for!

BroncoInferno
11-07-2012, 11:58 AM
I'm using someone as popular as Clinton was to show the disparity. Even with that conservative figure, it's consistent with the rest of the minority groups and more than enough to swing the election which creates the logical conclusion:

If Barack were white, Romney would have won.

Sad to see 2012 being treated like 1932.

And no, I'm certainly not defending the people you finished your post in reference to. They belong in the same category of shame.

I can buy that a white Democratic candidate might have pulled a few percentage points less of the black vote, but not overwhelmingly so, and I'm not sure I buy it all with regards to Hispanics. First the obvious reason: they aren't black, so it's doubtful many voted Obama for that reason. Second, right-wing rhetoric on immigration has gotten more hostile in the last few years, and so that's why you see a decrease in the Republican haul with that demographic. Bush was fairly moderate on immigration, so he was able to achieve a better number. I get what you're saying, but I think it's a little more complex than simply as race thing.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:02 PM
LOL This thread is clearly not going as you had hoped...

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-poll-majority-harbor-prejudice-against-blacks

Be careful what you wish for!

...FLOORED that you read that and felt like that's supporting evidence

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:03 PM
I can buy that a white Democratic candidate might have pulled a few percentage points less of the black vote, but not overwhelmingly so, and I'm not sure I buy it all with regards to Hispanics. First the obvious reason: they aren't black, so it's doubtful many voted Obama for that reason. Second, right-wing rhetoric on immigration has gotten more hostile in the last few years, and so that's why you see a decrease in the Republican haul with that demographic. Bush was fairly moderate on immigration, so he was able to achieve a better number. I get what you're saying, but I think it's a little more complex than simply as race thing.

I never mentioned Hispanics. Re-read slower, bud.

bowtown
11-07-2012, 12:07 PM
I'm using someone as popular as Clinton was to show the disparity. Even with that conservative figure, it's consistent with the rest of the minority groups and more than enough to swing the election which creates the logical conclusion:

If Barack were white, Romney would have won.

Sad to see 2012 being treated like 1932.

And no, I'm certainly not defending the people you finished your post in reference to. They belong in the same category of shame.

This is unfounded. Obama is white:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EDxOSjgl5Z4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Garcia Bronco
11-07-2012, 12:07 PM
"Only" 82%? That sounds like a high percentage to me. The bottom line is, blacks overwhelming support Democrats....black, white or other, and they have done so for decades. I don't doubt there were blacks who voted for Obama because he's black, and that's unfortunate, but I think the numbers have more to do with party affiliation than race. Also, I can assure you there were plenty of whites who merely voted against Obama because they believe he's a black nationalist socialist from Kenya. I live and work amongst them.

Yeah..dude...that state you live in is a ****hole of a state. I moved away from the south to get away from those assholes.

gunns
11-07-2012, 12:08 PM
You're only citing opposition to GW Bush WHILE simultaneously ignoring voter turnout.

As popular as Bill Clinton was (especially in the black community), even he only netted 82%.

I'm sorry, but there's nothing defensible about this. It happened and no one should view it as acceptable.

Get over it. Your defense of the majority of whites voting for the white candidate is standard as opposed to the majority of blacks voting for the black candidate is ****ing unacceptable is an attempt to make your anger look like it's due to a situation rather than the outcome. Personally I think each person voted for the candidate that was best for them and overall the country. I don't know if that's true anymore than you know why they voted for them.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 12:08 PM
Tailgate nut just left me a neg rep calling me a greedy POS mormon. lol

And Ol #7 just left me a neg rep too.

The more things change...

Garcia Bronco
11-07-2012, 12:10 PM
Tailgate nut just left me a neg rep calling me a greedy POS mormon. lol

Hey Leo p***Y, participate or get a life loser. You might be the most emotional woman on the planet.


A word on Mormons as well. I haven't worked with all of them, but every one that I've ever worked with was a hard working non-complaining super-star in the work place.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:10 PM
Get over it. Your defense of the majority of whites voting for the white candidate is standard as opposed to the majority of blacks voting for the black candidate is ****ing unacceptable is an attempt to make your anger look like it's due to a situation rather than the outcome. Personally I think each person voted for the candidate that was best for them and overall the country. I don't know if that's true anymore than you know why they voted for them.

You continue to spew the dumbest **** I've ever read.

Let me ask you a question and really step back and think about it:

If voter demos were out, and Romney won because 93% of white people had voted for him, what do you think the backlash would be? Or would it be "okay" because "not all" of them voted by racial lines?

Would it just be me here complaining about racism? Or would it be the cover of every ****ing news outlet in the first world?

TonyR
11-07-2012, 12:13 PM
...FLOORED that you read that and felt like that's supporting evidence

I'm floored that you're floored. Where's your evidence? We should take your opinion over a study cited by the AP?!? (And I notice you altogether avoided the 8 links to "supporting evidence" that Miss I provided to contradict a previous comment of yours.) You're free to think that Obama won only, or primarily, because of the color of his skin. I'm free to disagree, and note the common sense idea that he loses as many, or more, votes for being black than he gains from it.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:14 PM
I'm floored that you're floored. Where's your evidence? We should take your opinion over a study cited by the AP?!? (And I notice you altogether avoided the 8 links to "supporting evidence" that Miss I provided to contradict a previous comment of yours.) You're free to think that Obama won only, or primarily, because of the color of his skin. I'm free to disagree, and note the common sense idea that he loses as many, or more, votes for being black than he gains from it.

