I
irishpatrick
Guest
No, I left nothing out that I thought was missing. The bottom line is the GOP did not get out the vote–they fix that or they will not win again.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
I can tell you why, because I have been saying it since March.Two major reasons have been cited: (1) Romney was not conservative enough and Republicans are sick of moderate candidates. (2) His faith scared some people.
I have no idea if those are truly the major reasons…yet, my point is the GOP needs to uncover why they failed to receive millions of votes. This should have been an easy victory.
The GOP Establishment decided that Romney was going to be their guy and made sure that he got the nomination. It was so poorly hidden that many of the “Tea Party” folks, like myself, basically thumbed their nose at the GOP. If they are going to treat us like idiots, then they can try to get votes the way that the Democrats do. Bribery, empty promises, and playing Robin Hood. But don’t rig the system and then try to tell us that Romney won it fair and square. Some of us can actually do research and know that Rence Prebius and others where orchestrating the whole primary to get Romney on the ticket.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
People voted for Romney in the primaries…they were not forced.Millions of Republicans realize what a sham the primaries were and felt excluded from the process. They expressed their displeasure with their actions. Maybe the GOP will learn and actually try to let the people decide who they want representing them.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Yes they did, but the RNC mechanism was working behind the scenes to ensure that Romney got the exposure. Marketing is everything. If Gingrich would have gotten a third of the money and support that Romney did, things may have been very different right now. Gingrich would have destroyed Obama in the debates and would have made sure that all of the important issues we front and center on the table. Romney took Obamacare OFF the table with Obama…the single-most important issue for conservative voters, and he virtually ignored it.People voted for Romney in the primaries…they were not forced.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Speaking of Gingrich, I understand he is still eligible to be House Speaker even though he doesn’t hold a seat.Yes they did, but the RNC mechanism was working behind the scenes to ensure that Romney got the exposure. Marketing is everything. If Gingrich would have gotten a third of the money and support that Romney did, things may have been very different right now. Gingrich would have destroyed Obama in the debates and would have made sure that all of the important issues we front and center on the table. Romney took Obamacare OFF the table with Obama…the single-most important issue for conservative voters, and he virtually ignored it.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
That would be great, because Boehner has to go.Speaking of Gingrich, I understand he is still eligible to be House Speaker even though he doesn’t hold a seat.
O
oldcelt
Guest
He may very well, in 2014That would be great, because Boehner has to go.
I
ishii
Guest
I think that is unlikely. Do you think that Romney had a vulnerable past? Bain capital, Romneycare, etc. Imagine how popular Gingrich would have been after the Obama media and Obama campaign attack ads. Gingrich had tons of baggage. It would not have mattered how good he did in the debates. Gingrich, great communicator and debater that he is, has always been a polarizing figure in politics. The Obama media complex would have had a field day pummeling him. I agree with you on Obama care though - Romney was not an effective candidate to exploit the issue.Yes they did, but the RNC mechanism was working behind the scenes to ensure that Romney got the exposure. Marketing is everything. If Gingrich would have gotten a third of the money and support that Romney did, things may have been very different right now. Gingrich would have destroyed Obama in the debates and would have made sure that all of the important issues we front and center on the table. Romney took Obamacare OFF the table with Obama…the single-most important issue for conservative voters, and he virtually ignored it.
Bottom line: Romney was probably the strongest candidate in a weak field of candidates. The left controls much of the media and all of the education system - its no wonder that large numbers of voters bought in to Obama’s campaign of class envy.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
We need to wake up to the fact that the left has slowly but surely transformed our country into an entitlement society - which expects government to take care of them. I think what you are saying proves my point - in a sense - Obama was a complete disaster on all levels. Yet he still won! That says more about the state of our country and the state of mind of the voters than it does about Romney. Romney was a successful businessman. Governor of Mass. Had gravitas on foreign policy. Had positive solutions to the problems we face. In the end, Obama was able to tap in to the large numbers of voters who benefit from government entitlements to add to his base. He had a press that went to bat for him. He had good luck. And lots of money for attack ads. Say what you want, he is a skillful politician who can read a teleprompter.Two major reasons have been cited: (1) Romney was not conservative enough and Republicans are sick of moderate candidates. (2) His faith scared some people.
I have no idea if those are truly the major reasons…yet, my point is the GOP needs to uncover why they failed to receive millions of votes. This should have been an easy victory.
One group that I am really disappointed in is Catholics. There was no excuse for not voting for Romney - and that goes for liberal Catholics as well as the “true believer” Ron Paul types and 3rd party types. If more had voted for Romney he might have won. We’ll never know.
Ishii
K
Kindness
Guest
My understanding is that the states with the most Americans dependent on government benefits actually voted Republican and those areas with the most well-educated citizens voted Democrat. The more education you have the more likely you have a better paid job and pay higher taxes. So the implication of your post that Republican voters are less likely to be receiving “entitlements” does not hold water.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Link? Obama won 8 out of the 10 wealthiest countiesMy understanding is that the states with the most Americans dependent on government benefits actually voted Republican and those areas with the most well-educated citizens voted Democrat. The more education you have the more likely you have a better paid job and pay higher taxes. So the implication of your post that Republican voters are less likely to be receiving “entitlements” does not hold water.
R
rocklobster
Guest
Hey, you there. Sounds like you need re-education: watch this. It’s the main reason I vote Republican.Black people do not eschew voting for Republicans because of those mythical “gifts.” They don’t vote for Republicans in large numbers because they know exactly what these wolves in sheeps clothing support!
