What's new

Official 2012 Presidential Election Night Thread

WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP GOING BACK TO EITHER WOMENS RIGHTS OR RACISM? i HAVEN'T MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT EITHER OF THESE THINGS!

I've been to college. Lots of women there. I've been to work constantly without fail and there are women in the office. My work place is owned and operated by a woman and she does a fine job. There is nothing wrong with women voting, and I have at no time implied this. This is my last post on this topic, because people are not 'getting it' at all.

Regardless of the past there is no problem with women and minorities in politics or the work place. There is no problem with women or minorities voting. There is a problem with people voting to cover for their personal reluctance to live an honest life rather than voting for the betterment of the strength and stability of the nation.

I get it. Not racist, not sexist, but class war, right?

Look man, you are talking about the main reason Romney lost- because a kit of people felt that Romney believed the same crap you keep spouting.

If republicans are going to survive as a party, they are going to have to get past that old time Taliban style mentality.
 
What I find funny are all the people bitching about the electoral college.

It's not the irony that these same folks weren't complaining about it after Bush beat Gore... It's that I thought after the health care debate that the Constitution was perfect and that the FF never intended for the Constitution to be changed?

So just a few months ago, repubs were talking about how we needed to get back to the Constitution and abide by it instead of changing it to fit our needs but are now complaining about how the electoral college is outdated and needs to go.

So which is it?

Is the Constitution outdated and needs to be fluid and able to adapt to whatever are our countries' needs? Or is it set in stone and never should be changed?
 
What I find funny are all the people bitching about the electoral college.

It's not the irony that these same folks weren't complaining about it after Bush beat Gore... It's that I thought after the health care debate that the Constitution was perfect and that the FF never intended for the Constitution to be changed?

So just a few months ago, repubs were talking about how we needed to get back to the Constitution and abide by it instead of changing it to fit our needs but are now complaining about how the electoral college is outdated and needs to go.

So which is it?

Is the Constitution outdated and needs to be fluid and able to adapt to whatever are our countries' needs? Or is it set in stone and never should be changed?
Obama ended up winning the popular vote anyway, so their complaints are just sour grapes (although I am all for getting rid of the electoral college too).
 
Obama ended up winning the popular vote anyway, so their complaints are just sour grapes (although I am all for getting rid of the electoral college too).

But that would mean changing the perfect document that was never ever ever meant to be changed, the Constitution.

Remember now, repubs just a few weeks ago were chatting about how we needed to get back to the Constitution... Now the Constitution is outdated and needs to be changed?
 
But that would mean changing the perfect document that was never ever ever meant to be changed, the Constitution.

Remember now, repubs just a few weeks ago were chatting about how we needed to get back to the Constitution... Now the Constitution is outdated and needs to be changed?

Except for the fact that the Constitution has a built-in mechanism for being changed. Instead of ignoring the Constitution we should follow the procedure for changing it.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that changing the Constitution is in fact Constitutional.
 
But that would mean changing the perfect document that was never ever ever meant to be changed, the Constitution.

Remember now, repubs just a few weeks ago were chatting about how we needed to get back to the Constitution... Now the Constitution is outdated and needs to be changed?

The Constitution has been amended 27 times. I have never understood the argument for "going back to the Constitution" when it clearly was meant to provide for adjustment.
 
What I find funny are all the people bitching about the electoral college.

It's not the irony that these same folks weren't complaining about it after Bush beat Gore... It's that I thought after the health care debate that the Constitution was perfect and that the FF never intended for the Constitution to be changed?

So just a few months ago, repubs were talking about how we needed to get back to the Constitution and abide by it instead of changing it to fit our needs but are now complaining about how the electoral college is outdated and needs to go.

So which is it?

Is the Constitution outdated and needs to be fluid and able to adapt to whatever are our countries' needs? Or is it set in stone and never should be changed?

I'm one those people. I wasn't old enough to vote in 2000, and now that I am the EC just pisses me off. The potential to have someone be elected president without winning the popular vote sucks, but what sucks the most is watching candidates campaign endlessly in some select battleground states when they should care as much about Utah voters as Ohio voters.
 
