Why Rommney/Ryan are losing

Mott the Hoople said:
Well how about this. Try some moderation. How about dropping the stupid immigration policies Republicans want to enforce on latinos such as forcing anyone who looks like a latino to prove they are citizens or advocating "self-deportation"policies and opposition to pathways to citizenship, particularly for young immigrants who's parents brougt them here? Ya know, let them commit to public service of some sort for several years (i.e. milatary service) as a path to citizenship. Advocating this combined with support of traditional values would win a lot of latinos.

Then you could moderate your stance on abortion. Instead of opposing abortion in all circumstances as a republican platform how about changing it to opposing abortion on demand, particularly for late term pregnancies but making exceptions for life and health of the mother? How about openly supporting womens right to access to birth control and opposing discrimination against women on both reproductive rights and in the work place? Could win a lot of women votes there.

You could also moderate your stance on gays and lesbians. You can still oppose marriage for gays and lesbians as a sacred religious institution while supporting domestic union rights for gays. There would be a lot more log cabin Republicans if you did that.

How about designing a message for African Americans on public education? Many blacks are very open minded to school choice. How about Republicans advocating improving educational standards and access for African Americans? How about paying more attention to issues that are important to blacks? How about making it Republican policy that racial profiling or discrimination of any sort will not be tolerated? Education (including job programs) and opposition to racial profiling/discrimination are issues Republicans could kill on with black voters.

Then how about supporting increased funding and access for college students and students who want to learn the trade skills? This is just common sense, particularly if that funding is focused on youths who want to study science, technology, business, the professions and most importantly the trades skills. There's a huge demand for trade skills in this nation and Republicans can gain a lot of support of the youth vote by increasing funding for post secondary education and funding entreprenuership programs that teach youths how to suceed in business. Again, Republicans can kill here. I mean this is a no brainer. Every dollar spent on post secondary education programs will return nearly double to a four fold increase in revenue from increased personal productivity. It's a win win. Why not do it? Who teaches entrepranuership better than Republicans?

The southern strategy of appealing to angry old white guys with racial code language is a loser. It's no longer sustainable. Just look at past Presidential elections. Democrats have won the popular vote in 4 of the last 5 elections and this one looks like it will make it 5 out of 6. This should be a serious wake up call.
Click to expand...

"...Republicans want to enforce on latinos such as forcing anyone who looks like a latino to prove they are citizens..."

Can you provide one bill or anything, other then an assertion, that your comment is truthful.
 
Lowaicue said:
We had the exact reverse under Thatcher. She divided the country, started a civil war with the miners, led a huge campaign to denigrate the workforce of the UK, geographically divided the north and the south and sold the family silver.

Overseas she was adored. Everywhere she went foreigners cheered the 'iron' lady.

Some of the truth is now coming out as we join the dots issuing from the worst football disaster ever, at Hillsborough, where the lies and cover ups are finding their rightful passage to her door. (even now there are those who say she should not be attacked because she is frail and sick) ... those of us who remember her war against the miners of Yorkshire and Derbyshire and who witnessed the armed vehicles lining the quiet streets of Chesterfield and knew police who were earning huge bonuses to keep them 'on side', would say she is not sick enough. She is still breathing.
Click to expand...

I notice that there is no mention of Arthur Scargill and his role in the destruction of mining. I haven't forgotten the three day week and the nightmare of dinosaur trade unions holding the country to ransom. As for Hillborough, I live quite close to the ground and it is just ridiculous to try to blame her government for the tragedy. If anybody is to blame then it is the clubs for being such cheapskates and not having fences that opened if too much pressure was put on them.

I know that you have a visceral hatred of the Daily Mail but this article really does highlight why certain elements of the Left are so irrational about her. When she took over in 1979, the country was in a dire state after Labour had destroyed the economy. The voters always end up turning to the Conservatives to clean up the shit that Labour, new or old leaves behind.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...rgaret-Thatcher-reminds-wrong-everything.html
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I notice that there is no mention of Arthur Scargill and his role in the destruction of mining. I haven't forgotten the three day week and the nightmare of dinosaur trade unions holding the country to ransom. As for Hillborough, I live quite close to the ground and it is just ridiculous to try to blame her government for the tragedy. If anybody is to blame then it is the clubs for being such cheapskates and not having fences that opened if too much pressure was put on them.

