PDA

View Full Version : Answer this question please?



scott spalding
11-13-2012, 08:18 PM
I will start by saying I am no fan of our current President but not much on Romney either.

1. Rated #1 for having a highly educated population."BA/BS or higher"
2. One of the lowests levels of poverty.
3. One of the highest median household incomes.
4. 75 percent white. Just put this in to show that there is a small population of minorities.
5. Governor Mitt Romney.

How could he not carry his home state?

Larry Thompson1
11-13-2012, 08:23 PM
Well that is the state that gave us 46 years of Ted Kennedy. Liberal to a fault.

luvmylabs23139
11-13-2012, 08:43 PM
It has been better known as Taxachussets for decades.

BonMallari
11-13-2012, 08:51 PM
I will start by saying I am no fan of our current President but not much on Romney either.

1. Rated #1 for having a highly educated population."BA/BS or higher"
2. One of the lowests levels of poverty.
3. One of the highest median household incomes.
4. 75 percent white. Just put this in to show that there is a small population of minorities.
5. Governor Mitt Romney.

How could he not carry his home state?


1. from the state that brings you Harvard and MIT, they definite skew the numbers

2. even the rich folks cant afford to live there....my nephew and his lifestyle partner cant afford to live in the city, and he is a practicing psychiatrist....

3. again the number of bluebloods skew the numbers

4. Have you ever read books from Bill Russell and Jim Rice about how Boston treats their black athletic stars.....and they say people in the south are racist :rolleyes:

5. been a while since Mitt was Gov....its still controlled by the folks in Hyannisport

scott spalding
11-13-2012, 08:57 PM
I could also add to that list rated #5 for millionaires per capita.

BonMallari
11-13-2012, 09:13 PM
I could also add to that list rated #5 for millionaires per capita.


and how many of them have FT dogs.....thats what is really important

Larry Thompson1
11-13-2012, 09:41 PM
and how many of them have FT dogs.....thats what is really important

It might be a little beneeth thier status. I spent a couple of weeks there this summer. Really expensive. Ye Oldster House, 12 dozen oysters 6 draft beers $485.00.
Lemmonchello's for supper 5 people $1234.00. Donavans pub for 5 beers $68.00 and then to a little coffee shop for desert $76.00 my boss asked if I had a good time, I said it was OK but for that price I felt a little unsatisfied. All in all a good afternoon.

HPL
11-13-2012, 09:55 PM
Howdy Scott!
Way off topic, but very nice looking pup in your avatar.

Ken Bora
11-13-2012, 09:56 PM
and how many of them have FT dogs.....thats what is really important

a fair number
and some great clubs
they test um in CT. NY. VT. RI. and Maine:D
I cut the angle through MA. comming home from West Thompson, CT., the Jim Person shortcut, often. I drive past the Kennedy State Forrest. With the sign that reads " No Alcohol after dark allowed" and I think "no alcohol, it's the Kennedy State Forrest!! alcohol should be manditory??" but I'm odd like that.

scott spalding
11-13-2012, 10:02 PM
Howdy Scott!
Way off topic, but very nice looking pup in your avatar.

He was my once in a lifetime dog. I have a pup from him now that will look just like him.

Thanks

Henry V
11-13-2012, 10:24 PM
Seems like Massachusetts should get a little more credit. Between 1981 and 2008 MA residents paid in $923,986 million dollars in federal taxes yet they received federal payments back of only $847,872 millions dollars (www.taxfoundation.org). Without states like MA, all those states dependent on the federal government would not get to share the 76,114,000,000 profit that the feds continue to reap from MA over the years. For example, picking a few states at random, Virginia received $375,627,000,000 more in federal payments than they contributed during this time period. Then there is NC which only received $9,255,000,000 more in federal payments than they contributed and Idaho which only received $21,528,000,000 more and Texas had a net gain of 133,310,000,000.

I guess this should be #6 on the list that started this thread.