See previous post, and I ignored Miss I because she posted those links 2 dozen pages ago and they've been discussed.

enjolras brought something new to the table and I conceded it.

You need to learn how to make a valid point if you want concessions out of people instead of standing up for racism like you're doing.

Bronco Yoda
11-07-2012, 12:19 PM
Wrong. I have no pre-existing bias. You do. You're extremely vocal about your values in the WRP forum that have a tendency to follow liberal party lines pretty closely.

I do not. I'm NOT conservative nor liberal. I'm conservative in economic and foreign policy while being extremely liberal in social issues. I supported Romney because I don't feel Barack came through on the social reform he promised 4 years ago.

I think my liberalism in social issues is precisely WHY I'm so stunned and disgusted right now.

:spit:

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:20 PM
:spit:

Don't worry. I've learned my lesson and my optimistic ignorance has been shattered.

24champ
11-07-2012, 12:21 PM
Does anyone really think this? I think most everyone worth listening to knows it has to be both spending and revenues.

It's nothing more than a temporary band-aid.

TonyR
11-07-2012, 12:22 PM
You need to learn how to make a valid point if you want concessions out of people instead of standing up for racism like you're doing.

I'm not sure why my point isn't valid. Perhaps because it disagrees with yours? I gave you a study which directly contradicts what you're suggesting!

As for standing up for racism, I asked you previously about the clearly racist voting results in the south. Do you think those results are any less racist than the percentage of blacks voting for Obama?

Inferno provided some pretty good numbers how blacks always vote overwhelmingly for the Dem candidate. I don't think it's all that surprising those numbers go up for a black candidate. Is it a little troubling? Perhaps. But I don't know that it's much more troubling than Romney winning every state in the south (except perhaps Florida? and Virginia if you consider that "south"?) by a large margin. Go look at an electoral map. It's ridiculous! Shouldn't Obama do well in at least some of those states because of their large black populations? And shouldn't the fact that he doesn't suggest that almost all of the whites are voting against him?

Miss I.
11-07-2012, 12:26 PM
See previous post, and I ignored Miss I because she posted those links 2 dozen pages ago and they've been discussed.

enjolras brought something new to the table and I conceded it.

You need to learn how to make a valid point if you want concessions out of people instead of standing up for racism like you're doing.

What are you talking about? I posted the links on the page previous to this one. If you are talking about the two links I posted much earlier in the thread, this time I picked specific article links referencing things specific to the topic about gays and also some related to initiatives helping women. One was actually the Wikipedia reference to the repeal of Don't Ask don't tell that he signed. Another was about anti-hate crime legislation, etc.

The links I posted earlier were everything he's done. this time I pulled things relevant to your post specifically.

Enjolras mentioned Don't Ask Don't tell, so did I. Not sure how it's different, but okay.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:27 PM
I'm not sure why my point isn't valid. Perhaps because it disagrees with yours? I gave you a study which directly contradicts what you're suggesting!

As for standing up for racism, I asked you previously about the clearly racist voting results in the south. Do you think those results are any less racist than the percentage of blacks voting for Obama?

Inferno provided some pretty good numbers how blacks always vote overwhelmingly for the Dem candidate. I don't think it's all that surprising those numbers go up for a black candidate. Is it a little troubling? Perhaps. But I don't know that it's much more troubling than Romney winning every state in the south (except perhaps Florida? and Virginia if you consider that "south"?) by a large margin. Go look at an electoral map. It's ridiculous! Shouldn't Obama do well in at least some of those states because of their large black populations? And shouldn't the fact that he doesn't suggest that almost all of the whites are voting against him?

TonyRacist

1. Your "study" doesn't even resemble a study.

2. Inferno provided skewed data which he admitted it was to a degree.

3. You show me ONE STATE where 93% of Caucasians voted Romney, let alone the entire nation... I highly doubt you could even find 1 county.

You go ahead and tell me what that indicates.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:32 PM
Exiting this discussion now.

The way some of you are propping up your partisan doctrine over equality is genuinely disgusting me to undreamt of heights.

I hope you get what's coming to you in regards to supporting these levels of prejudice.

Old Dude
11-07-2012, 12:33 PM
White Male Presidents: 43
Black Male Presidents: 1
Female Presidents: 0

Bronco Yoda
11-07-2012, 12:35 PM
No, idiot. History's shown a 59% to 41% is pretty standard for Caucasians regardless of candidates race.

93% is ****ing wrong.

A white privileged Republican that demonized the black demographic with code words and such.... and oh... he's Mormon. Let's just double down shall we. It's not rocket science here.

I just want to know who the 7% are. ROFL!

TonyR
11-07-2012, 12:40 PM
Exiting this discussion now.


LOL Wise choice, perhaps your first of this thread. You should have exited long ago. You're getting destroyed. You didn't even appear to know about DADT and you're a military guy for crying out loud.

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 12:55 PM
LOL Wise choice, perhaps your first of this thread. You should have exited long ago. You're getting destroyed. You didn't even appear to know about DADT and you're a military guy for crying out loud.