I know that you have a visceral hatred of the Daily Mail but this article really does highlight why certain elements of the Left are so irrational about her. When she took over in 1979, the country was in a dire state after Labour had destroyed the economy. The voters always end up turning to the Conservatives to clean up the shit that Labour, new or old leaves behind.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...rgaret-Thatcher-reminds-wrong-everything.html
Click to expand...

No one is blaming the Thatcher government for what happened at Hillsborough. The ground, as far as I know, did not have the required safety certificates so, in hind sight, neither club should have allowed the match to progress.
However the reports of Liverpool fans urinating on police and the injured and the fact that so many had entered with no tickets have now been revealed as lies. The guilty are the FL, The police and, of course Mr. Irvine Patnick, the Sheffield MP who is now likely to be stripped of his knighthood for the lies he told.
I know what you are saying... that does not implicate the tory government. But, of course it does. There must have been either a stated aim or an understanding that the same police who fought the miners with sticks and truncheons, armoured vehicles and hoses and who were paid up to GBP60,000 each in bonuses, could not have their character besmirched or it would seriously weaken the thatcher mob.
Irvine Patnick was a faithful tory lapdog and would have acted to protect his goddess. (no proof - just join the dots).
As for Scargill, he may well have been a fame seeking firebrand, but he was right, wasn't he? He said, to repeated government denials, that thatcher was out to close the mines. He was right when we had hardly heard of him and he was right when he was shamed into oblivion by the press and his own stupidity.
The then editor of the Sun has apologised (Andrew Neil?) and he is, no doubt, hoping to sell his newspaper into Liverpool where copies have been regularly burned and destroyed ever since his irresponsible front page. Of course Liverpudlians are easy meat in a case like this.
Regarding the tories coming in to clean the crap left behind by labour, Cammers of the Lower Fifth isn't making much of a success and what has Osborne got over him? He should have gone in the cosmetic reshuffle, with that no one can disagree, surely.
Damn. Dinner served. Must go.
 
Jarod said:
A) It turns out Ryan was a poor choice.
B) The Tea Party made it impossable for the R's to get a viable canidate.
C) Romney has managed his campaign very poorly.
D) I wonder if Romney is self sabatoging.
Click to expand...

Romney is losing because we don't trust him. And he shows a total lack of understanding and lack of respect for us.
It started with Romney's experience at Bain capital. Then ther were these stupid things he would say, like "corporations are people" and "I don't care about poor people" and then when asked about the gay kid in high school who he held down to cut off his hair, he said he didnt remember the incident. Then he refused to release his taxes, which essentially was middle-finger to any voter who wanted to be fully informed on Presidential candidate. Now we have the leakage of all these videos where ROmney is saying the AMerican voters are basically peons.
I mean seriously, what decent humna being is going to vote for such an insensative A-hole???

Here, read this:

http://generation-add.blogspot.com/2012/09/anatomy-of-landslide.html
 
Last edited:
FactsRStubborn said:
Your initial analogy is apt because the only thing Black Hussein Yobabymama is qualified to do is pump gas and wash windows.
Click to expand...

Are you a racist?

That was racist as fuck .. as well as stupid as hell.

Obama has a Law degree from Harvard and is the President of the United States.

And you suggest that all he's capable of doing .. with his emphasized blackness .. is pump gas and wash windows.

Do you think that's true of me .. and my degree isn't from Harvard.
 
blackascoal said:
Are you a racist?

That was racist as fuck .. as well as stupid as hell.

Obama has a Law degree from Harvard and is the President of the United States.

And you suggest that all he's capable of doing .. with his emphasized blackness .. is pump gas and wash windows.

