PDA

View Full Version : Why the Repulicans lost the election



LokiMeister
11-07-2012, 08:37 AM
Here is why they lost:

- The economy, while not great, is getting better, with unemployment coming down ever so slightly at the right time.
- Anti-birth control stance. What woman in their right mind is going to give up the right to birth control or abortions? There aren't too many out there that want to turn back the clock and reverse Roe V. Wade.
- Threatened loss of entitlements. When you are out of work, either willingly or unwillingly, the specter of losing your entitlements is daunting.
- Healthcare: people want healthcare and don't think they should have to "pay" for it.

Here in Wisconsin, we did the unthinkable, we hired the most radical democrat in that Beatch Tammy Baldwin to replace Herb Kohl in the Senate. While Tommy Thompson wouldn't have been the greatest choice, he would have a heck of a lot more moderate then Tammy. Baldwin is actually worse than Nancy Pelosi.

Mark my words, the economy will take a nose dive due to the socialist policies that Obummer will continue.

BonMallari
11-07-2012, 10:31 AM
Here in Nevada Dean Heller (R) narrowly beat Berkley (D) mainly because she was so corrupt, but Romney got trounced in the state due to the overwhelming support of the Latino/minority union backed workers, our demographics here will be like Southern Calif in another two years

the GOP needs some leadership change at the top of the Party...Time for the McConnell and Boehner act to take their show home, they just squandered everything they won in 2010...they ran some mediocre candidates and they all got clobbered.....and they all got clobbered in SWING states, they lost every election, including the aforementioned Thompson-Baldwin race

Hindsight may be 20-20 but the R primary season may have done more to hurt the party than to come up with a candidate....dont know what the answer is, Mitt may not have been the best choice but he was the most electable of the choices we had....Looks like the country wants someone that they like as opposed to someone who is qualified

huntinman
11-07-2012, 10:56 AM
I think Uncle Bill has had it right all along... we as a nation can survive an Obama administration (maybe even the second one)... but we can't surve the kind of idiots that would elect someone like him to lead this country...Twice!

Total abject blindness to his record of failure... Yet they put him back in power for four more years. This is not the country I grew up in. We are on the fast train to becoming Greece. (or worse)

Franco
11-07-2012, 11:46 AM
I think Uncle Bill has had it right all along... we as a nation can survive an Obama administration (maybe even the second one)... but we can't surve the kind of idiots that would elect someone like him to lead this country...Twice!

Total abject blindness to his record of failure... Yet they put him back in power for four more years. This is not the country I grew up in. We are on the fast train to becoming Greece. (or worse)



You said your boy was going to win big, what happened?

If you would absorb News other than Fox News, you would know that the Repubs are as much of the blame for the Deficit as the Dems and that Romney's plan also called for growing the Deficit! Yet, you rejected the only candidates that put forth a budget that reduced the Deficit. So, I would include you in that group that would lead us to become like Greece!

Colt Farrington
11-07-2012, 01:32 PM
Alright, here is what I think happened-

The Republicans have lost site of the arena they play in. The have lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections. America is a center/ right country, NOT a center religious right country. Just look at yesterday. Two states, by popular vote, agreed that there should be no categorical difference between marijuana and wine. Two other states voted that "Adam and Steve" should be able to join in the same marriage contracts as traditionally married families. Social conservative principles do not poll well with the majority of Americans. I believe Americans don't want more government control of their lives. They want to be left alone to make their own decisions.

I also think the Republicans way underestimated the legacy of George W. Bush. They went all in with backing Bush’s' policies and the law of the harvest stands- you reap what you sow. We were in rough shape when Obama took office and "Are you better off today than you were four years ago" just isn't going to cut it. People remember how we got here and Romney didn't differentiate himself very well from those same polices. Clint Eastwood inadvertently gave them the perfect campaign phrase, "When you hire a guy and he doesn't do the job, you just have to let him go." They should have been all over that like geese on white bread. Instead went with the "today vs. 4 years ago" line and you just can’t sell that but so many times. Reagan did in 1980 and Romney is certainly no Reagan.

Blaming the liberal media is a spin at best. Fox news has higher ratings than the rest combined. If you think the media won this for Obama you are only kidding yourself to keep from dealing with reality.

charly_t
11-07-2012, 01:33 PM
.................................................. .................................................. .............Looks like the country wants someone that they like as opposed to someone who is qualified

You got that 100% correct. A lot of this year's ( pres ) election was about popularity. Saw this play out in family a lot. Scared me I can tell you. Maybe too many koolade >( spelled this way on purpose ) drinkers :-(

BonMallari
11-07-2012, 02:11 PM
this actually happened to me about half an hour ago...a young ethnic man approached me after I had just got done putting gas in my car..he was dressed ok, new Nike shoes, hoody, new UNLV hat and listening to an iPhone. guess he just saw me put my money clip in my pocket

punk asks " hey can I have a dollar to get me some smokes"

Me : " go ask Obama for the money, I am broke"

punk: "hey man I know you got it, I just saw you put it away"

Me: "you bet your azzz and thats where its gonna stay"....by then I had already sat in my vehicle and had my hand on my Gerber hunting knife which I sometimes carry next to the console...

said punk starts to take a couple of steps toward me , at which time I show him what was in my hand. He stops dead in his tracks and says with a dead serious face

" man, I was just askin for a dolla, no need to go pullin no blade on a brother, I see you got plenty"

I wonder what he would have said if I had the Sig .40 with me.....


Guess Rush was right today when he said " you can't beat Santa Claus"

huntinman
11-07-2012, 02:40 PM
You said your boy was going to win big, what happened?

If you would absorb News other than Fox News, you would know that the Repubs are as much of the blame for the Deficit as the Dems and that Romney's plan also called for growing the Deficit! Yet, you rejected the only candidates that put forth a budget that reduced the Deficit. So, I would include you in that group that would lead us to become like Greece!



The deficit didn't have a damn thing to do with Obama winning. In fact, the people who voted him in could give a damn how big it gets as long as they have an Obama phone, food stamps and an unemployment check for life. Deficits? Your'e talking about deficits? Don't talk to me about deficits till you see what happens over the next few years... Deficits??