I can't believe I'm letting you bait me, but sincerely, this is my LAST post on the subject:

Destroyed? You're claiming that 93% of a populace voting along racial lines ISNT racism. If it's not, then the only conclusion is that you believe black people are fundamentally different than whites.

Either is equally racist (the very DEFINITION of it) and disgusting. Hope your political agendas are worth openly bankrupt values and double standards.

Traveler
11-07-2012, 01:02 PM
White Male Presidents: 43
Black Male Presidents: 1
Female Presidents: 0

BAM!

TheReverend
11-07-2012, 01:05 PM
BAM!

I'm glad that was the extent of the logic and justification for 13% of the electorate.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 02:24 PM
I don't think there's any doubt that the politics of association are strong and are a massive problem, but it does not account for the following:

Romney managed only 44% of the women in this country.
75% of Latinos went for Obama
73% of Asians went for Obama

And then there was Romney's focus during this campaign:
Not that Team Romney was shocked by the electorate's racial divisions, of course, as it had intentionally banked on courting the majority of the white vote and ignoring minorities: "Romney's camp is focused intently on capturing at least 61 percent of white voters," noted the National Journal in August (http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/politics/obama-needs-80-of-minority-vote-to-win-2012-presidential-election-20120824). "That would provide him a slim national majority-so long as whites constitute at least 74 percent of the vote, as they did last time, and Obama doesn't improve on his 80 percent showing with minorities." As we know now, things didn't work out as they planned.

http://gawker.com/5958556/dying-of-the-white-requiem-for-the-2012-election

broncocalijohn
11-07-2012, 02:34 PM
Didnt read it all as I skipped to the last page seeing why this was moved...now I know for obvious reasons. So I take it that the discussion is whites, in a huge majority, will vote for a candidate based on their political beliefs and not teir skin color while a black will either vote for color of their own or that they vote for DEMS no matter what at a 93% clip. I do know they re-elected a DC Mayor after he was in prison for cocaine use. Interesting fun. Carry on.

The finale is good luck getting a black to vote Republican. Even when blacks prospered under Reagan for black businesses, they did not vote Republican in spite of those facts. Blacks vote Democrat no matter what. Difference at least in 2008 is that blacks voted for their very first time because they had a president running that was their same skin color.

That One Guy
11-07-2012, 02:40 PM
As for standing up for racism, I asked you previously about the clearly racist voting results in the south. Do you think those results are any less racist than the percentage of blacks voting for Obama?


This election was also about the future of gay marriage in this country. That's enough to get the south out in droves. The fact that the blacks chose to vote for race over an issue that so many in the south oppose is quite telling.

lonestar
11-07-2012, 02:58 PM
congrats to those that got their desires met yesterday..

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 03:05 PM
congrats to those that got their desires met yesterday..

For us, "winning elections" isn't the only goal. It's fixing broken ****. Civil rights, healthcare security, social safety net.

But thanks.

BroncoBeavis
11-07-2012, 04:01 PM
For us, "winning elections" isn't the only goal. It's fixing broken ****. Civil rights, healthcare security, social safety net.

But thanks.

Yeah that Zero-Senate-Vote Obama budget showed that when it comes to real world in-the-trenches problem solving, you guys are all bidness. LOL

Rohirrim
11-07-2012, 04:20 PM
I guess starting your election campaign by dumping on 47% of the electorate is a bad strategy.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 04:26 PM
Yeah that Zero-Senate-Vote Obama budget showed that when it comes to real world in-the-trenches problem solving, you guys are all bidness. LOL

No, please. Go on cherry-picking.

Keep that head in the sand. We know you're dying to do it anyway.

gunns
11-07-2012, 05:36 PM
Watching Bill O' Reilly. My but he's in a pissy mood. He tells Dick Morris that tonight is not the night to mess with him. Bill Bieckel is getting yelled at by him because Bill B. is telling him that the Republicans just don't get it, are in the old age as far as women and Bill B. is telling him why people did not like being called the 47% and Billy boy aint buying it and keeps interrupting. Ahhh good times!

~Crash~
11-07-2012, 05:55 PM
soup lines.. yepp great times

baja
11-07-2012, 06:21 PM
soup lines.. yepp great times

Nah the food in the detention centers will be pretty good. ;D

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-07-2012, 06:24 PM
soup lines.. yepp great times

Thank you, barely literate poster. Solid contribution.

~Crash~
11-07-2012, 06:36 PM
well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

DHallblows
11-07-2012, 07:22 PM
Thank you, barely literate poster. Solid contribution.

You spoke too soon...

well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

gunns
11-07-2012, 07:29 PM
well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

;D

That One Guy
11-07-2012, 07:42 PM
I guess starting your election campaign by dumping on 47% of the electorate is a bad strategy.

I still think that number was just too low.

Without a doubt, many would vote Obama no matter what Romney did or said. He could do nothing to sway their vote. You disagree with that?

Rohirrim
11-07-2012, 07:50 PM
well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

ROFL!

BroncoLifer
11-07-2012, 08:00 PM
I guess starting your election campaign by dumping on 47% of the electorate is a bad strategy.

Now we'll see whether or not the Dems go for the strategy of dumping on 49% of the electorate. Based on recent history, the chances seem good.