Obama ended up winning the popular vote anyway, so their complaints are just sour grapes (although I am all for getting rid of the electoral college too).

This is such a damn crock. This is a willfull and knowing distortion of the arguement by you and Thriller. You are both being severly dishonest here and you know it.

It has been stated several times on here that what happened to Gore was wrong and that he should have been president.

Obama did win the popular vote and would still have won.

I expected that from Thriller but not you Salty.

What bothers me, and others from the arguements I have seen and read, is that 229,000+people in Utah voted for Obama and it did not mean a damn thing. Disgraceful. Same with the 462,000+ in Nevada that voted for Romney.
 
Lets see where we will be if Obama keeps us going "forward" for the next 4 years:

-Obama will add another 5-6 trillion to the deficit

-Gas prices will be around $6 dollars a gallon

-Healthcare costs will go higher than most people's Mortgage per month

-Unemployment will be around 9%


YES WE CAN!!!
 
Last edited:
Lets see where we will be if Obama keeps us going "forward" for the next 4 years:
-Obama will add another 5-6 trillion to the deficit

I agree his use of tax cuts to stimulate the economy was inefficient.

-Gas prices will be around $6 dollars a gallon

-Unemployment will be around 9%

Can't realistically happen at the same time. Gas prices dropped because the economy was sunk, and are rising because the economy is improving. However, I would not be surprised at $6/gallon gasoline.

Under Obama, we went from losing 850,000 jobs a month to gaining over 150,000. Four more years of that means we'd be adding 1,150,000 jobs a month.

-Healthcare costs will go higher than most people's Mortgage per month

OUtside of reducing payments in Medicaid, what has Obama done to increase health care costs? Certainly not Obamacare.
 
Lets see where we will be if Obama keeps us going "forward" for the next 4 years:

-Obama will add another 5-6 trillion to the deficit

-Gas prices will be around $6 dollars a gallon

-Healthcare costs will go higher than most people's Mortgage per month

-Unemployment will be around 9%


YES WE CAN!!!

The sky is falling! Gloom and Doom! Oh no!

Why don't you quit bitching about Obama and start looking at the House.
They have just as much blame as the Senate, and President.

You can't tell me your side is doing all they can to work with the other side.
Enough excuses.
 
This is such a damn crock. This is a willfull and knowing distortion of the arguement by you and Thriller. You are both being severly dishonest here and you know it.

It has been stated several times on here that what happened to Gore was wrong and that he should have been president.

Obama did win the popular vote and would still have won.

I expected that from Thriller but not you Salty.

What bothers me, and others from the arguements I have seen and read, is that 229,000+people in Utah voted for Obama and it did not mean a damn thing. Disgraceful. Same with the 462,000+ in Nevada that voted for Romney.

As I said, I'm all for getting rid of the electoral college.

Perhaps you aren't aware of Trump's tirade on Twitter last night calling for a revolution because the electoral college supposedly robbed the people of the true elected president?
 
As I said, I'm all for getting rid of the electoral college.

Perhaps you aren't aware of Trump's tirade on Twitter last night calling for a revolution because the electoral college supposedly robbed the people of the true elected president?

Are you seriously using Trump as the basis of your arguement. He is a fraud and gets on TV because he is rich and that is it.

He is the rights version of Chris Matthews thanking god for Hurricane Sandy.
 
This election shows the benefits and dangers of buying votes. It looks like republicans are going to have to stoop down to win any more of these. The thought of that spiral is not pretty.

Ohio--auto
Florida--ss&med
PA, MI--welfare owns the vote

Republicans have a vote buying strategy to figure out. That's a tough thing to do when you've been against certain demographics for decades and there aren't enough workers left to support do-gooder causes.
TAX CUTS FOREVER isn't the most childish attempt to buy votes ever?
 
Last edited:
Lets see where we will be if Obama keeps us going "forward" for the next 4 years:

-Obama will add another 5-6 trillion to the deficit

-Gas prices will be around $6 dollars a gallon

-Healthcare costs will go higher than most people's Mortgage per month

-Unemployment will be around 9%


YES WE CAN!!!

Care to cite a real study to support this post in the classic Beantown tradition?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top