The average Obama voter never heard the word deficit. And if they did they would think it is something their dog did in the bushes.

menmon
11-07-2012, 02:49 PM
Bill....surely you learned more from last night that this....the extreme can not win and if the republicans don't change and decide to compromise and work with the left they will boot them out.

For someone that would not take my bet...I offer you another one...either they work with the whitehouse of you will see power lost in the house in two years.

luvmylabs23139
11-07-2012, 02:57 PM
Bill....surely you learned more from last night that this....the extreme can not win and if the republicans don't change and decide to compromise and work with the left they will boot them out.

For someone that would not take my bet...I offer you another one...either they work with the whitehouse of you will see power lost in the house in two years.

Funny, here in NC we decided to send in extra troops to the house. We tossed three of dems for republicans.

huntinman
11-07-2012, 02:59 PM
Bill....surely you learned more from last night that this....the extreme can not win and if the republicans don't change and decide to compromise and work with the left they will boot them out.

For someone that would not take my bet...I offer you another one...either they work with the whitehouse of you will see power lost in the house in two years.

The extreme did win... the extreme left. How quickly you have forgotten the midterms of 2010... The biggest lib wipeout in congressional history. Your guys would be wise to remember that. It wasn't that long ago... The days after Obamas first election everyone said conservatism was dead. Dems would rule forever, blah, blah, blah. Two years later, they were practically run out of town... it can happen again.. It is a never ending battle... The war is not over, we have only just begun to fight.

menmon
11-07-2012, 03:07 PM
Ok Rush...bring it on

huntinman
11-07-2012, 03:20 PM
Ok Rush...bring it on

Did you and others like you just lay down and give up when Bush won? Or do you keep believing in your principals and fighting to get those issues pushed to the front?

Franco
11-07-2012, 03:42 PM
The deficit didn't have a damn thing to do with Obama winning. In fact, the people who voted him in could give a damn how big it gets as long as they have an Obama phone, food stamps and an unemployment check for life. Deficits? Your'e talking about deficits? Don't talk to me about deficits till you see what happens over the next few years... Deficits??

The average Obama voter never heard the word deficit. And if they did they would think it is something their dog did in the bushes.

Greece's problem is their Deficit! That they had to be bailed out by the Euro-Union. So, when people say, " we will wind up like Greece", they are talking about Greece's financial woes. Somehow, I think you knew it but you got caught supporting a candidate that woould grow our Deficit and because you rejected and ridiculed politicians that wanted to take our Defict head on and eliminate it!

Other than that, Greece is a nice place to visit.

duckheads
11-07-2012, 03:43 PM
Obama was re-elected with the highest unemployment rate since FDR.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/obama-wins-election-highest-unemployment-rate-since-fdr-171136752.html;_ylt=AuhGLGLY42x499WEwz0nHEuiuYdG;_ ylu=X3oDMTRwM2phMmhtBG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIFRvcCBTdG 9yaWVzIG1peGVkIGxpc3QEcGtnAzUwYTg4ZTU4LTdhYTgtM2Jl NC1hMTI1LTYyZTJkZWFkM2M0ZQRwb3MDNARzZWMDTWVkaWFCTG lzdE1peGVkTFBDQVRlbXAEdmVyAzNlODJiYjMwLTI5MDAtMTFl Mi1hZmI1LTI0YzUxYTNlYmY0NA--;_ylg=X3oDMTFpNzk0NjhtBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3

People still blaming Bush for the economy which proves how clueless many of the Obama voters are. Obama makes lots of promises to create jobs with no explanation of how he will do it. Where are the specifics on how he will do this? Lots of empty promises just like last time. Who will the sheeple blame when the economy continues to tank? Just today two different people called for us to pick up their softener that they rent from us as they are loosing their homes. Yep economy is getting so much better!

Franco
11-07-2012, 03:47 PM
The extreme did win... the extreme left. How quickly you have forgotten the midterms of 2010... The biggest lib wipeout in congressional history. Your guys would be wise to remember that. It wasn't that long ago... The days after Obamas first election everyone said conservatism was dead. Dems would rule forever, blah, blah, blah. Two years later, they were practically run out of town... it can happen again.. It is a never ending battle... The war is not over, we have only just begun to fight.

And, a lot of those 2010 mid-term Tea Baggers got booted yesterday! Why? because the only thing they had on thier mind was going after Big Bird and Planned Parenthood. They didn't go after big spending because most of them were just a bunch of small-minded dummies!

When Debbie Shultz was grinning ear to ear this morning on TV, it was because of folks like you!

huntinman
11-07-2012, 04:06 PM
And, a lot of those 2010 mid-term Tea Baggers got booted yesterday! Why? because the only thing they had on thier mind was going after Big Bird and Planned Parenthood. They didn't go after big spending because most of them were just a bunch of small-minded dummies!

When Debbie Shultz was grinning ear to ear this morning on TV, it was because of folks like you!

Dragging out the old Liberal favorite "Tea-Bagger"? How classy, you've been taking shots at republicans ever since they rejected your favorite libertarian, Ron Paul and you just can't stop. Must be something in that swamp water.

Jay Dufour
11-07-2012, 04:19 PM
Not only four more years....Hilary has 8 after that....keep on the abortion thing.....and common sense cuts to hand outs......and they will always win.

Franco
11-07-2012, 04:20 PM
Dragging out the old Liberal favorite "Tea-Bagger"? How classy, you've been taking shots at republicans ever since they rejected your favorite libertarian, Ron Paul and you just can't stop. Must be something in that swamp water.

I've been taking shots at Repubs longer than the primary season! Bush43 got this country into a huge mess and in all fairness, no one could have gotten us out of it in 3.5 years. I've been taking shots at Repubs because they have become the party of big government, big spending and big deficits and they continue with like politicians. The Repubs have become as bad as the Dems and worse on social issues!

CharlieC
11-07-2012, 04:21 PM
The real reason Mitt Romney lost is plain and simple. There are 50% of the people in this country who are only looking for a hand out from the government. I do not include those on Social Security in this group as those who are If you look at the states that Obama won you will see where these people live in over whelming numbers. We in the south did not vote for Obama.

