|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: A 2012 US election thread
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
Given the way places were being declared so early, was he just waiting to be sure?
Quite a few places seemed to declare for Romney very early based on three precincts that went for Obama.
So I can't quite understand when you actually know a states real vote (as supposed to having a darned good guess).
And there are a fair rack of states are close enough*, that you'd look a bit silly if you went "well done, oh wait a minute, cancel that I've got Virginia".
Meanwhile congratulations of voting. I'm a bit disappointed with the result, but knew the centre and left didn't have a chance. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
*actually I'm surprised how many are more mixed than 40-60.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Okay, now when do all the idiot right-wing poll aggregators give their concession speeches to Nate Silver?
Silver was forecasting 313 when last I looked (midway between 303 and 332 - i'ts going to be one or the other). Realclear politics and Politico were both forecasting 303. With Florida leaning towards Obama, Silver looks to be conservative if anything.
I have no idea what Gallup and Rassmussen were doing, other than getting it wrong (again). Perhaps they should look to recruiting a smart, geeky Democrat who practised on baseball games when he was a kid and got good? It might cost them a bit of course ...
No access to Fox News this week. I bet it's going well for them ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
I'm very pleased that the US has a clear result, with a clear win in the Electoral College and a majority on the National Vote.
I don't think Romney is a nutjob, certainly not in GOP terms. But after this result, following on the genuine disappointments of the Obama first term, the GOP is going to have to think long and hard about moderating its tone on federal responsibilities and hot-button personal morality issues. And I don't mean just for TV debates towards the close of campaigns.
The prevailing GOP rhetoric may be good for the faithful, but the changed demographics suggest it is becoming less likely to win the Presidency, even when the climate is favourable for change. From this side of the pond, it often sounds far too strident, too self-righteous.
And Fox News needs brain bleach.
[ 07. November 2012, 07:09: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Dear America,
Congratulations on your successful election - and thankyou for not electing a total nutjob to one of the most powerful posts on the planet,
Yours sincerely,
The world.
Are you referring to Roseanne Barr?
I've steered clear of this. Leaving the Americans to make their own decision, But thank you America for coming to the right decision.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Given the way places were being declared so early, was he just waiting to be sure?
Quite a few places seemed to declare for Romney very early based on three precincts that went for Obama.
So I can't quite understand when you actually know a states real vote (as supposed to having a darned good guess).
And there are a fair rack of states are close enough*, that you'd look a bit silly if you went "well done, oh wait a minute, cancel that I've got Virginia".
Meanwhile congratulations of voting. I'm a bit disappointed with the result, but knew the centre and left didn't have a chance.
*actually I'm surprised how many are more mixed than 40-60.
FWIW, I totally agree that Romney waiting to make sure the electoral vote was firmly against him was a good move. I would have been surprised if he didn't.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Okay, now when do all the idiot right-wing poll aggregators give their concession speeches to Nate Silver?
Silver was forecasting 313 when last I looked (midway between 303 and 332 - i'ts going to be one or the other). Realclear politics and Politico were both forecasting 303. With Florida leaning towards Obama, Silver looks to be conservative if anything.
ELECTORAL VOTE PREDICTIONS
Karl Rove: Romney, 285-253
Newt Gingrich: Romney, "over 300 electoral votes"
George Will: Romney, 321-217
Dick Morris: Romney, 325-213
Sean Hannity: Romney "by three points"
Charles Krauthammer: "Romney, very close."
Rush Limbaugh: "All of my thinking says Romney big. All of my feeling is where my concern is. But my thoughts, my intellectual analysis of this — factoring everything I see plus the polling data — it’s not even close. Three hundred-plus electoral votes for Romney."
Ari Fleischer: Romney 50.1 to 49.5%
Wouldn't mind seeing Josh Jordan eating a little crow also.
[ 07. November 2012, 07:19: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
If it wasn't 8 o'clock in the morning, I might have had a finger of whisky to toast the incumbent.
Tea it is, then.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Copied from tangent thread, where I accidentally posted it:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I think Donald Trump has finally passed the last frontier of sanity. His tweets on the subject of Obama's win are rather scarily hysterical. Did he scream about the injustice of the Electoral College when Bush won?
