Official 2012 Presidential Election Night Thread
- Thread starter Stoked
- Start date
I thought he did.
HipHopAnonymous
Active Member
JimLes
Well-Known Member
Romney did, to his eternal credit. The problem is that Romney's not the whole party, and he's certainly not going to be that prominent of a part of the party going forward.
T Minus 129 Days until Ted Nugent's Death
On April 17th 2012 Ted Nuget warned us pleebs that If Obama got reelected he would be dead within a year. Well idiots (myself included), you didn't listen to the Nuge and now the man behind Cat Scratch Fever, Damn Yankees, and Wang Dang Sweet (Something that's hilarious but I probably can't post here) will be dead in less than 130 days, since Obama is going to want to kill him for some reason. Be ashamed America, very ashamed.
On April 17th 2012 Ted Nuget warned us pleebs that If Obama got reelected he would be dead within a year. Well idiots (myself included), you didn't listen to the Nuge and now the man behind Cat Scratch Fever, Damn Yankees, and Wang Dang Sweet (Something that's hilarious but I probably can't post here) will be dead in less than 130 days, since Obama is going to want to kill him for some reason. Be ashamed America, very ashamed.
Oh so we are talking about the right in general. OK then yeah some are and some are not. Unfortunately I do not want to hear the left in general bitching about it because some on the left throw fits when they lose as well.
I am ashamed. Ashamed that Nuggent got enough burn for an idiotic comment like that to be put out there.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
But this isn't about losing in general, this is specifically about the fact that the GOP has managed to alienate large, fast-growing segments of the population, and that it continues to alienate them through idiotic comments.
Man to hell with the GOP and the Dems.
Why do you think I posted a thread about a 3rd party?
I keep hearing about how the GOP is dead and out of touch. That they got slaughtered in a landslide. Yes, the E-college win was lopsided but it's not like 75% of the country voted for Obama. He won by a very narrow margin. I don't think that the problem is as bad as it is being made to sound.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
What I find really difficult to understand is why the GOP act as if there is some major party to the right of them they have to constantly worry about losing votes to. As if somehow, if they waver in their support of nutcase Tea Party views, the voters on the extreme right will abandon them and flock...where exactly?
Who knows how many votes this Mourdock fiasco cost Romney nationally. Why was the response so weak? Why was there lukewarm condemnation, but no pulling of the Romney ad endorsing Mourdock? Remember, this is a guy who in the end had more than 10% fewer votes than Donnelly and lost the damn senate election anyway? Was it really worth it?
Why not come out really strong and give him a choice of either a full, grovelling, unconditional apology, or being kicked out of the party? I know it's late in the election, I know GOP allegedly believes in the freedom of conscience for their members and all that jazz, but if you really believe a member of your own party has said something so hateful and ridiculous(and is then trying to justify it), why would you want him in your party?
Why was it so important to support a local candidate who according to polls at the time stood little chance of winning anyway? Why is one single senate seat in Indiana more important than the national image of the party? Again, I understand what a mess it would've been to withdraw support to one of your own a week or two before the election, but was it worth not doing it in the end? Romney lost(not that I'm for a second suggesting that was the key reason or even that big of a reason, but it was part of a trend) and in the end, Mourdock lost, too. All that was gained from this was the reinforcement of the image of the GOP as a party of old, white, Christian men who think women are receptacles for sperm.
Who knows how many votes this Mourdock fiasco cost Romney nationally. Why was the response so weak? Why was there lukewarm condemnation, but no pulling of the Romney ad endorsing Mourdock? Remember, this is a guy who in the end had more than 10% fewer votes than Donnelly and lost the damn senate election anyway? Was it really worth it?
Why not come out really strong and give him a choice of either a full, grovelling, unconditional apology, or being kicked out of the party? I know it's late in the election, I know GOP allegedly believes in the freedom of conscience for their members and all that jazz, but if you really believe a member of your own party has said something so hateful and ridiculous(and is then trying to justify it), why would you want him in your party?
Why was it so important to support a local candidate who according to polls at the time stood little chance of winning anyway? Why is one single senate seat in Indiana more important than the national image of the party? Again, I understand what a mess it would've been to withdraw support to one of your own a week or two before the election, but was it worth not doing it in the end? Romney lost(not that I'm for a second suggesting that was the key reason or even that big of a reason, but it was part of a trend) and in the end, Mourdock lost, too. All that was gained from this was the reinforcement of the image of the GOP as a party of old, white, Christian men who think women are receptacles for sperm.
I do think the GOP has a problem with youth and hispanics. If they increase their margins there they will win mor elections.
candrew
Well-Known Member
I heard on the radio today that Romney didn't do bad on the exit poll survey. The one thing that killed him was; "which candidate cares more about me" in which he lost to Obama by a whopping 81% to 19%.
To me you can clearly draw that back to his 47% comment a month or so ago. I think that shook not only the takers (many of which vote republican any way) but the guy making $28-30K a year who isn't quite sure if his job is going to be there in a year or two.
To me you can clearly draw that back to his 47% comment a month or so ago. I think that shook not only the takers (many of which vote republican any way) but the guy making $28-30K a year who isn't quite sure if his job is going to be there in a year or two.
This sucks:
So Obama got the votes in the places where the people live. Amazing.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
This sucks:
I've seen this and similar things posted on my facebook the last couple of days by Romney supporters, and I don't get it.
Land doesn't vote, people do.
Yeah, what's really telling about that graph is that Obama won Nevada but won just two counties there, Washoe and Clark. The counties that happen to have Reno and Vegas in them.
And while Romney won Missouri, he won it 54% to 44%, yet Obama only one three counties. Jackson, Boone, and St. Louis. Home of Kansas City, Columbia, and St. Louis...again, where the people live.
At least he won a county there (looks to be the county Jackson and Yellowstone are in). He didn't win a single one in Oklahoma, thus confirming my stance that Oklahoma is the absolute worst state in the nation.
Romney did. His supporters, not so much. I've found you a link: https://news.yahoo.com/freaking-best-worst-responses-obamas-win-193457867--abc-news-politics.html
But really, you need only go as far as facebook.