Franco
11-07-2012, 04:26 PM
The real reason Mitt Romney lost is plain and simple. There are 50% of the people in this country who are only looking for a hand out from the government. I do not include those on Social Security in this group as those who are If you look at the states that Obama won you will see where these people live in over whelming numbers. We in the south did not vote for Obama.

I don't see this as a valid agruement because one could also say that Obama carried the states with higher educational levels. The south is not known for having a great wealth of intelligence. Great Football, yes. Higher education, no.

fetchtx
11-07-2012, 04:35 PM
this actually happened to me about half an hour ago...a young ethnic man approached me after I had just got done putting gas in my car..he was dressed ok, new Nike shoes, hoody, new UNLV hat and listening to an iPhone. guess he just saw me put my money clip in my pocket

punk asks " hey can I have a dollar to get me some smokes"

Me : " go ask Obama for the money, I am broke"

punk: "hey man I know you got it, I just saw you put it away"

Me: "you bet your azzz and thats where its gonna stay"....by then I had already sat in my vehicle and had my hand on my Gerber hunting knife which I sometimes carry next to the console...

said punk starts to take a couple of steps toward me , at which time I show him what was in my hand. He stops dead in his tracks and says with a dead serious face

" man, I was just askin for a dolla, no need to go pullin no blade on a brother, I see you got plenty"

I wonder what he would have said if I had the Sig .40 with me.....


Guess Rush was right today when he said " you can't beat Santa Claus"

Was at local gun store getting some ammo, owner very busy many gun sales also when he called his supplier to order some inventory and the supplier gave him a list of what he had left in stock to pick from, as his supplies were dropping fast today.

huntinman
11-07-2012, 04:44 PM
I don't see this as a valid agruement because one could also say that Obama carried the states with higher educational levels. The south is not known for having a great wealth of intelligence. Great Football, yes. Higher education, no.

You prove that by living as far south as one can go...

Franco
11-07-2012, 04:51 PM
You prove that by living as far south as one can go...

Had you paid attention while working on your GED, you would know that there are parts of Texas and Florida more south than where I live!

huntinman
11-07-2012, 04:54 PM
Had you paid attention while working on your GED, you would know that there are parts of Texas and Florida more south than where I live!

OK, if your'e so smart walk outside and start walking South and let me know when you get to TX or FL...:cool:

Franco
11-07-2012, 04:58 PM
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/536777_458023527597058_555011875_n.jpg

huntinman
11-07-2012, 05:02 PM
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/536777_458023527597058_555011875_n.jpg

So, you are saying if you die out the swamp while duck hunting, they will never identify your body? Thats a shame... Bless your heart.

murral stark
11-07-2012, 05:09 PM
OK, if your'e so smart walk outside and start walking South and let me know when you get to TX or FL...:cool:
He said parts of those states had locations further south than where he lives in Louisiana. Never said he could go south to either one of them. Beside the fact that florida and Louisiana do not connect geographically.

Gerry Clinchy
11-07-2012, 06:13 PM
Hermain Cain contended: Obama ran a popularity contest campaign, and that's what happened. At least partially right.

Rush added, as Bon noted, who wouldn't vote for Santa Claus? When you hit the tipping point when as many are getting from the govt as there are sending money to the govt, you're going to have a problem getting enough people to vote for giving the goodies back.

Can't believe that Hurricane Sandy came to O's aid! A great photo op with Christie. And actually did NOT do a thing to really help. Alabama utility workers were not allowed to work in NJ because they were non-union workers! Gasoline lines in NY and NJ remain a mile long. Generators and supplies brought into NY for the marathon (that was cancelled) just sat there when they could have been useful to those in distress.

HPL
11-07-2012, 06:39 PM
I don't see this as a valid agruement because one could also say that Obama carried the states with higher educational levels. The south is not known for having a great wealth of intelligence. Great Football, yes. Higher education, no.


Well, as long as you don't include Texas (heavily Repub) in that, you might have a point, but Texas has at least three universities (t.u. Austin, Rice, and Texas A&M (I think SMU was also in there) listed in the top 200 in the WORLD. We also have NASA, Dell, etc., so we at least have a wealth of cognitive reserves on which to draw.

Pete
11-08-2012, 09:13 AM
Anti-birth control stance. What woman in their right mind is going to give up the right to birth control or abortions? There aren't too many out there that want to turn back the clock and reverse Roe V. Wade.[/COLOR]]
This alone could have persuaded enough woman to vote differently. I find it strange that a a concept to be shadowed under governmental rule could be considered a conservative concept. A true conservative would keep government out of such decisions. Separation of church and state comes to mind.

Pete

road kill
11-08-2012, 09:26 AM
So, you are saying if you die out the swamp while duck hunting, they will never identify your body? Thats a shame... Bless your heart.
I have been FORCED to arrive at this conclusion;

New Orleans is America's Montreal
Cajun Country her Quebec


Nuff said..............

LokiMeister
11-08-2012, 09:35 AM
Anti-birth control stance. What woman in their right mind is going to give up the right to birth control or abortions? There aren't too many out there that want to turn back the clock and reverse Roe V. Wade.[/COLOR]]
This alone could have persuaded enough woman to vote differently. I find it strange that a a concept to be shadowed under governmental rule could be considered a conservative concept. A true conservative would keep government out of such decisions. Separation of church and state comes to mind.

Pete

I have never understood this either. Must be a religious thing. I am a Christian, but a sensible one.

Ken Bora
11-08-2012, 09:42 AM
so Franco and I are like brothers????? Le Habs Canadians! :cool:




I have been FORCED to arrive at this conclusion;

New Orleans is America's Montreal
Cajun Country her Quebec


Nuff said..............

Duckquilizer
11-08-2012, 09:44 AM
this actually happened to me about half an hour ago...a young ethnic man approached me after I had just got done putting gas in my car..he was dressed ok, new Nike shoes, hoody, new UNLV hat and listening to an iPhone. guess he just saw me put my money clip in my pocket

punk asks " hey can I have a dollar to get me some smokes"

Me : " go ask Obama for the money, I am broke"

punk: "hey man I know you got it, I just saw you put it away"

Me: "you bet your azzz and thats where its gonna stay"....by then I had already sat in my vehicle and had my hand on my Gerber hunting knife which I sometimes carry next to the console...

said punk starts to take a couple of steps toward me , at which time I show him what was in my hand. He stops dead in his tracks and says with a dead serious face

" man, I was just askin for a dolla, no need to go pullin no blade on a brother, I see you got plenty"

I wonder what he would have said if I had the Sig .40 with me.....