Heh. As I posted on FB three hours ago, "I guess that permanent pout isn't an affectation."
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If it wasn't 8 o'clock in the morning, I might have had a finger of whisky to toast the incumbent.
Tea it is, then.
Tea for celebration?
...a TEA PARTY?! Is THAT what you're having?!!!
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr Clingford
Shipmate
# 7961
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If it wasn't 8 o'clock in the morning, I might have had a finger of whisky to toast the incumbent.
Tea it is, then.
Tea for celebration?
...a TEA PARTY?! Is THAT what you're having?!!!
Too right me ol' fruit. The correct response to misuse is not disuse but the right use. And that is a proper cup of tea. With a biscuit, cucumber sandwich or a slice of toast. Yum.
--------------------
Ne'er cast a clout till May be out.
If only.
Posts: 1660 | From: A Fleeting moment | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If it wasn't 8 o'clock in the morning, I might have had a finger of whisky to toast the incumbent.
Tea it is, then.
Tea for celebration?
...a TEA PARTY?! Is THAT what you're having?!!!
Yes, but it's TAXED SOCIALIST tea, and what's more, I take it BLACK.
Yeah, baby.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
Early on they were predicting not having a winner at least until the next day or possibly several days later. One network (and no, it wasn't Fox) was stating that provisional ballots would have to be counted and that wouldn't be until after the 17th. The polls on the West Coast had just closed when it became apparent Obama had won - and had a big electoral college win. Contrary to popular pundits he also won the popular vote. I am grateful for the clear win and that we avoided another 2000 type legal battle as well as grateful that Obama won. I have to admit I'm also happy that we have an opposition, though I do hope the opposition has brains enough to figure out they need to compromise this time out. If they don't, I hope they get trounced in the mid term elections even though I don't want one party in control of everything. No matter whether it's Dems or GOP they get stupid when they control everything.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
More people voted for Obama
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
Romney's a stinking rich mo fo completely out of touch with real people who have to live paycheck to paycheck.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
That didn't stop the Brits voting for one in our last election.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Inger
Shipmate
# 15285
|
Posted
Wonderful news to wake up to! Congratulations and thank you for this result.
Good too to hear about the same sex marriage results.
Posts: 332 | From: Newcastle, UK | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
One of the networks I listened to tonight said their polling of individuals exiting the poll showed that Obama's performance during Sandy along with Christie's glowing review and bipartisan photo op made a difference in how some voted.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
To me the biggest reason is the one that was observed during the Republican primaries: to win the ideological supporter base of the party then, you have to move out to the right. To win the general election, you have to move back towards the centre.
You end up with a candidate that doesn't have a convincing position.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
Too many swing voters looked at Romney and thought, I'm just not convinced he's enough of a scary right wing nutjob. When the Republicans run a proper scary right wing nutjob then I'll vote for him. In the meantime, I'll vote for Obama again.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
To me the biggest reason is the one that was observed during the Republican primaries: to win the ideological supporter base of the party then, you have to move out to the right. To win the general election, you have to move back towards the centre.
You end up with a candidate that doesn't have a convincing position.
This is the thing that struck me, too.
Those on the left (from a US perspective - it encompasses everything from actual left to slightly right of centre) have no one to vote for but the Democrats. So the Democratic primaries are about picking a candidate who is credible to the centre-right.
The Republicans seem unwilling to pick a candidate who is credible to the centre-right in the primaries - the far right (not necessarily the same as the European far right) demand a candidate who will uphold far right principles. Who is then unleashed on the general public and has to, perforce, appeal to the centre-right, only to find that the Democratic candidate is not only already there, but has been there all along.
The far right Republicans will still vote Republican, despite their candidate moving to the centre, but the centrists, even if they have leaned Republican in the past, will look at the two candidates and vote Democrat.
In almost every respect, the rise of the Tea Party has made it far, far more difficult to elect a Republican president. A Democratic candidate only has to step a little to the right in order to comfortably win. A Republican candidate has to step waaaaaaaaaaaay to the left to be in the same position, and it just looks phoney.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Too many swing voters looked at Romney and thought, I'm just not convinced he's enough of a scary right wing nutjob. When the Republicans run a proper scary right wing nutjob then I'll vote for him. In the meantime, I'll vote for Obama again.