Bronco Yoda
11-07-2012, 09:03 PM
Hilarious!well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

ROFL!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-08-2012, 02:47 AM
well its been great ... I told you ass hats whats on it way. I told you last election what would happen go back look it happened to a completely . it was the night you a-holes were all happy yucking it up about Obama winning the first time ... oh if you are in the stock market sell early tomorrow . it will get mighty ugly tomorrow and the next few weeks . enjoy.

I am never coming to this **** hole war and politics this place is full of **** heads . enjoy you bunch of communist bastards

http://www.bartcop.com/mitt-buh-bye.jpg

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-08-2012, 02:55 AM
Takeaways (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Nov07.html#item-2)

Here are some of our takeways, in no particular order.


It's not just the economy, stupid. It's the whole package
Abandoning large constitutencies, like women, Latinos, and young voters is not a winning formula
The partisan identification in 2008 was not a freak accident. There are more Democrats than Republicans
The candidate matters: on paper Rick Perry and Mitt Romney were great, but the real men weren't
Nominating a sneering plutocrat who likes firing people and writes off half the country is not a wise move
If you can't release your tax returns because they are full of poison, don't run for President
There aren't enough billionaires to buy the election
Don't talk about gay marriage unless you are supporting it
And above all, don't talk about rape except maybe if you are proposing to castrate rapists

Rohirrim
11-08-2012, 05:04 AM
Takeaways (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Nov07.html#item-2)

Here are some of our takeways, in no particular order.


It's not just the economy, stupid. It's the whole package
Abandoning large constitutencies, like women, Latinos, and young voters is not a winning formula
The partisan identification in 2008 was not a freak accident. There are more Democrats than Republicans
The candidate matters: on paper Rick Perry and Mitt Romney were great, but the real men weren't
Nominating a sneering plutocrat who likes firing people and writes off half the country is not a wise move
If you can't release your tax returns because they are full of poison, don't run for President
There aren't enough billionaires to buy the election
Don't talk about gay marriage unless you are supporting it
And above all, don't talk about rape except maybe if you are proposing to castrate rapists


From the article:

Demographically, the Republican Party's base is angry, old white men.
Ha!

And I liked this too:

Why the GOP didn't win
1. Romney was not a real conservative, but he was the only one left standing after the others crashed and burned
2. The liberal media (= NYT) were in the tank for Obama and refused to talk about Libya all day and night
3. The pollsters conspired to have skewed polls that discouraged all the faint-hearted Republicans from voting
4. It's all the fault of Hurricane Sandy because it cost Romney three days of campaigning
5. Well, its the fault of Sandy plus that traitor Chris Christie, who is only looking out for his own fat ass
6. The voters are too stupid to realize that when Obamacare kicks in, America will instantly become Cuba

Rohirrim
11-08-2012, 05:08 AM
Oh, and it looks like I was right about Spammer Dan. He seems to have disappeared and taken his rabid rants with him. Looks like the tragedy in Libya was simply the election propaganda version of :deadhorse

BroncoBeavis
11-08-2012, 05:16 AM
Oh, and it looks like I was right about Spammer Dan. He seems to have disappeared and taken his rabid rants with him. Looks like the tragedy in Libya was simply the election propaganda version of :deadhorse

Watergate with a body count. “meh" says the left. "We got our guy"

Old Dude
11-08-2012, 05:30 AM
According to US Census (through 2009):

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0695.pdf

Median annual income for African American family in 2009 was $38,409.

For hispanics: $39,730.

For whites: $62,545.


Just taking a wild guess here, but maybe people with lower incomes are more likely to vote democratic.

Rohirrim
11-08-2012, 06:00 AM
Watergate with a body count. “meh" says the left. "We got our guy"

And that's why I ignore you. You have nothing valid to say.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-08-2012, 07:24 AM
According to US Census (through 2009):

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0695.pdf

Median annual income for African American family in 2009 was $38,409.

For hispanics: $39,730.

For whites: $62,545.


Just taking a wild guess here, but maybe people with lower incomes are more likely to vote democratic.

But Romney said "middle class" was people making $250k and up.

/head asplode

TheReverend
11-08-2012, 07:30 AM
According to US Census (through 2009):

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0695.pdf

Median annual income for African American family in 2009 was $38,409.

For hispanics: $39,730.

For whites: $62,545.


Just taking a wild guess here, but maybe people with lower incomes are more likely to vote democratic.

93% worth?

Never mind you just PROVIDED evidence showing the same general economic class as Hispanics... so if we use that as a baseline, we can now quantify and conclude that roughly 20% of African Americans voted by race and the election was won by it.

I appreciate your efforts you to statistically prove my complaint, Old Dude, but we're all the losers here. This logic train leads to parties providing the best minority candidate instead of the best candidate for the job.

Yay, inequality.

BroncoBeavis
11-08-2012, 07:56 AM
And that's why I ignore you. You have nothing valid to say.

Yeah, what am I talking about. Justice was served. The Youtube Perpgoat is locked away for at least a year.

Meanwhile

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/world/africa/suspect-in-benghazi-attack-scoffs-at-us.html?_r=0

Witnesses and the authorities have called Ahmed Abu Khattala one of the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 attack on the American diplomatic mission here. But just days after President Obama reasserted his vow to bring those responsible to justice, Mr. Abu Khattala spent two leisurely hours on Thursday evening at a crowded luxury hotel, sipping a strawberry frappe on a patio and scoffing at the threats coming from the American and Libyan governments.