Buzz
11-13-2012, 10:26 PM
One of the best questions I have seen on POTUS. One thing that has crossed my mind in the past is the religious differences. In the NE there are a lot of Episcopals, Unitarians, and also Catholics. Not so many evangelicals. Historically Catholics I know have supported Democrats. I am not sure why but my guess is the Catholic Church's focus on social justice. If not for the abortion issue, I believe they would lean more heavily Democrat. I have life long friends who grew up Catholic who are very conservative. Without exception they all have abandoned the Catholic Church and now go to Evangelical Churches. I came from a very Catholic family. Grandparents And aunts & uncles who helped build parishes and Catholic Schools. I attended Catholic School. I blame my liberalism on the message of social justice that was drilled into my head as a kid. I have talked about it a little here, trying to figure out how Christians could relate to the teachings of Ayn Rand and I am mostly quite surprised by the response I get.


i could be all wet, but I have thought about this before. The fact that they are so educated and wealthy could be just a byproduct of the concentration of terrific educational institutions there.

reading my post I can see that I didn't really address your question. Just rambling about one factor I think might explain the NE liberal leanings...

huntinman
11-13-2012, 11:02 PM
I will start by saying I am no fan of our current President but not much on Romney either.

1. Rated #1 for having a highly educated population."BA/BS or higher"
2. One of the lowests levels of poverty.
3. One of the highest median household incomes.
4. 75 percent white. Just put this in to show that there is a small population of minorities.
5. Governor Mitt Romney.

How could he not carry his home state?

Scott... Same reason no republican can carry WA State... Overrun with liberals, plain and simple.

road kill
11-14-2012, 08:28 AM
One of the best questions I have seen on POTUS. One thing that has crossed my mind in the past is the religious differences. In the NE there are a lot of Episcopals, Unitarians, and also Catholics. Not so many evangelicals. Historically Catholics I know have supported Democrats. I am not sure why but my guess is the Catholic Church's focus on social justice. If not for the abortion issue, I believe they would lean more heavily Democrat. I have life long friends who grew up Catholic who are very conservative. Without exception they all have abandoned the Catholic Church and now go to Evangelical Churches. I came from a very Catholic family. Grandparents And aunts & uncles who helped build parishes and Catholic Schools. I attended Catholic School. I blame my liberalism on the message of social justice that was drilled into my head as a kid. I have talked about it a little here, trying to figure out how Christians could relate to the teachings of Ayn Rand and I am mostly quite surprised by the response I get.


i could be all wet, but I have thought about this before. The fact that they are so educated and wealthy could be just a byproduct of the concentration of terrific educational institutions there.

reading my post I can see that I didn't really address your question. Just rambling about one factor I think might explain the NE liberal leanings...
I read an interesting article about Romney's Mormonism being a bigger factor than what was openly discussed.
I can remember when JFK ran, being a Catholic was an issue as my parents were Southern Baptist!

Just a comment, I really have no clue what lurks in the hearts and minds of men, only the Shadow do!!!:cool:

huntinman
11-14-2012, 08:42 AM
I read an interesting article about Romney's Mormonism being a bigger factor than what was openly discussed.
I can remember when JFK ran, being a Catholic was an issue as my parents were Southern Baptist!

Just a comment, I really have no clue what lurks in the hearts and minds of men, only the Shadow do!!!:cool:

Stan it may have been a problem somewhere... But it didn't seem to bother we bigots in the south;-)

JS
11-14-2012, 09:51 AM
Hey, guys.

Saying that Romney lost Mass because “there are so many liberals there” is not answering the question. It is simply restating the question. Of course liberals didn’t support Romney.

Scott’s question asks why is it, if Obama was really elected by of the welfare-seeking, “takers” who are looking for a handout without “giving” anything back ... as has been argued repeatedly all over this forum ... how do you explain a state like Mass, which has a very low percentage of voters in this category, going to Obama??? :confused:

The same can be asked about a number of other states.

There must be a few voters with liberal views who actually are not looking for a handout.

JS

road kill
11-14-2012, 10:00 AM
Hey, guys.

Saying that Romney lost Mass because “there are so many liberals there” is not answering the question. It is simply restating the question. Of course liberals didn’t support Romney.

Scott’s question asks why is it, if Obama was really elected by of the welfare-seeking, “takers” who are looking for a handout without “giving” anything back ... as has been argued repeatedly all over this forum ... how do you explain a state like Mass, which has a very low percentage of voters in this category, going to Obama??? :confused:

The same can be asked about a number of other states.

There must be a few voters with liberal views who actually are not looking for a handout.

JS
Name one.............:cool:

JS
11-14-2012, 10:02 AM
Name one.............:cool:

ME!

Are you serious?

road kill
11-14-2012, 10:03 AM
ME!

Are you serious?
Have a sense of humor once in a while.
That right there was funny, I don't care who you are!!!!