Guess Rush was right today when he said " you can't beat Santa Claus"

You just made my new sig line. I'll give equal credit to you and Rush.

Ken Bora
11-08-2012, 09:47 AM
and Montreal is an American city. oldest brewry in North America right there. About an hour and 15 min drive from were I sit if I hit the border right. They made it out of stone! Great tour I recomend. it is just not a United States, city. ;-)

Duckquilizer
11-08-2012, 09:50 AM
This alone could have persuaded enough woman to vote differently. I find it strange that a a concept to be shadowed under governmental rule could be considered a conservative concept. A true conservative would keep government out of such decisions. Separation of church and state comes to mind.

Pete

I have never understood this either. Must be a religious thing. I am a Christian, but a sensible one.[/QUOTE]

How much of one is for you to determine..

Seperation of church and state only means the state doesn't tell the church what to do. The "state" was founded on Christian principles and is to follow the will of the people. This is our whole problem, everyone has determined the opposite.

huntinman
11-08-2012, 10:20 AM
I have been FORCED to arrive at this conclusion;

New Orleans is America's Montreal
Cajun Country her Quebec


Nuff said..............

I have a feeling most of the cajuns have a lot more common sense than our good libertarian friend;-)

achiro
11-08-2012, 10:43 AM
- Anti-birth control stance. What woman in their right mind is going to give up the right to birth control or abortions? There aren't too many out there that want to turn back the clock and reverse Roe V. Wade.




This alone could have persuaded enough woman to vote differently. I find it strange that a a concept to be shadowed under governmental rule could be considered a conservative concept. A true conservative would keep government out of such decisions. Separation of church and state comes to mind.

Pete




I have never understood this either. Must be a religious thing. I am a Christian, but a sensible one.
This pretty much sums up the premise of your title. Republicans lost because they let the dims define them. The idea that even a republican like yourself thinks that this was Romneys stance on birth control is kind of sad. Just because the Catholics didn't want to pay for birth control didn't mean anyone in the Romney camp wanted to take it away.

huntinman
11-08-2012, 10:54 AM
This pretty much sums up the premise of your title. Republicans lost because they let the dims define them. The idea that even a republican like yourself thinks that this was Romneys stance on birth control is kind of sad. Just because the Catholics didn't want to pay for birth control didn't mean anyone in the Romney camp wanted to take it away.

That's correct... the ill informed public believes the sound bites on the nightly news... (or the comedy channel)

Franco
11-08-2012, 10:59 AM
I have never understood this either. Must be a religious thing. I am a Christian, but a sensible one.

How much of one is for you to determine..

Seperation of church and state only means the state doesn't tell the church what to do. The "state" was founded on Christian principles and is to follow the will of the people. This is our whole problem, everyone has determined the opposite.[/QUOTE]


Actually, it was our most influential Founding Father, Thomas Jefferson who wrote about the importance of the seperation of Chruch from State. It was penned in a letter to the Danberry Baptist Chruch regarding that there be no state sponsored church. An it means that the chruch does not tell the state. Because there is no state sponsored chruch! Jefferson was a Diest in belief, a child of the Enlightenment. Also, consider that in Jefferson's Bible, he makes no reference to God. What he does discuss in his bible is the importsnce of the teachings of the Rabbi Jesus as a foundation for freedom. However, Jefferson does NOt recognize Jesus as a son of a god, therefore Jefferson was not a Christian.

Duckquilizer
11-08-2012, 11:20 AM
I can read Wiki too...by the way he wasn't the only framer...

Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.

A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[18][19][20] (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible") and Benjamin Franklin.[21] Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[22]

Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism".[23

Franco
11-08-2012, 11:23 AM
I can read Wiki too...by the way he wasn't the only framer...

Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.

A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[18][19][20] (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible") and Benjamin Franklin.[21] Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[22]

Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism".[23

I never said he had anything to do with The Constitution. He was in France when it was being framed. He did however singlehandidly write the Declaration Of Independence.

There is nothing in The Constitution declaring a state sponsored chruch.

LokiMeister
11-08-2012, 11:25 AM
This pretty much sums up the premise of your title. Republicans lost because they let the dims define them. The idea that even a republican like yourself thinks that this was Romneys stance on birth control is kind of sad. Just because the Catholics didn't want to pay for birth control didn't mean anyone in the Romney camp wanted to take it away.

I, obviously, disagree. Romney more than once said he wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood. He took money from the Catholics. The Republican Party continually tries to reduce funding for birth control, favoring an abstinence stance, and repealing Roe V. Wade, are anti-abortion, are Pro-life.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

RailRoadRetrievers
11-08-2012, 11:30 AM
It has nothing to do with social issues, abortion, gay rights, government spending on birth control has absolutely nothing to do with the election. The Americans voted in some strong, strong conservatives, Cruz for example. They still have the values, its just the people overall bought into Obama's Free Stuff and that's what won. Social issues have nothing to do with this at all.....

Franco
11-08-2012, 11:32 AM
so Franco and I are like brothers????? Le Habs Canadians! :cool:

We too are free thinkers. Where dogma and fear do NOT dictate how we live!;)

gmhr1
11-08-2012, 11:53 AM
If the 3 million registered Repub's would have voted this may have had a different outcome.

achiro
11-08-2012, 12:22 PM
I, obviously, disagree. Romney more than once said he wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood. He took money from the Catholics. The Republican Party continually tries to reduce funding for birth control, favoring an abstinence stance, and repealing Roe V. Wade, are anti-abortion, are Pro-life.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/
Wow, you really fell for it. Saying that cutting PUBLIC funding to PP is wanting to eliminate birth control is like saying cutting funding to PBS is wanting to eliminate television.

huntinman
11-08-2012, 12:25 PM
People hear what they want to hear for the most part.