Do you think that's true of me .. and my degree isn't from Harvard.
Click to expand...

You had to ask??

:rofl2:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
"...Republicans want to enforce on latinos such as forcing anyone who looks like a latino to prove they are citizens..."

Can you provide one bill or anything, other then an assertion, that your comment is truthful.
Click to expand...
Nope, but that certainly is the intent and the affect of this legislation. You think an Arizona police officer is going to ask for proof of citizenship from my creamy white ass?

Be that as it may, you miss my point. The Arizona law is hugely unpopular with Latinos as it is a law that is systematically targeted at them. Not only is it a bad law but by embracing it Republicans needlessly alienate conservative minded latinos who could help Republicans to build a ruling coalition. You know who else agrees with me on that? George W. Bush. Bush advocated a guest worker program, he rightfully considered the Arizona minuteman project vigilantes, he opposed the GOP's "english only" educational policies. He supported pathways to citizenship that did not embrace amnesty and his rhetoric was pro-latino family or in his own words "Latino immigration is not a problem to be solved" and he also spoke rudimentary Spanish. This all paid dividends for Bush at the polls where he recieved significant levels of support from Latinos.

The anti-immigrant laws of Arizona, Alabama and South Carolina, as well as "self-deportation" rhetoric of many Republicans has needlessly alienated large numbers of latinos. That's not only short sighted but it's politically stupid considering latino citizens now represent over 10% of our population.
 
blackascoal said:
Unless I see demonstrable evidence of it, I'm slow to call someone a racist. But damn, all a black Obama can do is pump gas and wash windows?

What year is this?
Click to expand...

I guess you missed the one about how Alias can't be a racist because the woman who cleans his house is 'colored'....

:D
 
consagainromney said:
The answer to why Romney/Ryan is losing is that we don't trust him. And he shows a total lack of understanding and lack of respect for us.
It started with Romney's experience at Bain capital. Then ther were these stupid things he would say, like "corporations are people" and "I don't care about poor people" and then when asked about the gay kid in high school who he held down to cut off his hair, he said he didnt remember the incident. I mean seriously, who in the funk is going to vote for such an insensative A-hole???

Here, read this:

http://generation-add.blogspot.com/2012/09/anatomy-of-landslide.html
Click to expand...
Man I posted this yesterday before I heard Romney's asinine comments about 47% of Americans being self entitled welfare moochers. Wow, what a stupid thing to say. Having said that....It's no dumber than Obama's comments about small town Americans being bitter and clinging to guns and religion. A truly dumb thing for Obama to say but as with this comment it will have hardly any affect. Romney was speacking to a constituency who, for the most part, whole heartedly agree with him. Just as Obama did in 08.
 
Voltaire said:
Mott,

Your analysis is based on nothing more than your wishful thinking. This election is not an uphill battle for Romney, but for Obama. Obama won in '08 due to victory in swing states by only a few percentage points. National popular vote is irrelevant (Although I do think Romney will win the popular vote, too). If you think Obama can simply take those swing state independent votes for granted, you are tragically misguided.
Click to expand...

Popular vote isn't "irrelevant". In any winner take all system, the results are, of course, heavily dependents on the popular vote. You can usually build a rather simple model of how the election is going on by taking the popular vote from last time, comparing it to polls this time around, and adding or subtracting from each districts results last time based on the swing at the national level. Of course, there are particularities, and you can build more sophisticated models to take these into account, but this is generally how it works. So, sure, you may luck into an electoral college victory without a popular vote victory once or twice. And a party could win the house of representatives as well without getting the popular vote. But it's not something you can depend on. If one sides making gains in the popular vote, you can't count on blind luck to save you.

Anyway, if anything Obama is doing way better when it comes to the electoral college than in the popular vote. This is, of course, because of the winner take all nature of it, so that small leads in polls tend to be exaggerated into huge ones in the EC (think of the 2008 election, where Obama one by a 2:1 landslide in the electoral college, but McCain could've easily come out ahead with just a 3 point swing in his direction).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top