By the look of his tweets mentioned upthread, Donald J. Trump is that man!
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
So, which Shipmate from WA or CO is going to smoke his/her first legal joint?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wesley J
Silly Shipmate
# 6075
|
Posted
According to the BBC News' constantly updated Election live text, quote:
The Wall Street Journal says in an editorial that the re-election of Obama is "best described as the voters doubling down on hope over experience", adding that the Obama campaign's effective get-out-the-vote strategy was "the definition of winning ugly".
Link to WSJ. - Warning: The article seems very heavily biased, which is probably to be expected.
quote:
This was all a caricature even by the standards of modern politics. But it worked with brutal efficiency—the definition of winning ugly. Mr. Obama was able to patch together just enough of these voting groups to prevail even as he lost independents and won only 40% of the overall white vote, according to the exit polls. His campaign's turnout machine was as effective as advertised in getting Democratic partisans to the polls.
So, white voters are the only ones there are, according to the WSJ? And getting as many people as possible - and, oh look, black people, Hispanics and women as well! They all have the right to vote now, too, apparently!? - involved in basic, democratic political action is surely an excellent thing? What a pity you can't hang or shoot them all anymore?
And this is exactly what worries me about such a strong, even compulsive type of opinion: the sheer amount of undisguised hatred towards Obama as a person, and possibly towards what he stands for.
President Obama is clearly far from perfect - why nobody's telling him e.g. to talk considerably more slowly in his speeches is totally beyond me. It can very much come across as intellectual arrogance.
However, the denial by some that there are non-white human beings out there, Americans, some of whom women (!), and white women too (!), who have their own opinion and are not afraid to express it (!), and to attack those and the candidate they voted for, accusing them of dirty tricks - well, it does make me wonder if there won't be another Civil War of sorts soon.
God forbid. But such unmit(t)igated hatred seems to me extremely counterproductive, to say the least.
Just my 2p worth of a European perspective.
[ 07. November 2012, 10:44: Message edited by: Wesley J ]
--------------------
Be it as it may: Wesley J will stay. --- Euthanasia, that sounds good. An alpine neutral neighbourhood. Then back to Britain, all dressed in wood. Things were gonna get worse. (John Cooper Clarke)
Posts: 7354 | From: The Isles of Silly | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
God bless America! ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Some good analysis above. Romney had to show two faces (well, at least two!), first, a kind of dog-whistle to the right-wing, trust me, I'm also anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, a hawk on Iran, and I'll sack those lazy workers, but then he had to also show a more moderate face to the centre people, look, I'm quite nice, I don't like violent solutions, I brought in my own health care measures, and so on.
OK, all politicians have to do this, but with Romney the sense of disjunction just became too great, so it was like looking at one of those images, where the face starts to melt into a grotesque mask.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
It was close. I think that both candidates were very good. Congratulations to the President!
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
I see the Christian won.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
So, white voters are the only ones there are, according to the WSJ?
Yeah, that had me going "wow" as well. You'd think the author would reach the obvious conclusion that whites don't run the country any more. They are just one bloc among several, and you can now lose that bloc and still win the election.
That isn't winning 'ugly', for goodness' sake. Sounds like someone is railing against demographic change. They probably wish women would vote how they were told, as well.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Regarding the Republican problem of being 'two-faced': a commentator here also made the observation that some of the Republican candidates in Senate races were simply unelectable in State-wide contests. Tea Party candidates might have played GREAT in the 'reddest' parts of a State, but then they got hammered elsewhere.
I can't recall which State it was, but there was at least one instance of a long-serving moderate Republican being ousted in the primaries by someone further right, who then lost today. The commentator clearly thought this was political self-wounding of the highest order.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Meg the Red
Shipmate
# 11838
|
Posted
I'm reading on Yahoo! Canada that some po'd Republicans are threatening to move north of the border.
On behalf of my country, I'd like to say "Our idiot PM may be a Repub wannabe, but in the meantime we still have legalized abortion, gun control, same-sex marriage and socialized healthcare. Enjoy."