Pete
11-08-2012, 12:25 PM
http://mormon.org/faq/church-position-on-abortion

During the debate this was in fact Romney's position on abortion. This is fine for Romney and would also be my personal view on the matter,,,but I could not hold you and your wife to my standards especially when the bible may actually teach something different.

Pete

huntinman
11-08-2012, 12:27 PM
http://mormon.org/faq/church-position-on-abortion

During the debate this was in fact Romney's position on abortion
Pete

that's the mormon church position... how about go to Mitt Romney's website if you are going to post "his" position?

ARay11
11-08-2012, 12:29 PM
Bill....surely you learned more from last night that this....the extreme can not win and if the republicans don't change and decide to compromise and work with the left they will boot them out.

For someone that would not take my bet...I offer you another one...either they work with the whitehouse of you will see power lost in the house in two years.

The extreme DID win. Think about it. Every extremist group out there won.... because they all backed the same guy.

The R's only have one extreme group: Straight White people earning in excess of $250,000 annual household income.

The Dems have all the rest.

PamK
11-08-2012, 12:35 PM
Romney miscalculated the 47% turned into the 52%.

Duckquilizer
11-08-2012, 12:37 PM
Romney miscalculated the 47% turned into the 52%.

Idiots are hard to predict. ;)

HPL
11-08-2012, 01:01 PM
Wow, you really fell for it. Saying that cutting PUBLIC funding to PP is wanting to eliminate birth control is like saying cutting funding to PBS is wanting to eliminate television.

The thing is that the dems can frame that as being anti choice and THAT is really a problem with the single female vote. I have often said that I think that abortion is a terrible form of birth control. I have often also said that I am not "Pro" abortion, and don't think that you would find many people who truly are. One could easily take from those statements that I think that abortion should be against the law. One would be wrong.

The point being that this is the kind of divisive issue that is a real loser for the Republicans. IF a republican candidate for national office wants a chance of being elected he needs to be able to say convincingly that although he is against abortion, he is also against the government getting involved in an issue that should be between a woman, her family, and her own conscience. (and that has to be good enough for the powers that be within the republican party).

Duckquilizer
11-08-2012, 01:14 PM
The thing is that the dems can frame that as being anti choice and THAT is really a problem with the single female vote. I have often said that I think that abortion is a terrible form of birth control. I have often also said that I am not "Pro" abortion, and don't think that you would find many people who truly are. One could easily take from those statements that I think that abortion should be against the law. One would be wrong.

The point being that this is the kind of divisive issue that is a real loser for the Republicans. IF a republican candidate for national office wants a chance of being elected he needs to be able to say convincingly that although he is against abortion, he is also against the government getting involved in an issue that should be between a woman, her family, and her own conscience. (and that has to be good enough for the powers that be within the republican party).

What if a woman kills her 3 month old? Just curious how that plays in. Is that between a woman, her family, and her own conscience too?

scott spalding
11-08-2012, 01:27 PM
Then they have committed what the legal system has agreed is murder and they go to jail.

RailRoadRetrievers
11-08-2012, 01:34 PM
Does anyone really think that if the Republicans compromised their view, agreed with gay marriage, took a stance of pro-choice, and smoking weed, that they would be in the White House now?

Pete
11-08-2012, 01:44 PM
that's the mormon church position... how about go to Mitt Romney's website if you are going to post "his" position?

I watched the debate. It is what he said for the most part. If he believes something other than what his religion teaches that would make him a Jack mormon. I'm pretty sure he is not a Jack mormon.

Larry Thompson1
11-08-2012, 01:47 PM
Does anyone really think that if the Republicans compromised their view, agreed with gay marriage, took a stance of pro-choice, and smoking weed, that they would be in the White House now?

No I do not. If they want to win next time the thing to do is not change thier principles but rather change the voters minds. But ya can't fix stupid. It was more than one issue. It seems that the nation has accepted a left wing ideoligy of socialism. Alteast 52% HAS ANYWAY. I would like to see sucsession of the southern states, lets say from the Patomic river south. Give them Fla and Cal all red states can join the union all the rest can join the commies.

Pete
11-08-2012, 01:52 PM
http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/06/my-pro-life-pledge

I can't believe I took the time to find this for you. Match what his web site says with what the mormon faith says. However I do agree we should not devote one red cent to it.
Your welcome
Pete

HPL
11-08-2012, 01:54 PM
Does anyone really think that if the Republicans compromised their view, agreed with gay marriage, took a stance of pro-choice, and smoking weed, that they would be in the White House now?

Yes, if framed correctly. They could still say that they don't feel that gay marriage is moral, but that it is also no place for the government to be involved. The pro-choice stance is NOT pro abortion but is clearly the smart position, and I don't think that using any substance that affects one's judgement is smart, but I'm sure that all you beer drinkers (who contribute in large numbers to the carnage on our nations highways) don't feel that that is any of the govt's business if you want to knock back more than a few beers. You want the right to marry any member of the opposite gender you want as many times as you want, but would deny a similar right to many others just because you think their choice is a sin. Well, the Catholics think that serial marriage is a sin (as do I although I wouldn't use the word sin), but if the govt decreed that the only way you could remarry was if your spouse died, you would scream bloody murder (and I suspect that the actual murder rate would go up).

A true conservative (which is what the republicans are SUPPOSED to represent) wants the govt to take care of the business that is rightly relegated to govt, and STAY out of all else.

HPL
11-08-2012, 01:56 PM
What if a woman kills her 3 month old? Just curious how that plays in. Is that between a woman, her family, and her own conscience too?

1. Depends on the circumstances.

2. You're just being silly

Franco
11-08-2012, 01:58 PM
Yes, if framed correctly. They could still say that they don't feel that gay marriage is moral, but that it is also no place for the government to be involved. The pro-choice stance is NOT pro abortion but is clearly the smart position, and I don't think that using any substance that affects one's judgement is smart, but I'm sure that all you beer drinkers (who contribute in large numbers to the carnage on our nations highways) don't feel that that is any of the govt's business if you want to knock back more than a few beers. You want the right to marry any member of the opposite gender you want as many times as you want, but would deny a similar right to many others just because you think their choice is a sin. Well, the Catholics think that serial marriage is a sin (as do I although I wouldn't use the word sin), but if the govt decreed that the only way you could remarry was if your spouse died, you would scream bloody murder (and I suspect that the actual murder rate would go up).