B
BroomWagon
Guest
Your understanding is wrong.My understanding is that the states with the most Americans dependent on government benefits actually voted Republican and those areas with the most well-educated citizens voted Democrat. The more education you have the more likely you have a better paid job and pay higher taxes. So the implication of your post that Republican voters are less likely to be receiving “entitlements” does not hold water.
Obama won New York and California which take a lot of welfare.
Of the biggest welfare states, Obama won 13 of 15!
cnbc.com/id/31910310?slide=15
- California
- Maine
- Tennessee
- Massachusetts
- Vermont
- District of Columbia
- New York
- Minnesota
- Washington State
- New Mexico
- Indiana
- Rhode Island
- Michigan
- Pennsylvania
- Oregon
Talk about water.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
Gingrich was not liked, at all. He came across as abrasive to many people. Yet, no matter what we think of the original candidates, Romney won and Republicans (by the millions) did not vote for him. The “I want my candidate or I will not vote” position helped Obama win. I suppose for those millions, they saw zero difference between Romney and Obama.Yes they did, but the RNC mechanism was working behind the scenes to ensure that Romney got the exposure. Marketing is everything. If Gingrich would have gotten a third of the money and support that Romney did, things may have been very different right now. Gingrich would have destroyed Obama in the debates and would have made sure that all of the important issues we front and center on the table. Romney took Obamacare OFF the table with Obama…the single-most important issue for conservative voters, and he virtually ignored it.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
Obama lost 5-6 million votes even with all those positives you mentioned…not exactly a great statement. At the same time, about the same number of Republicans did NOT vote at all. Add it together and we see why Romney lost–the GOP failed to seal the deal, it failed to get their vote out! Now, the question is, why? How could millions of Republicans choose to NOT vote?We need to wake up to the fact that the left has slowly but surely transformed our country into an entitlement society - which expects government to take care of them. I think what you are saying proves my point - in a sense - Obama was a complete disaster on all levels. Yet he still won! That says more about the state of our country and the state of mind of the voters than it does about Romney. Romney was a successful businessman. Governor of Mass. Had gravitas on foreign policy. Had positive solutions to the problems we face. In the end, Obama was able to tap in to the large numbers of voters who benefit from government entitlements to add to his base. He had a press that went to bat for him. He had good luck. And lots of money for attack ads. Say what you want, he is a skillful politician who can read a teleprompter.
One group that I am really disappointed in is Catholics. There was no excuse for not voting for Romney - and that goes for liberal Catholics as well as the “true believer” Ron Paul types and 3rd party types. If more had voted for Romney he might have won. We’ll never know.
Ishii
K
Kindness
Guest
When talking of “welfare” what is included? Does this include Medicaid and Social Security and all other entitlements?Your understanding is wrong.
Obama won New York and California which take a lot of welfare.
.
B
BroomWagon
Guest
Sorry, these are not welfare but if I am mistaken, someone can correct me.When talking of “welfare” what is included? Does this include Medicaid and Social Security and all other entitlements?
Welfare is thought to be food stamps, etc., housing assistance.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
E
epan
Guest
I think that you need to look at money paid to the Federal Government, and then subtract money paid back out into the state. It turns out that the red states have a much higher proportion of money paid out, vs paid in. The Red States tend to be big spenders of Federal money, more than they pay in taxes, while the Blue States tend to be net contributors to the public coffer.Your understanding is wrong.
Obama won New York and California which take a lot of welfare.
Of the biggest welfare states, Obama won 13 of 15!
cnbc.com/id/31910310?slide=15
All of these States except for Tenn and Indiana voted for Obama.
- California
- Maine
- Tennessee
- Massachusetts
- Vermont
- District of Columbia
- New York
- Minnesota
- Washington State
- New Mexico
- Indiana
- Rhode Island
- Michigan
- Pennsylvania
- Oregon
Talk about water.
It is highly ironic that the red candidate is the one who promised to cut Federal spending. I wonder how many red voters realized that they would be the most affected by that? It shows how the average voter just swallows whatever they are fed, without considering the actual consequences of what they are voting for. Some of the red stated receive as much as 2.5 times their internally generated GDP in federal spending.
Here is a map. There are exceptions, but pretty much, there is a relationship. Red states are subsidized by Blue tax revenues, and not the other way around. If the red states secede, maybe we will get the deficit under control in the remaining states in the Union.
economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union
I
ishii
Guest
Okay, let’s here your explanation. Perhaps we need more analysis of these non-voting Republicans: did they get out and vote for McCain 4 years ago and then decide to stay home in 2012? I am trying to imagine a candidate that could have inspired those 5-6 million GOP voters. Romney ran a campaign of positive ideas, there are serious issues we face, Obama has been a complete disaster, etc. If in spite of all this so many GOP voters were not motivated to vote then I question their committment to conservative principles. One might say, “but Santorum would have motivated them” but then Santorum would have alienated moderates and independents.Obama lost 5-6 million votes even with all those positives you mentioned…not exactly a great statement. At the same time, about the same number of Republicans did NOT vote at all. Add it together and we see why Romney lost–the GOP failed to seal the deal, it failed to get their vote out! Now, the question is, why? How could millions of Republicans choose to NOT vote?
I am sticking to my earlier premise: Obama won because of a variety of factors: the role of individuals, luck, the press, decades of leftist dominance of our educations system (for which we can blame so many youth votes for Obama - he is borrowing from China to continue entitlements and they will have to foot the bill yet they still voted for him) and an increasing entitlement society - recall that Obama promised college students “help in paying their student loans”. Rob Peter to pay Paul and you will get Paul’s vote.
Ishii
- Status
- Not open for further replies.