--------------------
Chocoholic Canuckistani Cyclopath
Posts: 1126 | From: Rat Creek | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Photo Geek
Shipmate
# 9757
|
Posted
I love blue ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif) ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
"Liberal Christian" is not an oxymoron.
Posts: 242 | From: Southern Ohio, US | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
The rescue of the auto industry certainly cost Romney Ohio and quite probably Michigan (although he might have lost the latter anyway). Having a lead in Ohio was key to putting Romney in a disadvantaged position throughout most of the campaign.
Adding Ryan to the ticket made Florida a lot more difficult for Romney than it might have been.
But really, Romney never did spell out any details of his plan for the economy. He set goals to accomplish - increase employment, reduce the deficit, etc., but never said how that would get done. The only firm details were concerning cutting taxes, and people did not see how all of this was going to add up.
Additionally, the comments to rich donors about the 47% etc. certainly did not help.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Karl Rove loses his cool on Fox News.
And then Fox gets to show off an anchor's legs?
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Grits
Compassionate fundamentalist
# 4169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win. He won because he is black, and there were people who voted for him who have never voted before, except maybe in 2008. I personally witnessed a man being turned away after it was discovered he had been purged from the rolls due to inactivity. I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm not saying that's why everyone voted for him. But it is most certainly why he was reelected. I'd think someone here of all places would have the balls to say it.
--------------------
Lord, fill my mouth with worthwhile stuff, and shut it when I've said enough. Amen.
Posts: 8419 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Okay, now when do all the idiot right-wing poll aggregators give their concession speeches to Nate Silver?
Silver was forecasting 313 when last I looked (midway between 303 and 332 - i'ts going to be one or the other). Realclear politics and Politico were both forecasting 303. With Florida leaning towards Obama, Silver looks to be conservative if anything.
ELECTORAL VOTE PREDICTIONS
Karl Rove: Romney, 285-253
Newt Gingrich: Romney, "over 300 electoral votes"
George Will: Romney, 321-217
Dick Morris: Romney, 325-213
Sean Hannity: Romney "by three points"
Charles Krauthammer: "Romney, very close."
Rush Limbaugh: "All of my thinking says Romney big. All of my feeling is where my concern is. But my thoughts, my intellectual analysis of this — factoring everything I see plus the polling data — it’s not even close. Three hundred-plus electoral votes for Romney."
Ari Fleischer: Romney 50.1 to 49.5%
Wouldn't mind seeing Josh Jordan eating a little crow also.
There is a real need for a bonfire of the vanities, mousethief.
What gets me is the sheer arrogant illogicality of making such confident predictions despite the cumulative polling evidence. "The numbers may say this - but we know better". One of the UK punjokes about the word expert is as follows
Ex = has been
(S)Pert - sounds like "spurt" = drip.
Ergo, expert = has-been drip. If the cap fits ..
Those guys have demonstrated zero political forecasting expertise but a comforting ability to keep on pandering to their adoring audiences without much regard for the truth.
The slagging of Silver also included some homophobic overtones. Very nasty.
So far as Fox and Fellow-Travellers are concerned, I wonder if the ownership is capable of a reality check? You would think they would want to avoid "Not fit for purpose"? If their purpose really is, at least in part, to inform, rather than to pander or manipulate.
[ 07. November 2012, 12:50: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win. He won because he is black, and there were people who voted for him who have never voted before, except maybe in 2008. I personally witnessed a man being turned away after it was discovered he had been purged from the rolls due to inactivity. I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm not saying that's why everyone voted for him. But it is most certainly why he was reelected. I'd think someone here of all places would have the balls to say it.
Over here, part of the analysis is that there weren't enough angry white men to elect Romney. That's kind of different to voting for the other guy because he's black.
You may as well say that women preferentially voted for Obama because... well, it might have something to do with not wanting to own their uterus. Or because he doesn't have binders.
And actually, even if you're right, I think it's a good thing: a country that's only been integrated in living memory votes for the black man because he's a black man. That's positive. Laudable, even.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
So far as Fox and Fellow-Travellers are concerned, I wonder if the ownership is capable of a reality check? You would think they would want to avoid "Not fit for purpose"? If their purpose really is, at least in part, to inform, rather than to pander or manipulate.