A true conservative (which is what the republicans are SUPPOSED to represent) wants the govt to take care of the business that is rightly relegated to govt, and STAY out of all else.

Very true but unacceptable by today's Conservatives! The above is now at the core of the Libertarian Party and as someone as open-minded as you should consider a return to it.


http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/543033_10151322341651081_1398409097_n.jpg

HPL
11-08-2012, 02:02 PM
Yes, if framed correctly. They could still say that they don't feel that gay marriage is moral, but that it is also no place for the government to be involved. The pro-choice stance is NOT pro abortion but is clearly the smart position, and I don't think that using any substance that affects one's judgement is smart, but I'm sure that all you beer drinkers (who contribute in large numbers to the carnage on our nations highways) don't feel that that is any of the govt's business if you want to knock back more than a few beers. You want the right to marry any member of the opposite gender you want as many times as you want, but would deny a similar right to many others just because you think their choice is a sin. Well, the Catholics think that serial marriage is a sin (as do I although I wouldn't use the word sin), but if the govt decreed that the only way you could remarry was if your spouse died, you would scream bloody murder (and I suspect that the actual murder rate would go up).

A true conservative (which is what the republicans are SUPPOSED to represent) wants the govt to take care of the business that is rightly relegated to govt, and STAY out of all else.

Very true but unacceptable by today's Conservatives! The above is now at the core of the Libertarian Party and as someone as open-minded as you should consider a return to it.


http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/543033_10151322341651081_1398409097_n.jpg

Whereas the libertarian party might be a pretty good fit for me, (and I voted for several libertarians this time), I am also a pragmatist and felt that since Romney seemed to have a chance to unseat Obama (which was my primary goal this time) I voted Rep for pres.

LokiMeister
11-08-2012, 02:18 PM
Wow, you really fell for it. Saying that cutting PUBLIC funding to PP is wanting to eliminate birth control is like saying cutting funding to PBS is wanting to eliminate television.

Yep, I guess you are correct.:confused:

RailRoadRetrievers
11-08-2012, 03:59 PM
Honestly HPL, I disagree because the fact remains, it's not a state level issue therefore the party I support will openly stand against moral social issues. Until it becomes state level I will openly endorse those who carry my values. Pro-Choice is simply murder of the one person who deserves the choice. Sanctity of marriage. By standing down and compromising your view, then you are supporting it.

The point is this, if you think social issues lost the election, you are wrong. If republicans took the side of the democrats concerning these issues they still wouldn't get the vote because the democrats don't care what we support, they could find a transgendered black lesbian pot smoking abortion doctor to endorse their party and the democrats would call them a puppet or an Uncle Tom. The Republicans would lose credibility and integrity. Changing their stance will change nothing.

It's the fact that everyone overlooked where we are and are going, Boeing held off on a large layoff until after the election, so the unemployed number will rise, the economy still sucks, gas prices are sky high, insurance will be forced down our throats, and Obama wants us to be morally, socially, and economically like Europe.

LokiMeister
11-08-2012, 04:08 PM
http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/06/my-pro-life-pledge

I can't believe I took the time to find this for you. Match what his web site says with what the mormon faith says. However I do agree we should not devote one red cent to it.
Your welcome
Pete

Looks pretty similar.

ARay11
11-08-2012, 04:16 PM
Honestly HPL, I disagree because the fact remains, it's not a state level issue therefore the party I support will openly stand against moral social issues. Until it becomes state level I will openly endorse those who carry my values. Pro-Choice is simply murder of the one person who deserves the choice. Sanctity of marriage. By standing down and compromising your view, then you are supporting it.

The point is this, if you think social issues lost the election, you are wrong. If republicans took the side of the democrats concerning these issues they still wouldn't get the vote because the democrats don't care what we support, they could find a transgendered black lesbian pot smoking abortion doctor to endorse their party and the democrats would call them a puppet or an Uncle Tom. The Republicans would lose credibility and integrity. Changing their stance will change nothing.

It's the fact that everyone overlooked where we are and are going, Boeing held off on a large layoff until after the election, so the unemployed number will rise, the economy still sucks, gas prices are sky high, insurance will be forced down our throats, and Obama wants us to be morally, socially, and economically like Europe.

and why did folks over look these things? because they want their social issues.

Franco
11-09-2012, 06:29 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/543059_461389837245099_733945450_n.jpg

RailRoadRetrievers
11-09-2012, 07:00 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/543059_461389837245099_733945450_n.jpg

And colleges and institutions of higher learning aren't liberal and don't hire liberals to educate the youth of America and spew their liberal agendas.....

huntinman
11-09-2012, 07:25 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/543059_461389837245099_733945450_n.jpg

I don't call that "Best" educated... More like intellectual idiocy

road kill
11-09-2012, 07:28 AM
Yes, if framed correctly. They could still say that they don't feel that gay marriage is moral, but that it is also no place for the government to be involved. The pro-choice stance is NOT pro abortion but is clearly the smart position, and I don't think that using any substance that affects one's judgement is smart, but I'm sure that all you beer drinkers (who contribute in large numbers to the carnage on our nations highways) don't feel that that is any of the govt's business if you want to knock back more than a few beers. You want the right to marry any member of the opposite gender you want as many times as you want, but would deny a similar right to many others just because you think their choice is a sin. Well, the Catholics think that serial marriage is a sin (as do I although I wouldn't use the word sin), but if the govt decreed that the only way you could remarry was if your spouse died, you would scream bloody murder (and I suspect that the actual murder rate would go up).

A true conservative (which is what the republicans are SUPPOSED to represent) wants the govt to take care of the business that is rightly relegated to govt, and STAY out of all else.

Very true but unacceptable by today's Conservatives! The above is now at the core of the Libertarian Party and as someone as open-minded as you should consider a return to it.


http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/543033_10151322341651081_1398409097_n.jpg

How did he get reelected to his congressional seat then?

