The us election 2012 - obama or romney?
- Thread starter Keith1
- Start date
Miss. (information)
This guys got it about right.
South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham:
“If I hear anybody say it was because Romney wasn’t conservative enough I’m going to go nuts. We’re not losing 95 per cent of African-Americans and two thirds of Hispanics and voters under 30 because we’re not being hard-ass enough.”
And the same holds true here. Old white guys are a dying breed.
South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham:
“If I hear anybody say it was because Romney wasn’t conservative enough I’m going to go nuts. We’re not losing 95 per cent of African-Americans and two thirds of Hispanics and voters under 30 because we’re not being hard-ass enough.”
And the same holds true here. Old white guys are a dying breed.
Sorry.
Ian Anderson
Lifetime Supporter
Last edited:
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
50-48% as of now, still votes coming in from California so it may expand.
Electoral College, which is what really matters, was not close.
Interesting election cycle.
Electoral College, which is what really matters, was not close.
Interesting election cycle.
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
The Republicans are going the same way as our own Conservatives. Their core vote is dying (literally). They will have to broaden their appeal if they want to survive.
Demographics. Its going to kill them off.
Totally. And, worse, they are killing off the moderate elements in their own party. Don't they see where this is going? Abe Lincoln is rolling in his grave. So is Eisenhower.
Demographics. Its going to kill them off.
Totally. And, worse, they are killing off the moderate elements in their own party. Don't they see where this is going? Abe Lincoln is rolling in his grave. So is Eisenhower.
Agreed, Jeff!
I would be interested in hearing from members what they think cost Romney the election.
I know what the event was for me....it was an interview with Ann Romney, the topic was the Romney refusal to release the traditional 10 most recent tax returns, and they had only released two.
Ann Romney's answer was something to the effect of "...we have released two, and we were attacked for what they contained. There will be no more."
For me that was ah "Ahaa" moment....I could not believe that Ann Romney believed that they would be praised for the content of their tax returns in a contentious race, which made me wonder if she really had the heart to be involved in politics at the national level....and I could not convince myself that the U.S.A. would want such a brash, rude, abrupt lady to represent our country in the many public appearances that would be necessary. I may be the only one in the U.S. who had that reaction....but for me it was the most memorable moment of the media coverage that the Romney's received.
I would be interested in hearing from others...why, in a time when the country seemed to be saying we need a different direction, did the country vote to maintain the present course? What cost Romney the election, in your opinion---and by that I don't mean an assertion that majority of the voting population is comprised of a idiots, I mean what did the Romney campaign do that was....for lack of a better word....not good enough?
Doug
And then there's chris mathews point, "I'm so glad we had that storm last week because I think the storm was one of those things. No, politically I should say. Not in terms of hurting people. The storm brought in possibilities for good politics."
Perhaps if Romney spent significantly less on his campaign compared to BO, he may have made a lasting impression on voters, of truly understanding the situation faced by the average Joe in the street.
The money these guys threw at it, in an economy like today's, is a disgrace. An obscene example to confirm that Politicians don't reside in the same world as the rest of us. Clueless t**ts.
The money these guys threw at it, in an economy like today's, is a disgrace. An obscene example to confirm that Politicians don't reside in the same world as the rest of us. Clueless t**ts.
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
Doug,
In the smallest nutshell I can put this in; When we had the 2009 downturn, every indicator to me (direct and indirect) indicated a 5-10 year recovery, so to say we should have had a full recovery within 4 years was a bit unrealistic (again, my opinion), and to blame Obama for the lack of a full recovery was a bit unrealistic. Thus the "economy" wasn't a voting issue for me in this go-around.
In my eyes, I came close to viewing the two candidates more alike than I was comfortable with, but the constant reversing of stance by Romney made me wonder what he really stood for. Lastly, I think the Republican party was so confident in a win (not sure why they refused to look at this realistically), that they relaxed a bit, and repeatedly let their true colors show in several suicide gaffs, which helped me cement my decision. (on one hand they want little government, but on the other hand don't mind telling me what I cannot do in my personal life). It's not a perfect world, so we have no choice but to pick the lesser of two evils.
Today, everybody basically got a mulligan, so perhaps our current government can try to do better this next four years)
I agree...thought it unreasonable to expect B.O. to bring about a complete reversal, regardless of his enthusiasm and his comments (which were not campaign promises) that if things were not better in 4 years he might be a one-term president. This economic downturn is not just a U.S. issue, it's worldwide...it can't be solved JUST in the U.S., I don't care if you are Mitt Romney you can't do that. It's a bigger problem than we thought when it started in 2007.
I'm a psychologist by training, so I find people's perceptions and motivations interesting.
...not so interested in sour grapes....if you don't like the question, Mike, perhaps you could avoid being rude, just don't answer it.
Doug
Similar threads