I've read some Fox pundits openly saying they couldn't have been wrong, that there was fraud in this election. It's the only way Obama could have won.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win.
I alluded to the fact that the crowd in Boston was noticeably lacking in non-white faces.
The reality is not that a white man can't win. The reality is that a man can't win if the only voters he appeals to are the white ones.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm sure that's true of some people on both sides.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
So far as Fox and Fellow-Travellers are concerned, I wonder if the ownership is capable of a reality check? You would think they would want to avoid "Not fit for purpose"? If their purpose really is, at least in part, to inform, rather than to pander or manipulate.
I've read some Fox pundits openly saying they couldn't have been wrong, that there was fraud in this election. It's the only way Obama could have won.
I believe there is precedent for fraudulent elections. Maybe the folk at Fox can tell us more.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white.
Right. If Romney had won, he would have been our first white President. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win. He won because he is black, and there were people who voted for him who have never voted before, except maybe in 2008. I personally witnessed a man being turned away after it was discovered he had been purged from the rolls due to inactivity. I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm not saying that's why everyone voted for him. But it is most certainly why he was reelected. I'd think someone here of all places would have the balls to say it.
There may have been a minority who voted for Obama simply because he is white, just like there was a minority who voted for Romney simply because he is white. To say it was the major reason Obama was elected is absurd and rather insulting to those of us who voted for him. The people I personally know who voted for Obama, as well as many people I saw interviewed voted for him because they didn't like either the Tea Party extremist he became for the base coupled with placing the guy with the extreme budget who wanted to privatize Social Security and turn Medicare essentially into a voucher program. I voted for Obama even though I really wanted to vote for 1 of the 3rd party candidates because I didn't want to take the chance Romney/Ryan would be able to pull the Tea Party agenda off and because I'd rather see Obamacare fixed rather than repealed with health care reform then forgotten or done in such a way it still left tens of millions without access to health coverage. The vast majority did do their research. We just didn't come to the same conclusions the Romney supporters did - and I'll wager they did research as well.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grits
Compassionate fundamentalist
# 4169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Over here, part of the analysis is that there weren't enough angry white men to elect Romney. That's kind of different to voting for the other guy because he's black.
You may as well say that women preferentially voted for Obama because... well, it might have something to do with not wanting to own their uterus. Or because he doesn't have binders.
And actually, even if you're right, I think it's a good thing: a country that's only been integrated in living memory votes for the black man because he's a black man. That's positive. Laudable, even.
So tell me, then: Why is all that OK, and yet voting against it is repugnant, antiquated, ignorant, etc.? Liberals want acceptance and support for their views, but their view never seem to truly embrace liberality -- which is allowing others the dignity and right to opposing opinions.
You say voting for a black man because he's a black man is positive and laudable. Would you say that about voting for a woman? I seriously doubt you supported Sarah Palin -- just because she was a woman. See, that kind of thinking only works one way.
And you're right -- I don't think there were any "angry white men", which is as it should be. Elections shouldn't be based on anger. But they should be based on more than race or gender.
--------------------
Lord, fill my mouth with worthwhile stuff, and shut it when I've said enough. Amen.
Posts: 8419 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win. He won because he is black, and there were people who voted for him who have never voted before, except maybe in 2008. I personally witnessed a man being turned away after it was discovered he had been purged from the rolls due to inactivity. I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm not saying that's why everyone voted for him. But it is most certainly why he was reelected. I'd think someone here of all places would have the balls to say it.
Probably because it's horseshit.
Tea Party crazies made the Republicans unelectable. And will till they are purged.
Simple. Elegant. Irresistible.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
So, bullet points please, Why did Romney lose?
P
He lost because he is white. I've kind of scrolled back through, and I don't see anyone even alluding to the reality of Obama's win. He won because he is black, and there were people who voted for him who have never voted before, except maybe in 2008. I personally witnessed a man being turned away after it was discovered he had been purged from the rolls due to inactivity. I just think there were a lot of uninformed voters who knew nothing of his positions on marriage or his foreign policy, etc. They voted for him for one reason.