All because Axelrod says keeping a light footprint (and hiding that Al Qaeda autonomy) in Libya is just good politics.

But what's really weird is how Al Qaeda in Libya wasn't really much of a terrorist problem before. What happened? Oh that's right, complete power vacuum because we started plinking Tinpot dictators with no plan for what comes after. Oh and with zero Congressional approval.

You guys keep not only matching Bush, but one-upping him. While applauding things you used to claim were criminal.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-08-2012, 08:02 AM
Yeah, what am I talking about. Justice was served. The Youtube Perpgoat is locked away for at least a year.

Meanwhile

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/world/africa/suspect-in-benghazi-attack-scoffs-at-us.html?_r=0



All because Axelrod says keeping a light footprint (and hiding that Al Qaeda autonomy) in Libya is just good politics.

But what's really weird is how Al Qaeda in Libya wasn't really much of a terrorist problem before. What happened? Oh that's right, complete power vacuum because we started plinking Tinpot dictators with no plan for what comes after. Oh and with zero Congressional approval.

You guys keep not only matching Bush, but one-upping him. While applauding things you used to claim were criminal.

Republican leadership on Libya: WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

Republican leadership days later: WHY DID YOU DO THAT THING WE TOLD YOU TO DO?

Republican leadership now: WE CANNOT BELIEVE YOU DID THAT THING WE TOLD YOU TO DO AND NOW YOU'RE WORSE THAN BUSH!

Republicans: Morons.

TonyR
11-08-2012, 08:07 AM
You're claiming that 93% of a populace voting along racial lines ISNT racism...

While I agree that there would be an uproar if 93% of whites voted for Romney, you really can't compare the situations like that. African Americans are a minority, there's a history there.

I look at it this way. African Americans voted for Obama more than against Romney. So to me that isn't as "racist" as voting against Obama just because of the color of his skin.

But again, I agree that the 93% is a bit disconcerting. But you and I have never had the "black experience". We've never been discriminated against because of the color of our skin. We've never been the only kid with dark skin in the classroom. We've never had negative assumptions made about us because of our skin color. Our parents never had "the talk" with us on this issue. We weren't raised in the black community, and we've never been part of it. Our president has always been a white guy. If the tables were turned I don't think it's outlandish to suggest that we might support "our guy". It's a pride thing. They were proud of being part of electing the first president of color in 2008, and now they're proud of defending his office against the rich white guy in 2012. Is this "racist"? Maybe. But again, they aren't voting against Romney because he's white. They're voting for Obama because he's black. And this is without considering that blacks generally vote Dem anyway, which greatly reduces the number of blacks for which race was a determining factor.

I also don't think the "he wouldn't have won if he was white" argument is correct. I think for every black person that voted for him because he's black there's at least one white person who voted against him for the same reason. And I think that's a rather common sensical assumption. There are roughly 4 times more white voters than black voters. So it only takes 25% of white voters factoring in race to match the black vote.

This is a difficult, sensitive topic. And I understand where you're coming from and why that 93% is a bit jarring at first glance. But I have a hard time with the "he only won because he's black" type of argument in a country where a whole region overwhelmingly voted for Romney/against Obama, and in a country where African Americans are a minority with a "colorful" history. It's not a utopian situation. But I don't think it really says anything nearly as bad as the 93% seems to suggest at first glance.

Just my 2 cents. Sorry this got so heated.

baja
11-08-2012, 08:19 AM
While I agree that there would be an uproar if 93% of whites voted for Romney, you really can't compare the situations like that. African Americans are a minority, there's a history there.

I look at it this way. African Americans voted for Obama more than against Romney. So to me that isn't as "racist" as voting against Obama just because of the color of his skin.

But again, I agree that the 93% is a bit disconcerting. But you and I have never had the "black experience". We've never been discriminated against because of the color of our skin. We've never been the only kid with dark skin in the classroom. We've never had negative assumptions made about us because of our skin color. Our parents never had "the talk" with us on this issue. We weren't raised in the black community, and we've never been part of it. Our president has always been a white guy. If the tables were turned I don't think it's outlandish to suggest that we might support "our guy". It's a pride thing. They were proud of being part of electing the first president of color in 2008, and now they're proud of defending his office against the rich white guy in 2012. Is this "racist"? Maybe. But again, they aren't voting against Romney because he's white. They're voting for Obama because he's black. And this is without considering that blacks generally vote Dem anyway, which greatly reduces the number of blacks for which race was a determining factor.

I also don't think the "he wouldn't have won if he was white" argument is correct. I think for every black person that voted for him because he's black there's at least one white person who voted against him for the same reason. And I think that's a rather common sensical assumption. There are roughly 4 times more white voters than black voters. So it only takes 25% of white voters factoring in race to match the black vote.

This is a difficult, sensitive topic. And I understand where you're coming from and why that 93% is a bit jarring at first glance. But I have a hard time with the "he only won because he's black" type of argument in a country where a whole region overwhelmingly voted for Romney/against Obama, and in a country where African Americans are a minority with a "colorful" history. It's not a utopian situation. But I don't think it really says anything nearly as bad as the 93% seems to suggest at first glance.

Just my 2 cents. Sorry this got so heated.