PamK
11-14-2012, 10:05 AM
QUOTE]Originally Posted by road kill

Name one.............[/QUOTE]

If one beleives the 47% remark and Obama won with 52% then 5% of the voters.

JS
11-14-2012, 10:05 AM
Have a sense of humor once in a while.
That right there was funny, I don't care who you are!!!!

OK, my bad. :oops:

Aren't you supposed to be out shooting (at) ducks?

JS

road kill
11-14-2012, 10:10 AM
OK, my bad. :oops:

Aren't you supposed to be out shooting (at) ducks?

JS

Bustin' out'a this joint for the evening flight!!!!:D

huntinman
11-14-2012, 10:20 AM
QUOTE]Originally Posted by road kill

Name one.............

If one beleives the 47% remark and Obama won with 52% then 5% of the voters.[/QUOTE]

Maybe 47% was a low number. We are over the tipping point already. So, instead of 47%, maybe it should be 50% or 52%...

Gerry Clinchy
11-14-2012, 10:40 AM
Hey, guys.

Saying that Romney lost Mass because “there are so many liberals there” is not answering the question. It is simply restating the question. Of course liberals didn’t support Romney.

Scott’s question asks why is it, if Obama was really elected by of the welfare-seeking, “takers” who are looking for a handout without “giving” anything back ... as has been argued repeatedly all over this forum ... how do you explain a state like Mass, which has a very low percentage of voters in this category, going to Obama??? :confused:

My theory is "guilt"; and also in line with Buzz's Roman Catholic theory. Old man Kennedy built the family fortune without much compassion, but the later generation, who inherited the wealth then felt compelled to prove that they would use that wealth constructively to do good. Guilt is a large portion of RC education (I was also raised as RC), and also part of Irish culture and my own Italian culture; also Jewish culture. Old Joe Kennedy was considered "nouveau riche", and he encouraged the next generation to seek out the societal acceptance of high society ... which they did very successfully.

We have also seen, over time, that the politicians become rich through their "service", while they spend money of others very magnanimously. They rarely suffer any economic duress from the laws they impose on the rest of the country. Note, how they have provided such luxury health care and retirement benefits for themselves; and have, up to recently, absolved themselves from the rules of "insider trading. And not a twinge of conscience in voting themselves such largesse not available to the general population.

There must be a few voters with liberal views who actually are not looking for a handout.

Surely there are. Yet, there are also liberals who take full advantage of the tax loopholes available to them. While I can't blame someone for minimizing taxes, if those liberals truly believe in the social compassion they espouse, why is that belief not strong enough to eschew those loopholes to "donate" more to the cause of their social beliefs?

It occurs to me that some like Clooney and Angelina Jolie, liberals and wealthy, undoubtedly use tax loopholes to "donate" less to social issues in the US, but donate more to helping abjectly poor in other countries. I'm not criticizing the good they do, but, evidently, they feel they are the best ones to judge how they use their wealth to improve the human condition. Don't they trust the govt's judgment to use that money in the best way? Those with less wealth don't get to make choices like that in the same way.

It's also true that "giving" to someone in need makes the giver feel good. Paying taxes rarely has the same emotional reward.
JS
.............

Marvin S
11-14-2012, 10:44 AM
I will start by saying I am no fan of our current President but not much on Romney either.

1. Rated #1 for having a highly educated population."BA/BS or higher"
2. One of the lowests levels of poverty.
3. One of the highest median household incomes.
4. 75 percent white. Just put this in to show that there is a small population of minorities.
5. Governor Mitt Romney.

How could he not carry his home state?

Why would any major college location skew liberal? They are supposed to be intelligent & it's been many times proven that enabling creates bad behavior. Who can answer that?

When reading the "Bell Curve" the poor white trash wanted to feel superior to someone so it ended up being the blacks that they felt superior to, in many cases not justified :). The "Bell Curve" used a poor white trash population as the test group. Maybe the need to feel superior to someone exists at a higher level than us common folk realize :confused:.

menmon
11-14-2012, 10:56 AM
To get elected as a republican in the northeast one has to be moderate economically and liberal socially. That was the Romney before the primary and the Romney after the first debate. His problem was that folks believed that the socially conservative would pull his strings...that simple.