I'm sure others voted against him because of colour too, and others have been turned away from the polls for that reason.
quote:
I'm not saying that's why everyone voted for him. But it is most certainly why he was reelected. I'd think someone here of all places would have the balls to say it.
I'd like to see some hard evidence, really I would. But to this Brit it looks like Romney lost because he was on the Republican ticket, and the 2012 Republicans scared enough of the 2008 Obama voters back to the polling booths despite their reservations over Obama.
[eta: x-p with Dark Knight]
[ 07. November 2012, 13:22: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
quote:
[Obama] won only 40% of the overall white vote, according to the exit polls.
So, white voters are the only ones there are, according to the WSJ? And getting as many people as possible - and, oh look, black people, Hispanics and women as well! They all have the right to vote now, too, apparently!? - involved in basic, democratic political action is surely an excellent thing? What a pity you can't hang or shoot them all anymore? ...
the denial by some that there are non-white human beings out there, Americans, some of whom women (!), and white women too (!), who have their own opinion and are not afraid to express it (!), and to attack those and the candidate they voted for, accusing them of dirty tricks - well, it does make me wonder if there won't be another Civil War of sorts soon.
I just now read
an article on Slate saying "Mitt Romney's election strategy depends on the notion that the white vote is separate from the rest of the vote" and "This has been the foundation of Republican presidential politics for more than four decades, since Richard Nixon courted and won the votes of Southerners who'd turned against the Democratic Party because of integration and civil rights."
The article makes clear the American Civil War never ended.
I had no clue until I moved south and heard attitudes expressed, out loud, I thought had died 100 years ago. No one says "slavery is good"; but some neighbors openly insist everyone would be better off if the South had won, that the war had nothing to do with slavery.
Mostly what you hear is constant insistence on "self-reliance" which I didn't realize for a long time means "foods stamps or medical care or subsidized housing for the poor are bad, they aren't being self reliant, but government subsidies for my mortgage, my child's college education, my business expansion, my Medicare are good." Government subsidizes me = good, government subsidized "them" = bad. Then seems to mean other than white males.
And oh the nostalgia for the 50s! I point out that the 50s were a terrible time for blacks and women. They say things were orderly because everyone was in their place.
A friend says the "Religious Right" are Nazis. He may be not far off. White supremacy may still be a strong undercurrent in USA white culture. Scary what that can lead to.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
Just saw an typo in my last post: should have read "voted for Obama because he is black". Argghhh.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Over here, part of the analysis is that there weren't enough angry white men to elect Romney. That's kind of different to voting for the other guy because he's black.
You may as well say that women preferentially voted for Obama because... well, it might have something to do with not wanting to own their uterus. Or because he doesn't have binders.
And actually, even if you're right, I think it's a good thing: a country that's only been integrated in living memory votes for the black man because he's a black man. That's positive. Laudable, even.
So tell me, then: Why is all that OK, and yet voting against it is repugnant, antiquated, ignorant, etc.? Liberals want acceptance and support for their views, but their view never seem to truly embrace liberality -- which is allowing others the dignity and right to opposing opinions.
You say voting for a black man because he's a black man is positive and laudable. Would you say that about voting for a woman? I seriously doubt you supported Sarah Palin -- just because she was a woman. See, that kind of thinking only works one way.
And you're right -- I don't think there were any "angry white men", which is as it should be. Elections shouldn't be based on anger. But they should be based on more than race or gender.
It's laudable because of history. Obviously (it is obvious, right?) Obama couldn't win just relying on the black vote, or the Hispanic vote, or the Korean vote. He needed white people to vote for him too. So it seems that enough white people have got over the whole slavery/segregation racist thing and it's now possible for the US to have a black president. Twice. So yes, props to white folk who voted for the black guy. Ditto those who voted in the gay senator.
Would I have voted for Palin? No. Because she's bat-shit crazy. It's a hurdle both of them have to get over as well as the race/gender thing. Some men wouldn't contemplate voting for a woman, sure, but when either the Democrats or the Republicans put up a female candidate who isn't bat-shit crazy, Lots of people will consider it a privilege to vote for them.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