Duckquilizer
11-09-2012, 08:15 AM
Honestly HPL, I disagree because the fact remains, it's not a state level issue therefore the party I support will openly stand against moral social issues. Until it becomes state level I will openly endorse those who carry my values. Pro-Choice is simply murder of the one person who deserves the choice. Sanctity of marriage. By standing down and compromising your view, then you are supporting it.

The point is this, if you think social issues lost the election, you are wrong. If republicans took the side of the democrats concerning these issues they still wouldn't get the vote because the democrats don't care what we support, they could find a transgendered black lesbian pot smoking abortion doctor to endorse their party and the democrats would call them a puppet or an Uncle Tom. The Republicans would lose credibility and integrity. Changing their stance will change nothing.

It's the fact that everyone overlooked where we are and are going, Boeing held off on a large layoff until after the election, so the unemployed number will rise, the economy still sucks, gas prices are sky high, insurance will be forced down our throats, and Obama wants us to be morally, socially, and economically like Europe.

You couldn't be more accurate...

2tall
11-09-2012, 08:16 AM
And colleges and institutions of higher learning aren't liberal and don't hire liberals to educate the youth of America and spew their liberal agendas.....


I don't call that "Best" educated... More like intellectual idiocy

Just curious. By what standard would you guys define the level of "useful" education? Whenever I see the word "spew" in these posts, I find a lack of critical thinking and limited reasoning skills. Read more. Increase your vocabulary. Check your news sources. Then, debate away and be part of the solution!

Duckquilizer
11-09-2012, 08:19 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/543059_461389837245099_733945450_n.jpg

Boy that's the worst representation of what it takes to be "educated" that I have ever seen...

huntinman
11-09-2012, 08:25 AM
Just curious. By what standard would you guys define the level of "useful" education? Whenever I see the word "spew" in these posts, I find a lack of critical thinking and limited reasoning skills. Read more. Increase your vocabulary. Check your news sources. Then, debate away and be part of the solution!

I don't recall using the word "spew"... Not there is anything wrong with that. But you did.;-)

BonMallari
11-09-2012, 08:54 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/543059_461389837245099_733945450_n.jpg

Gee do you think Mass is # 1 because it has Harvard and MIT, and Conn is # 4 because of Yale, New Jersey has Princeton, NH has Dartmouth,NY has Columbia and Cornell

kinda skews that list just a bit doesnt it

Franco
11-09-2012, 09:42 AM
Gee do you think Mass is # 1 because it has Harvard and MIT, and Conn is # 4 because of Yale, New Jersey has Princeton, NH has Dartmouth,NY has Columbia and Cornell

kinda skews that list just a bit doesnt it

According to your cohorts, those institutions are worthless.

road kill
11-09-2012, 10:10 AM
According to your cohorts, those institutions are worthless.

Please, if you can, show one post where any of the "COHORTS" said these institutions were "worthless."

RailRoadRetrievers
11-09-2012, 10:25 AM
Just curious. By what standard would you guys define the level of "useful" education? Whenever I see the word "spew" in these posts, I find a lack of critical thinking and limited reasoning skills. Read more. Increase your vocabulary. Check your news sources. Then, debate away and be part of the solution!

I don't get what your saying

ARay11
11-09-2012, 10:31 AM
Gee do you think Mass is # 1 because it has Harvard and MIT, and Conn is # 4 because of Yale, New Jersey has Princeton, NH has Dartmouth,NY has Columbia and Cornell

kinda skews that list just a bit doesnt it

ding ding ding!! winner!!! lol

This graphic measures education by degrees earned in secondary institutions. It doesn't mean they're any smarter (or earn more money) than those of us with life-given educations.

Henry V
11-09-2012, 11:20 AM
More facts for consideration.
http://www.usnews.com/dbimages/master/32756/GR_120918_brodwin.jpg

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/04/mapstatestaxes-thumb-454x340-18041.gif

and confirming stories at:
http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/14/the-redblue-paradox
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/09/18/obama-supporters-subsidize-romney-supporters-with-their-taxes-
http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/

HPL
11-09-2012, 11:48 AM
The color of the states is somehow related to some form of spending but it doesn't really explain that part of the graphic.

JS
11-09-2012, 12:04 PM
More facts for consideration.
http://www.usnews.com/dbimages/master/32756/GR_120918_brodwin.jpg

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/04/mapstatestaxes-thumb-454x340-18041.gif

and confirming stories at:
http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/14/the-redblue-paradox
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/09/18/obama-supporters-subsidize-romney-supporters-with-their-taxes-
http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/

Awesome, Henry!!! Thank you for that graphic.

I think I may be able to use it over in the "Unions" thread! When I get some time, I will look for a correlation between the most tax producing states and number of union members. (I'm excited :cool:)

If it doesn't turn out like I hope, I prolly won't post it. ;-)

JS

JS
11-09-2012, 12:14 PM
.....

Republicans lost because they let the dims define them.

.....




That is funny! The Democrats did no such thing. Mitt Romney defined himself throughout the Republican primary. Then reinforced it in the first presidential debate when he ran roughshod over a sleeping Obama.

The next day, while you guys were cheering and counting your votes, the undecided, middle-of-the-road voters were saying, "WTF :shock: ... either this guy is a Romney imposter or he's lying through his teeth". Get over it.

JS

HPL
11-09-2012, 12:24 PM
That is funny! The Democrats did no such thing. Mitt Romney defined himself throughout the Republican primary. Then reinforced it in the first presidential debate when he ran roughshod over a sleeping Obama.

The next day, while you guys were cheering and counting your votes, the undecided, middle-of-the-road voters were saying, "WTF :shock: ... either this guy is a Romney imposter or he's lying through his teeth". Get over it.

JS

I love revisionist history. That is not actually what either the polls or the focus groups showed.

Marvin S
11-09-2012, 01:41 PM
Awesome, Henry!!! Thank you for that graphic.

I think I may be able to use it over in the "Unions" thread! When I get some time, I will look for a correlation between the most tax producing states and number of union members. (I'm excited :cool:)

If it doesn't turn out like I hope, I prolly won't post it. ;-)

JS

I look forward to the posting - hopefully you will be able to do some correlation regarding my original guesstimate of union membership by state. Remember, withholding information available is a form of lying, & I just believe you are above that :). It will make a very good baseline for my next foray onto the union thread :cool:.

