Don't buy the "close election" spin

C

Cancel 2020.1

Canceled
I keep hearing that from the O'Reilly's, Limbaughs, et al. "Don't get too excited, Democrats - this was a close one; no mandate here" (which brings back fond memories of Limbaugh holding up a red/blue map after Bush lost the popular vote to Gore, saying 'THERE is your mandate' because of all of the red on the map. As though dirt votes).

Make no mistake - this election was a shellacking. Obama shouldn't have come near re-election with the economy the way it is. Give him credit for improving it since the crash, but people usually vote their wallets, and most wallets are still pretty empty right now. The GOP also missed a huge opportunity in the Senate, which is almost inexplicable.

America isn't as center-right as we're always told it is anymore. This is becoming a more progressive country, with big shifts in demographics, and the GOP is on the wrong side of a bunch of issues - gay rights, immigration, the environment, gun control, taxes. And women's issues are huge; lost in the "binders full of women" part of Romney's response was the fact that he dodged a question about equal pay with a lame "I hire women, and even let them go home early so they can fix dinner" kind of response.
 
I hear some of what you are saying but I also remember in the early 2000's the Republicans were talking about having a permanent majority. They had this incredible hubris and then turned around and governed like sh*t and got their sorry *sses kicked out of office. I see a lot of similiarities here. "The Republican Party is dead". "Due to demographics the Democrats are going to win all elections going forward" etc.

The thing with having power is you have to produce. Enough voters might have said 'after eight years of Bush I want to give Obama eight years himself to see what he can do" but I'll bet you anything if things don't improve in the next four years voters aren't going to be saying we need to give Democrats 12 years.
 
cawacko said:
I hear some of what you are saying but I also remember in the early 2000's the Republicans were talking about having a permanent majority. They had this incredible hubris and then turned around and governed like sh*t and got their sorry *sses kicked out of office. I see a lot of similiarities here. "The Republican Party is dead". "Due to demographics the Democrats are going to win all elections going forward" etc.

The thing with having power is you have to produce. Enough voters might have said 'after eight years of Bush I want to give Obama eight years himself to see what he can do" but I'll bet you anything if things don't improve in the next four years voters aren't going to be saying we need to give Democrats 12 years.
Click to expand...

True enough, but the demographics shift is a biggie, and will only get worse for Republicans if they remain mired in the 1950's.

I don't think the GOP is dead. I think the GOP as we know it is dead.
 
cawacko said:
I hear some of what you are saying but I also remember in the early 2000's the Republicans were talking about having a permanent majority. They had this incredible hubris and then turned around and governed like sh*t and got their sorry *sses kicked out of office. I see a lot of similiarities here. "The Republican Party is dead". "Due to demographics the Democrats are going to win all elections going forward" etc.

The thing with having power is you have to produce. Enough voters might have said 'after eight years of Bush I want to give Obama eight years himself to see what he can do" but I'll bet you anything if things don't improve in the next four years voters aren't going to be saying we need to give Democrats 12 years.
Click to expand...

Not a chance. According to them the following is true

All latinos only want open borders and until the GOP caves on that, they won't get their vote

All women vote with their vagina's and unless the GOP gives out free contraception at the RNC convention, they won't get their vote

The same shit happens ever election. The winners think their shit don't stink and everyone tells the losers how they should change in order to win. In 2004 it was the democrats chasing the "values voters". Remember that crock of shit? That lasted all of three weeks.

Obama is a failure. The democrats party is a failure full of stale old ideas. Look who they are already touting for 2016. Biden and Hillary? :rofl2:

I guess we should remind them that they didn't think either of them were up to the job in 2008. They thought a black guy could do it better.
 
Thing1 said:
True enough, but the demographics shift is a biggie, and will only get worse for Republicans if they remain mired in the 1950's.

I don't think the GOP is dead. I think the GOP as we know it is dead.
Click to expand...

I would add that the notion that they'll figure this out is remote at best.
 
Its the biggest one paarty gain since FDR.


denying facts is what got the right this reward
 
evince said:
Its the biggest one paarty gain since FDR.


denying facts is what got the right this reward
Click to expand...

Counting from the midterm, after two years of gloating or from the last Presidential year? It is starting to seem that you guys are destined to blow this.
,
The only real mandate is on the social issues. It's not always "the economy" when you take extreme positions on the social issues.
 
evince said:
Its the biggest one paarty gain since FDR.


denying facts is what got the right this reward
Click to expand...

And yet he is the first re elected President not to increase his margin of victory since when, without Gary Johnson getting over 1.2 million votes from republicans it's basically a tie in the overall vote so nice try this was a status quot election. People are ok with gridlock it means politicians can't screw us anymore. Oh and it means the welfare drag on Society will remain
 
patriot66 said:
And yet he is the first re elected President not to increase his margin of victory since when, without Gary Johnson getting over 1.2 million votes from republicans it's basically a tie in the overall vote so nice try this was a status quot election. People are ok with gridlock it means politicians can't screw us anymore. Oh and it means the welfare drag on Society will remain
Click to expand...

Not all Gary Johnson votes came from Republicans. That is a huge misconception.
 
patriot66 said:
well why would they vote for Johnson, Over Obama they are diametrically opposed.
Click to expand...

No more/less diametrically opposed than they are too Romney.

The writers from Reason destroy your argument. Many of them voted for Obama in 2008. Many of Johnson's votes, for example mine, came from people that would not have voted otherwise.

They are open to appeals by Republicans but Republicans will never win their votes by treating them as captives.

As for the mandate, LRC and C4L candidates did pretty well.
 
TheRocketSurgeon said:
Counting from the midterm, after two years of gloating or from the last Presidential year? It is starting to seem that you guys are destined to blow this.
,
The only real mandate is on the social issues. It's not always "the economy" when you take extreme positions on the social issues.
Click to expand...

You'd be wrong there in my opinion. Occupy brought reality to the party and that was very well understood.
 
patriot66 said:
Any democrat, you said not all votes for Johnson came from republicans, so why would a democrat vote for Johnson
Click to expand...

Because they were fed up with Obama's broken promises and continuation of too many of Bush's policies. Soc voted for Obama in '08, Johnson in '12. Rana voted Obama in '08, Johnson '12. I don't know who Brent voted for in '08 but he's a liberal leaning libertarian and voted for Johnson. That's three people on just this board.
 
patriot66 said:
Any democrat, you said not all votes for Johnson came from republicans, so why would a democrat vote for Johnson
Click to expand...

So now you are just going to play word games? As if that will win you some votes? lol

Why would Republicans vote for Johnson?

Nearly ALL of the votes for Johnson came from people who do not identify that strongly with one party or another. There were probably some from both camps in states where their vote would not have mattered that registered protest votes.
 
Haiku said:
You'd be wrong there in my opinion. Occupy brought reality to the party and that was very well understood.
Click to expand...

Okay. The Occupiers were only slightly more coherent than the tea party. Much of their anger was over corporate welfare that Democrats support and the failure to deliver on civil liberties.

I told you arrogant Dems in 2008, you were going to blow it. You will again. Your own coalition cannot hold it together as Mayors like Emanuel run low on money to pay off the unions. The economy will likely recover and they might be able to repair that some. But teachers are going to be replaced by technology soon, and a big part of your support will disappear. Plus the unionist are largely socially conservative and once they are satisified financially they will turn back to voting on those issues. You better hope the Republicans stay stupid on social issues or your support amongst minorities and younger voters will slip away too.

The voters that matter are finicky and opportunistic. You are not going to get a permanent majority.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top