Archive

romney explain why he lost

  • TedSheckler
    isadore;1320992 wrote:if reading my writings on this site have not enlightened, you may be beyond the pale. Try to read and understand.
    Still waiting.....

    Show me the hatred, please.
    YesObama cares so much that the average workers health insurance will rise tounprecedented cost. Thanks!
  • TedSheckler
    I think the obvious reason is all the intolerance of half the American people against the Mormon religion. It's just a shame this country couldn't stand to have America's first Mormon president.
  • 2kool4skool
  • gut
    TedSheckler;1321020 wrote:I think the obvious reason is all the intolerance of half the American people against the Mormon religion. It's just a shame this country couldn't stand to have America's first Mormon president.
    It is un-American not to drink beer. We know Obama drinks beer. With a cold bottle of beer, Obama can (and has) fixed racism.
  • QuakerOats
    Food Stamp Recipients Alone Would Have Accounted For 75% Of Obama's Total Vote... [HR][/HR]
  • BoatShoes
    You forget, all those rural whites on SNAP voted for Romney lol try again.
  • ptown_trojans_1
    Sooo, I wonder how many people in the South (R territory) are on foodstamps?
  • isadore
    TedSheckler;1321013 wrote:Still waiting.....

    Show me the hatred, please.
    Ted Schekler wrote:
    Examples of Racist stereotypes, hateful statements aboutObama and straight out lies.
    You must be poor. You have Mexicans across the street.

    He knew it was a terrorist attack right away and he wantedto still try to convince the American people that the war on terror is over.That there is nothing to see here, hence the blaming of the YouTube video, eventhough he knew it wasn't true.
    The president being presidential....

    http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o185/cbrdamon/46491_379707892109582_1141088351_n.jpg

    New poll. Obama only has 47% of the Jewish vote. Compared to78% last time.
    a few examples
  • rmolin73
    ptown_trojans_1;1321081 wrote:Sooo, I wonder how many people in the South (R territory) are on foodstamps?
    What are you doing bringing facts into the argument?
  • TedSheckler
    isadore;1321090 wrote:a few examples

    No, you goose. You quoted a line earlier that you said was hatred. I failed to see the hatred in it. You still haven't explained how it's hatred. Still waiting...
  • WebFire
    Forgive him Ted. He's spewing so much shit he can't keep track of what he is replying to.
  • isadore
    TedSheckler;1321146 wrote:No, you goose. You quoted a line earlier that you said was hatred. I failed to see the hatred in it. You still haven't explained how it's hatred. Still waiting...
    you have been shown the truth, you refuse to accept it. You have refused a chance to be redeemed from your hatred.
  • stlouiedipalma
    In my view, Romney (and several Republican House and Senate candidates) lost this election primarily because a majority of Americans rejected their message. There are other, more obvious factors as well which relates to demographics. How else can you explain the Latino vote? Eight short years ago George W. Bush was able to claim support from over 40% of Latinos. That number shrank dramatically this year, down into the low 20's. You can argue it's because Obama "gave" them stuff, as Mr. O'Reilly has. I prefer to think that the Republican Party's dramatic shift to the right and adoption of the tea party alienated many Latinos, single women, African-Americans and the younger voters. There is simply nothing their message has to offer which could attract any of these voting blocs. I think they were emboldened by their victories in the 2010 midterms and didn't do anything to build on it. That blame should be placed squarely on the RNC. They had serious momentum going into 2012 and they blew it. They outspent Team Obama by over $200 million and have nothing to show for it. Everything was trending in their favor, with the economy struggling the way it was and they still managed to blow it. If Republicans across the country want to put a face of blame on their losses, they need only look in the mirror.
  • rmolin73
    The Republicans will lose the Latino vote in 2016 if they don't get it together. Someone needs to put a muzzle on Mitt.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/ana-navarro-romney-latino-gifts_n_2138380.html?ref=topbar

    The Asian vote as well.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-08/asian-voters-send-a-message-to-republicans.html

    The women vote.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/naomi-wolf-how-republicans-persuaded-women-to-re-elect-obama-2012-11
  • 2kool4skool
    The Jews and Asians both voted for Obama overwhelmingly. Both groups of people notorious for being lazy freeloaders and possessing no business knowledge...

    :rolleyes:
  • HitsRus
    reps to molin for the links....although HuffPo is hardly an unbiased source.

    I think any one who points to one or two 'reasons' why the Republicans lost is much too simplistic....and I'm not sure the 'message' was rejected as much as it was allowed to be skewed...or the perception of it skewed by by extremists within the party and by Democratic attack ads that took advantage of it. Opportunities to make inroads against Obama were 'blown'. Romney was as bad in debate #3 as Obama was in the first...killing the momentum. Further, while Obama was aggressive the final two weeks in attacking Romney, Romney was lackluster and milquetoast. The democratic ground game was better. The liberal tilt of most of the media. The loss was by a thousand small cuts. There was no overriding factor.