Not to hurt any feelings but, I find it interesting when someone who lives in a RTW state, with little or no understanding of the situation a uneven playing field brings, espouses anything on the subject. Where we live the unions have inserted themselves into the fabric of government to the point of diminishing returns? I will post more on that subject & my opinion on what that does after your posting on the union thread :).

menmon
11-09-2012, 01:59 PM
Becasue they believed their on BS that the minorities would not get out and vote like they did in 2008. However, their underlying canidate offered a bad plan that catered to the well to do. Your base mostly white males (lot of them but not enough) would have voted for Micky Mouse if he had been a republican. Most most importantly, the republicans thought they could do it without women support...bad mistake.

When you were arguing the birth control issue this summer and was agreeing with Rush, I told you you lost then. Then you got more stupid embracing Akin and then endorsing Murdock.

This is why you lost. This country is a melting pot of all kinds of folks and they have their rights too. I like my guns and hunting and fishing, but others don't feel the same, and I realize that. So we compromise and work together or you can be like the republicans...their way or the highway. How did that work for you?

Henry V
11-09-2012, 04:32 PM
The color of the states is somehow related to some form of spending but it doesn't really explain that part of the graphic.

The blue states have a ratio of federal taxes received versus federal taxes contributed of 1 or less. They contribute more federal tax dollars than they provide in taxes.

The red states have a ratio of federal tax dollars received versus federal taxes contributed of greater than 1. They take more federal money than they provide in taxes.

The states most dependent on federal government spending are the red states relative to how much they contribute. This is a 2008 based map but this has been the case for many years and likely has not changed. Over the years, some blue states like like California and New York have sent many billions more dollars to the federal coffers than they have ever received in return.

The federal budget could be balanced by just restricting the spending of federal dollars in these states that get more than they pay in (after adjusting for military spending in some way). A fair and balanced approach that would empower the states to help balance the federal budget.

Marvin S
11-09-2012, 05:12 PM
The federal budget could be balanced by just restricting the spending of federal dollars in these states that get more than they pay in (after adjusting for military spending in some way). A fair and balanced approach that would empower the states to help balance the federal budget.

Sort of the Minuteman Missile approach, locate the cans where there are few people (red states) so none of them get nuked :). It does raise the spending in a less populated community.

BTW - Cato now has a book out - Silent Spring revisited after 50 years - Have you read it yet?

JS
11-10-2012, 05:09 PM
That is funny! The Democrats did no such thing. Mitt Romney defined himself throughout the Republican primary. Then reinforced it in the first presidential debate when he ran roughshod over a sleeping Obama.

The next day, while you guys were cheering and counting your votes, the undecided, middle-of-the-road voters were saying, "WTF :shock: ... either this guy is a Romney imposter or he's lying through his teeth". Get over it.

JS


I love revisionist history. That is not actually what either the polls or the focus groups showed.

Polls, exit polls, focus groups ... what they give you is raw data. Drawing accurate conclusions from that data is another story.

The mistake the party and the candidate made, and are still making, is putting too much emphasis on demographics and minority groups. Mistrust cuts across all lines. There were PLENTY of middle-of-the-road white males over 50 that Romney lost. Some of them voted for Obama; some of them stayed home. Probably enough to make the difference.

The party counted votes and thought they had them. Can't fool all the people all the time.

JS

Golddogs
11-11-2012, 12:23 PM
More facts for consideration.
http://www.usnews.com/dbimages/master/32756/GR_120918_brodwin.jpg

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/04/mapstatestaxes-thumb-454x340-18041.gif

and confirming stories at:
http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/14/the-redblue-paradox
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/09/18/obama-supporters-subsidize-romney-supporters-with-their-taxes-
http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/

But Henry, these are facts and statistics. You expect too much from some on the board.

( nice to see you back, missed your fact based debates )

HPL
11-11-2012, 12:42 PM
Polls, exit polls, focus groups ... what they give you is raw data. Drawing accurate conclusions from that data is another story.

The mistake the party and the candidate made, and are still making, is putting too much emphasis on demographics and minority groups. Mistrust cuts across all lines. There were PLENTY of middle-of-the-road white males over 50 that Romney lost. Some of them voted for Obama; some of them stayed home. Probably enough to make the difference.

The party counted votes and thought they had them. Can't fool all the people all the time.

JS


I seriously doubt that any middle of the road white males that voted for Obama because Romney was the other choice could have been attracted to the Republican party by anyone that would have been acceptable to ANY republican.

M&K's Retrievers
11-11-2012, 01:03 PM
Somehow their guy got more votes than our guy. :confused::???::cry::sad::shock:

Gerry Clinchy
11-12-2012, 05:09 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/the_real_lesson_of_the_election.html

Interesting analysis of the voting patterns. NY'ers may actually have thought that the photo-op was meaningful (as NJ), though it really didn't turn out to be so in viewing the results. California is in deep trouble financially, and voted for increased taxes. Maybe they just want to see the rest of the country share in their pain?

As for Henry V's chart, I think that in spite of the overall tax-production, all those states are heavily influenced by large cities. I noted that there were 59 wards in Philadelphia that had ZERO votes for Romney ... even in a heavily Dem area that seems pretty remarkable. The article did not state which wards they were; or how many votes were involved.

Marvin S
11-12-2012, 06:05 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/the_real_lesson_of_the_election.html

Interesting analysis of the voting patterns. NY'ers may actually have thought that the photo-op was meaningful (as NJ), though it really didn't turn out to be so in viewing the results. California is in deep trouble financially, and voted for increased taxes. Maybe they just want to see the rest of the country share in their pain?

As for Henry V's chart, I think that in spite of the overall tax-production, all those states are heavily influenced by large cities. I noted that there were 59 wards in Philadelphia that had ZERO votes for Romney ... even in a heavily Dem area that seems pretty remarkable. The article did not state which wards they were; or how many votes were involved.

Gerry - good article, & probably makes more sense than anything from MSM or POTUS punditry :-P.