Wonder what those numbers would look like if the black guy has Romney's platform and a white guy was the left leaning guy?

TheReverend
11-08-2012, 08:33 AM
While I agree that there would be an uproar if 93% of whites voted for Romney, you really can't compare the situations like that. African Americans are a minority, there's a history there.

I look at it this way. African Americans voted for Obama more than against Romney. So to me that isn't as "racist" as voting against Obama just because of the color of his skin.

But again, I agree that the 93% is a bit disconcerting. But you and I have never had the "black experience". We've never been discriminated against because of the color of our skin. We've never been the only kid with dark skin in the classroom. We've never had negative assumptions made about us because of our skin color. Our parents never had "the talk" with us on this issue. We weren't raised in the black community, and we've never been part of it. Our president has always been a white guy. If the tables were turned I don't think it's outlandish to suggest that we might support "our guy". It's a pride thing. They were proud of being part of electing the first president of color in 2008, and now they're proud of defending his office against the rich white guy in 2012. Is this "racist"? Maybe. But again, they aren't voting against Romney because he's white. They're voting for Obama because he's black. And this is without considering that blacks generally vote Dem anyway, which greatly reduces the number of blacks for which race was a determining factor.

I also don't think the "he wouldn't have won if he was white" argument is correct. I think for every black person that voted for him because he's black there's at least one white person who voted against him for the same reason. And I think that's a rather common sensical assumption. There are roughly 4 times more white voters than black voters. So it only takes 25% of white voters factoring in race to match the black vote.

This is a difficult, sensitive topic. And I understand where you're coming from and why that 93% is a bit jarring at first glance. But I have a hard time with the "he only won because he's black" type of argument in a country where a whole region overwhelmingly voted for Romney/against Obama, and in a country where African Americans are a minority with a "colorful" history. It's not a utopian situation. But I don't think it really says anything nearly as bad as the 93% seems to suggest at first glance.

Just my 2 cents. Sorry this got so heated.

You might have a point if Obama hadn't received more white votes than Gore or Kerry (and that's running against G-effing-W). Alas, that is NOT the case. No matter what "studies" you cite that literally base a portion of their "research" on public school children, we have actually statistics showing this.

You keep on celebrating the reversal of generations of civil rights work, though!

TonyR
11-08-2012, 08:46 AM
You might have a point if Obama hadn't received more white votes than Gore or Kerry

More white votes because more voted? Or a higher percentage of the white vote?


You keep on celebrating the reversal of generations of civil rights work, though!

I'm not "celebrating" any such thing. I'm glad the guy I thought was the better candidate won. I don't care about his skin color.

But I'd be curious to know how/why "generations of civil rights work" has been reversed? Because ~90+% of black people voted for a black guy, instead of the usual ~80+% voting Dem?

BroncoBeavis
11-08-2012, 08:48 AM
Republican leadership on Libya: WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

Republican leadership days later: WHY DID YOU DO THAT THING WE TOLD YOU TO DO?

Republican leadership now: WE CANNOT BELIEVE YOU DID THAT THING WE TOLD YOU TO DO AND NOW YOU'RE WORSE THAN BUSH!

Republicans: Morons.

Well you could get more specific. Support or opposition was never universal. But it's really just a deflection because it doesn't really matter.

Supporting or not supporting the action is different than simply ignoring the Constitutional issue of whether it is ever sanctioned by Congress. He likely would've gotten authorization. But he didn't ask. Not sure why. Guessing because he thought it was bad press.

But just in case you think it's just some big misunderstanding or difference of opinion, note that the man himself used to draw a hard line for others which suddenly became soft when applied to himself.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/mar/23/barack-obama/barack-obamas-libya-intervention-flip-flop-what-he/

So where does this leave us? In 2007, Obama was adamant that the president did not have the power to authorize an attack if there was no imminent threat to the U.S. But now he has authorized just such an action. Full Flop.

TheReverend
11-08-2012, 08:48 AM
More white votes because more voted? Or a higher percentage of the white vote?

I'm not "celebrating" any such thing. I'm glad the guy I thought was the better candidate won. I don't care about his skin color.

But I'd be curious to know how/why "generations of civil rights work" has been reversed? Because ~90+% of black people voted for a black guy, instead of the usual ~80+% voting Dem?

Because an election was decided by image and not substance.

Regardless of who you champion and what you believe, America loses in that scenario EVERY time.

Garcia Bronco
11-08-2012, 08:56 AM
Lol at all the emotional butt-hurt feelings. Losing is a part of partcipating. Everybody got their vote and the results are the results. No matter who won, we're on the long road to the bottom because of the outright mismanangement and poor decisons of the babyboomers. The public debt is the number one issue for me and it's not going to get addressed by either of these factions.

TonyR
11-08-2012, 08:58 AM
Because an election was decided by image and not substance.

Regardless of who you champion and what you believe, America loses in that scenario EVERY time.

While I certainly wouldn't disagree with your second point, I don't agree with your first. What "substance" did Romney provide? He pretended to be right wing to win the party nomination (including the choice of a right wing running mate), and then he pretended to be moderate (including taking many of Obama's positions) to win the election. He presented an overall plan which was not much more than platitudes and an economic/tax plan that wouldn't hold up to even high level scrutiny. I'm not a blind Obama loyalist. I wish I had a better option. I didn't feel like I did.