Gerry Clinchy
11-14-2012, 11:05 AM
One of the best questions I have seen on POTUS. One thing that has crossed my mind in the past is the religious differences. In the NE there are a lot of Episcopals, Unitarians, and also Catholics. Not so many evangelicals. Historically Catholics I know have supported Democrats. I am not sure why but my guess is the Catholic Church's focus on social justice. If not for the abortion issue, I believe they would lean more heavily Democrat. I have life long friends who grew up Catholic who are very conservative. Without exception they all have abandoned the Catholic Church and now go to Evangelical Churches.


I was also raised RC, and can agree that social justice and charity are a key element. I did not go to Catholic schools, however. My family could not afford to pay tuition for a non-public school, even though Catholic schools are often very low tuition. Back at that time, though, public schools were not as much of a mess as they are today. The choice of Catholic school was more for the religious content added to the curriculum.

Public schools did give "released time" each week to attend religious instruction of choice. Those who did not choose to participate in that could have a study hall. In fact, in my early years in NYC schools, Jewish children were excused from school, without penalty, on Jewish holidays. My neighborhood's ethnic mix was primarily Jewish and Italian (who actually have many cultural similarities). That was in the South Bronx in the early 50s.

And, yes, I left the Catholic church and moved to Lutheranism. Lutherans are not so far removed from RCs in their rituals and beliefs, but they are more moderate on social issues than RC. I would have to classify myself as "conservative" v. "liberal". I disagreed with RC on contraception. My views on abortion are a "mixture", as you could probably tell from my feelings on 3rd timester abortions and the fate of babies who survive late-term abortions.


I came from a very Catholic family. Grandparents And aunts & uncles who helped build parishes and Catholic Schools. I attended Catholic School. I blame my liberalism on the message of social justice that was drilled into my head as a kid. I have talked about it a little here, trying to figure out how Christians could relate to the teachings of Ayn Rand and I am mostly quite surprised by the response I get.

As you and I have discussed before ... I believe Ayn Rand was influenced, even if unconsciously, by Christian belief. Christianity, in its original form, emphasized a relationship between an individual and God, without the need for an "intermediary" of a formal church heirarchy (as had developed in Judaism). It also focused on free will, and the value of each individual. The Golden Rule was a central theme. Ayn Rand's philosophy was also based on individualism and of humans entering into relationships with fairness to both parties and free will. How ironic that the RC church should eventually develop the same kind of heirarchy that Christ faulted in Judaism.


i could be all wet, but I have thought about this before. The fact that they are so educated and wealthy could be just a byproduct of the concentration of terrific educational institutions there.

I think that MA is heavily under the influence of the Kennedy "rule" over such a long period of time. It would be interesting to see how the highly educated and wealthy are distributed throughout the state. There may be heavy concentrations in certain areas, and other groups in inner cities who are less educated and less wealthy, but have other reasons for voting Dem.

reading my post I can see that I didn't really address your question. Just rambling about one factor I think might explain the NE liberal leanings...

...........

Henry V
11-14-2012, 12:39 PM
Bustin' out'a this joint for the evening flight!!!!:D

Just some perspective... everything is almost frozen solid here. Will give it one more try on a big lake over the weekend if the bullrushes have not been sheared off by ice.

Blackstone
11-14-2012, 12:51 PM
Perhaps the residents of MA did not like the job he did as Gov., so they did not want to see him repeat that performance as President.

billbe
11-14-2012, 10:02 PM
He was just not a strong canidate in the election. More enerhy was needed.

murral stark
11-14-2012, 10:18 PM
He was just not a strong canidate in the election. More enerhy was needed.

Oh you are going to get a good tongue lashing here. Not a place to be speaking poorly of the Republicans. You will be an out cast such as myself and a few others.

duckheads
11-15-2012, 07:12 AM
Oh you are going to get a good tongue lashing here. Not a place to be speaking poorly of the Republicans. You will be an out cast such as myself and a few others.

Give it a rest Murral!

paul young
11-15-2012, 07:37 AM
I think if he had run on a platform that was similar to the way he governed Massachusetts he might have won. The RNC's platform as relates to social issues are what cost him the election. That's a shame, as he might have been a great President if allowed to run his own show.-Paul

gdgnyc
11-15-2012, 07:49 AM
I think if he had run on a platform that was similar to the way he governed Massachusetts he might have won. The RNC's platform as relates to social issues are what cost him the election. That's a shame, as he might have been a great President if allowed to run his own show.-Paul

I totally agree.