    1 or 2 voters in a hundred, in a couple of swing states decided this election. The Republicans failed miserably in the final two weeks in securing those voters.
  • WebFire
    stlouiedipalma;1321262 wrote:In my view, Romney (and several Republican House and Senate candidates) lost this election primarily because a majority of Americans rejected their message. There are other, more obvious factors as well which relates to demographics. How else can you explain the Latino vote? Eight short years ago George W. Bush was able to claim support from over 40% of Latinos. That number shrank dramatically this year, down into the low 20's. You can argue it's because Obama "gave" them stuff, as Mr. O'Reilly has. I prefer to think that the Republican Party's dramatic shift to the right and adoption of the tea party alienated many Latinos, single women, African-Americans and the younger voters. There is simply nothing their message has to offer which could attract any of these voting blocs. I think they were emboldened by their victories in the 2010 midterms and didn't do anything to build on it. That blame should be placed squarely on the RNC. They had serious momentum going into 2012 and they blew it. They outspent Team Obama by over $200 million and have nothing to show for it. Everything was trending in their favor, with the economy struggling the way it was and they still managed to blow it. If Republicans across the country want to put a face of blame on their losses, they need only look in the mirror.
    That's the problem to begin with. People vote based on "what's in it for me" instead what's best for the country. So instead of debating about the deficit and budget and foreign policy, we have debates centered around abortion, gay rights and entitlements.
  • HitsRus
    ^^^^I had a discussion with a younger voter...and his reason for voting for Obama was that he didn't see much difference on what Romney would do for the economy...so he voted on 'social issues' which he felt were more important for him. Republicans thought it would be all about the economy, when in fact, it was not.
  • WebFire
    HitsRus;1321360 wrote:^^^^I had a discussion with a younger voter...and his reason for voting for Obama was that he didn't see much difference on what Romney would do for the economy...so he voted on 'social issues' which he felt were more important for him. Republicans thought it would be all about the economy, when in fact, it was not.
    It was not, but should have been. After all, the 2 are tied together.
  • Raw Dawgin' it
    Black person voting for Obama cause he's black, not racist. White person voting for Romney because he's white, racist!
  • gut
    WebFire;1321368 wrote:It was not, but should have been. After all, the 2 are tied together.
    Some talking head or writer somewhere had a good point about younger voters - they don't really understand how the economy works or how policy is going to affect them. True many were unemployed, but they don't really understand how that's linked to growth and how that's impacted by policy.

    Along those same lines, Romney isn't going to be able to make them understand how that works in a few minutes in a debate. Even then, in my experience most people are not capable of understanding, or wanting to understand, no matter how many times it's explained. Kind of like medicine - most people aren't going to understand how or why something really works, they just trust their doctor knows what he's doing. In economics and fisc, we don't really trust people (and economists probably should blame themselves for allowing their work to become biased with politics).

    HitsRus young person is probably representative. They are probably predisposed toward Obama for a variety of reasons, and liberal creep in education only helps that. So there's skepticism and a lack of trust, and that results in rejecting Romney on the economy because the voter can't or won't see any differences, and votes for Obama for a different reason. The economics issues are complex and dynamic, and I think the explanation is simply the Romney didn't do enough to show how socialism is failing.

    People just don't know what they're voting for, so they don't really know what they are going to get. I don't think people really grasp or understand the magnitude of the nuclear bomb building in national debt. Even if we sounded all kinds of alarm bells and warnings about the housing bubble, without a policy change people would not have changed their behavior. We had that with the internet bubble, and supposedly sophisticated and smart investors ignored the warnings (they all think they are smart enough not to be left holding the bag, and it's debateable if the 10% that do escape are smarter or just luckier).

    So the moral of the story is a reckless Congress making poor decisions is perhaps to be expected when people that elect them continue to make reckless and poor choices. I just don't see the electorate warming to the idea that what's good for the country in the long-run is good for everyone, and so just ignore any perceived individual short-run pain. I don't think anyone is under any illusion that a politician running on entitlement reform has a chance in hell in a general election.
  • rmolin73
    Raw Dawgin' it;1321372 wrote:Black person voting for Obama cause he's black, not racist. White person voting for Romney because he's white, racist!
    Anyone that thinks this way is an idiot! Now don't get me wrong there are a great deal of the voting public that do vote because of race. But to say one is racist one way or another is getting pretty ridiculous on both sides.
  • rmolin73
    Raw Dawgin' it;1321372 wrote:Black person voting for Obama cause he's black, not racist. White person voting for Romney because he's white, racist!
    Anyone that thinks this way is an idiot! Now don't get me wrong there are a great deal of the voting public that do vote because of race. But to say one is racist one way or another is getting pretty ridiculous on both sides.
  • BoatShoes
    Ok, I'm starting to get it now.

    If Romney had won....it would've surely been

    "Look, the people finally came to their senses and have mandated entitlement reform and "pro-growth" economics! This election was always about the economy and a referendum on Obama/socialism. Hip-Hip Hooray!"

    Romney loses...

    "People didn't actually reject Romney's policies...the election didn't end up being about the economy and overall the American people are just too stupid."

    :laugh::laugh::laugh:
  • sleeper
    HitsRus;1321360 wrote:^^^^I had a discussion with a younger voter...and his reason for voting for Obama was that he didn't see much difference on what Romney would do for the economy...so he voted on 'social issues' which he felt were more important for him. Republicans thought it would be all about the economy, when in fact, it was not.
    That's exactly it. Young people only vote on social issues and right now the Republican social platform is an absolute joke.