TheReverend
11-08-2012, 09:07 AM
While I certainly wouldn't disagree with your second point, I don't agree with your first. What "substance" did Romney provide? He pretended to be right wing to win the party nomination (including the choice of a right wing running mate), and then he pretended to be moderate (including taking to win the election. He presented an overall plan which was not much more than platitudes and an economic/tax plan that wouldn't hold up to even high level scrutiny. I'm not a blind Obama loyalist. I wish I had a better option. I didn't feel like I did.

I'm not claiming YOU didn't decide by substance. Many did. In fact, what would've amounted to nearly 3% of the popular vote.

I have no issues with Obama winning. It's the racial vehicle he won with that upsets me. We should be better than that.

Old Dude
11-08-2012, 09:41 AM
... so if we use that as a baseline, we can now quantify and conclude that roughly 20% of African Americans voted by race and the election was won by it.
...


Not really. In order to reach that conclusion, you'd have to assume that all the remaining issues in the platforms were exactly the same for Hispanics and African Americans - but they aren't.

We could quibble about that all day, but instead, I'll grant you your fundamental premise: that a huge percentage of blacks identified more with Obama than Romney (hardly a surprise) and that they turned out in greater numbers to support Obama than they would have turned out for some white democrat with either the same or even more liberal views -

So what?

Racial disparity is an issue in this country and has been since it was founded. After over 200 years of white domination, African-Americans are now supposed to set all that aside and become politically color-blind?

And this is in the same election cycle where they see an African-America candidate being falsely attacked for not being a Christian, or even an American? You think that doesn't reinforce their identification with a guy who is more likely to understand their viewpoints and the kind of ongoing prejudice they experience on a daily basis?

The fact is that a lot of people - maybe most voters - tend, when everything is said and done - to vote for the person they most trust to represent their interests. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes they're wrong. But that's politics. Always has been and always will be, and calling out blacks in this election (still a substantial minority of the electorate) sounds like nothing more than bitter grapes.

houghtam
11-08-2012, 09:50 AM
93% worth?

Never mind you just PROVIDED evidence showing the same general economic class as Hispanics... so if we use that as a baseline, we can now quantify and conclude that roughly 20% of African Americans voted by race and the election was won by it.

I appreciate your efforts you to statistically prove my complaint, Old Dude, but we're all the losers here. This logic train leads to parties providing the best minority candidate instead of the best candidate for the job.

Yay, inequality.

Nice math. Big fan of Rasmussen are we?

Again, you're out of your element. Statistically speaking, you have no clue what you're talking about. There is literally no correlation between those numbers, and anyone who who has ever taken a freshman stats course in college will tell you the same.

BowlenBall
11-08-2012, 09:54 AM
88% of Romney Voters Were White (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/11/mitt_romney_white_voters_the_gop_candidate_s_race_ based_monochromatic_campaign.html)

Strange that we're calling black people racist, isn't it...?

(note to black OM members: I apologize for my peckerwood cracker OM brethren).

Rohirrim
11-08-2012, 10:02 AM
Lol at all the emotional butt-hurt feelings. Losing is a part of partcipating. Everybody got their vote and the results are the results. No matter who won, we're on the long road to the bottom because of the outright mismanangement and poor decisons of the babyboomers. The public debt is the number one issue for me and it's not going to get addressed by either of these factions.

The baby boomers? Ha! What is it about the Right and their addiction to scapegoats?

Most of the legislation the Right is trying to attack and destroy was written before the baby boomers were born. Medicare and Medicaid was enacted before they were old enough to vote and the military industrial complex was also, already in operation.

I guess once the USSR fell, you could no longer blame everything on the commies, although that worked for a few decades. Then, you had the hippies, but they seem to have dissipated. Welfare queens wasn't a big enough demographic to blame everything on. Of course, there's that old standby, illegal immigrants.

Come to think of it, Obama clearly raked in the Latino vote. How many of those were illegal? Yeah! It's not those ****ing boomers (although we should shoot a bunch of them, just for yuks) it's those goddamn illegal aliens! They're destroying Amurca. There's a nigra in the White House! Yikes!

houghtam
11-08-2012, 10:03 AM
88% of Romney Voters Were White (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/11/mitt_romney_white_voters_the_gop_candidate_s_race_ based_monochromatic_campaign.html)

Strange that we're calling black people racist, isn't it...?

(note to black OM members: I apologize for my peckerwood cracker OM brethren).

Yep. From a statistical standpoint, if you can't plug in any other hypothetical factor and reach the same conclusion, then it's not math, it's speculation. If our president had a criminal record instead of being black, for example, you'd then be claiming that black people only voted for him because he's a criminal.

That also shows how blatantly racist it is to suggest that 20+% of the black population ONLY voted for him because of race.

Rohirrim
11-08-2012, 10:08 AM
My guess is that the majority of black Republicans, say those who voted for Reagan for example, were fiscal conservatives who tended to be socially moderate, or liberal, on social policy, although as a group they tend to be Christian and pro-life. In other words, they are moderate Republicans. As we all know, moderates, and god forbid, liberal conservatives are no longer welcome in the GOP. For the GOP to now turn around and whine that the blacks are not voting for them is just irony of the highest order. You kicked them all out your party, dumb****s! :rofl:

houghtam
11-08-2012, 10:39 AM
My guess is that the majority of black Republicans, say those who voted for Reagan for example, were fiscal conservatives who tended to be socially moderate, or liberal, on social policy, although as a group they tend to be Christian and pro-life. In other words, they are moderate Republicans. As we all know, moderates, and god forbid, liberal conservatives are no longer welcome in the GOP. For the GOP to now turn around and whine that the blacks are not voting for them is just irony of the highest order. You kicked them all out your party, dumb****s! :rofl:

It's logical, and best of all, you admit it's a guess.

My advice to Rev would be to sit in on a high school math class, and with the money he saves from taking a college stats class, he can buy himself a clue, or some more of that stuff he's smoking.

Basically, he's saying this:

Given - Obama is black
1 - 20% more black people voted for Obama than traditionally vote Democrat
Therefore - 20% of black people voted for Obama only because he's black.

Look, I can do it too!

Given - There was a hurricane 4 days before the election
1 - 20% more black people voted for Obama than traditionally vote Democrat
Therefore - 20% of black people only voted for Obama because there was a hurricane 4 days before the election.

My guess what happened is this. We all know and have seen over the past two cycles that Obama has basically run the best ground game in presidential campaign history. He reached out to many voting blocs, including blacks, but also including young people, latinos and women, who traditionally have had lower participation for various reasons, one of them being that they didn't feel they were represented in government.

I don't know about you guys, but I know several people...several white people, in fact, who said the same...I've never voted before, but it seems to me like Obama has more of my interests in mind, not just more than the "other guy", but more than anyone else has ever had who's run for president.

To simply look at one stat, and come up with a silly conclusion like that, really makes one look stupid. And I mean stupid, not in the "you're a stupid-head" way, I mean in the "you literally lack intelligence" way.

BroncoBeavis
11-08-2012, 10:46 AM
88% of Romney Voters Were White (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/11/mitt_romney_white_voters_the_gop_candidate_s_race_ based_monochromatic_campaign.html)

Strange that we're calling black people racist, isn't it...?

(note to black OM members: I apologize for my peckerwood cracker OM brethren).

But 88 percent of whites didn't vote for Romney. You're flipping this debate upside down.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-08-2012, 10:49 AM
But 88 percent of whites didn't vote for Romney.

L0L @ you thinking you have some sort of point. Ha!

razorwire77
11-08-2012, 10:49 AM
My guess is that the majority of black Republicans, say those who voted for Reagan for example, were fiscal conservatives who tended to be socially moderate, or liberal, on social policy, although as a group they tend to be Christian and pro-life. In other words, they are moderate Republicans. As we all know, moderates, and god forbid, liberal conservatives are no longer welcome in the GOP. For the GOP to now turn around and whine that the blacks are not voting for them is just irony of the highest order. You kicked them all out your party, dumb****s! :rofl:

My grandfather was an Eisenhower Republican, a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army and a Purple Heart recipient. He was a child of the depression, and believed that a strong central government combined with American exceptionalism was what defined us as a nation. He was also fiscally conservative and like Eisenhower was fearful of the military industrial complex, the expenses associated with nation building and the morality questions of unnecessary perpetual warfare. Defense should be for defense he used to say.

I'm sure he'd be considered a Marxist, Communist Socialist, "taker" by today's chickenhawk Republican power structure. The Republican Party has some serious soul searching to do. The Lee Atwater playbook is becoming less and less effective in national elections. Sure it will work to secure a state Senate seat in Mississippi, but in the grand scheme of things, who is really going to give a **** south of the Mason Dixon line? The party has been infiltrated with money from elites who want to set up a Corporate Oligarchy and from religious evangelical extremists who largely ignore Jesus's teachings when it's inconvenient.

The good news is I believe there are a large swath of Moderates and true fiscal conservatives that are growing tired of the nonsense. I think there are valid ideals where liberals and libertarians can find common ground. For example, the outrageously expensive and ineffective drug war spending; the outrageous costs associated with incarceration of non-violent offenders , Habeas Corpus questions, Patriot Act questions etc.

TonyR
11-08-2012, 10:51 AM
And this is in the same election cycle where they see an African-America candidate being falsely attacked for not being a Christian, or even an American? You think that doesn't reinforce their identification with a guy who is more likely to understand their viewpoints and the kind of ongoing prejudice they experience on a daily basis?

^ Yup. This is huge. Great point.

TonyR
11-08-2012, 10:52 AM
L0L @ you thinking you have some sort of point. Ha!

He also thinks we'd be better off with Tebow, so consider the source...

TonyR
11-08-2012, 10:53 AM
88% of Romney Voters Were White (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/11/mitt_romney_white_voters_the_gop_candidate_s_race_ based_monochromatic_campaign.html)

Strange that we're calling black people racist, isn't it...?

(note to black OM members: I apologize for my peckerwood cracker OM brethren).

^ This is what got me so animated on this topic to begin with. White males in particular voted against Obama in droves and yet we're supposed to be mad at African Americans for supporting a black candidate?

houghtam
11-08-2012, 10:56 AM
^ This is what got me so animated on this topic to begin with. White males in particular voted against Obama in droves and yet we're supposed to be mad at African Americans for supporting a black candidate?

It's perpetuating the stupid notion that "reverse racism" is somehow as big or bigger a problem than "regular racism".