Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 · Nov 9, 2012

Charlatan said: ↑

I was saying this from the moment he announced his run. Hunstman would have been the Demorat's worst fear. A real centre-right candidate.
Click to expand...

Yes, but until you get past the "crucible" mentality of the primaries,
where the extremists are looking at the most "pure" candidates...then you're going to have a problem.

That and the Super-PAC while not shown to be as effective on the large-scale stage,
are really good at ripping part opponents...this was the Romney method in this current primary cycle.

Charlatan · Nov 10, 2012

rogue49 said: ↑

Yes, but until you get past the "crucible" mentality of the primaries,
where the extremists are looking at the most "pure" candidates...then you're going to have a problem.

That and the Super-PAC while not shown to be as effective on the large-scale stage,
are really good at ripping part opponents...this was the Romney method in this current primary cycle.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I know why Huntsman failed. He really had no hope of winning the Primaries. I just think the Republicans need to have a long think about why they lost and, as some on the right are suggesting, being *more* conservative isn't the answer. Had Romney run as a moderate the entire time, or had they chosen Huntsman, one of them would likely be President right now.

It wasn't about Obama, it was about appealing to the centre.

Tully Mars · Nov 10, 2012

rogue49 said: ↑

That and the Super-PAC while not shown to be as effective on the large-scale stage,
are really good at ripping part opponents...this was the Romney method in this current primary cycle.
Click to expand...

I keep hearing how the Romney camp ran a near prefect campaign. Every time I hear it I think "really? Seriously?" I mean they did a pretty good job of painting Obama has someone he isn't. He isn't a socialist, he is a citizen, he's not Muslim, he has not added 15 trillion to the debt, he has added private sector jobs, the economy is getting better- housing prices are going up and the Dow has nearly doubled in three years. But the right did a fantastic job of convincing people Obama was the opposite of all that. People believed he was/is a socialist, that he alone tripled the debt, he is a Muslim. Many believe all or some of those things and looked at Mitt and said "No, I'm voting for the free fall spending, Muslim, socialist." That happened, in part, because the Obama camp painted, a picture with the help of the GOP primary field, that Mitt was an out of touch rich asshole who could care less about any one but himself and other wealthy people. Camp Romney and it's supporting cast of well funded super PAC's spent all their time and money telling folks how evil Obama was and never bothered to try to get a message out that Mitt was a great candidate or what his great plan was. In short they thought they could just beat Obama by painting him as the bad guy. Super PAC's didn't get much for their money to say the least.

Random McRandom · Nov 10, 2012

Tully Mars Who is saying they ran a perfect campaign? I'm hearing tons of backlash against the campaign assets, ground-game, polling and use of funds. In fact, some are saying going into election night, the Romney camp knew they were going to lose and they holed up in the suite so they didn't have to face the donors while all the states were being lost.

The only people that the right convinced of those things were people who were already right or teabag'd to begin with. Most centrists and/or left people saw them for nothing more than fluff. The election was close, because it is still a tough time for many people here and the hope and change feel-good didn't translate this time. Look at it this way though, not even Clinton won the popular vote. Obama has won the electoral and popular vote twice. I think only Andrew Jackson and FDR are the only other Dem presidents to do that but Jackson doesn't really count considering voting methods/regulations back then.

The only ones claiming it was a good campaign and it was lost due to luck or the stupidity of American voters is Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity.
They all share needles though, so it's not like we can take them seriously.

rogue49 · Nov 10, 2012

The one thing I've notice the pattern after seeing a variety of election cycles...and swings between the parties.

After losing...
The GOP explode...ripping itself up
The Dems implode...needing to "find" themselves again.

A definition of insanity is doing something that doesn't work...and repeating it again and again.

Both parties need to figure this out.
The GOP needs to see grey and let go of the rage.
The Dems need to see some black & white...and get a spine.

They really are two sides of the same coin.

roachboy · Nov 10, 2012

Republican right weeps over Obama's victory – then begins internal civil war | World news | The Observer

Tully Mars · Nov 11, 2012

Glory's Sun said: ↑

Tully Mars Who is saying they ran a perfect campaign? I'm hearing tons of backlash against the campaign assets, ground-game, polling and use of funds. In fact, some are saying going into election night, the Romney camp knew they were going to lose and they holed up in the suite so they didn't have to face the donors while all the states were being lost.
Click to expand...

There was a day or half a day there, maybe Weds. where nearly every GOP talking head was claiming Mitt ran a great campaign. The number of people saying that has tampered off but as late as this morning I heard people making the claim. Mitt lost for a whole bunch of reasons, almost all theories included him being great but a victim of the evil liberal Media or the evil Obama people.

Reality is he lost for many reasons combined. Obama ran a better ground game, Mitt was a huge douche, often lying about stuff he'd just said the day before, Mitt never told people what his plan was, Obama did (more then Mitt anyway), Mitt was plastic as hell while Obama stuck to his platform much better. Mitt never connected with the middle class. But good luck convincing the folks on the right that.

Stuff like this-

Liberal media bias in American news: fact or fiction?

Is just as wrong as all those polls were.

rogue49 · Nov 10, 2012

Tully Mars said: ↑

There was a day or half a day there, maybe Weds. where nearly every GOP talking head was claiming Mitt ran a great campaign. The number of people saying that has tampered off but as late as this morning I heard people making the claim. Mitt lost for a whole bunch of reasons, almost all theories included him being great but a victim of the evil liberal Media or the evil Obama people.

But good luck convincing the folks on the right that.

Stuff like this-

Liberal media bias in American news: fact or fiction?

Is just as wrong as all those polls were.
Click to expand...

After watching all these years...I've found the "liberal bias" is this.
When the media actually calls you on bullshit or exaggeration
or emphasizes the contradiction in values that supposedly everyone is supposed to follow.

For some reason, the conservatives tend to use this as a scapegoat when they are called on their shenanigans.

Whereas liberals or dems tend to just try to slink away...

Ex. Akins (R) when he said something stupid about rape...and it was noted ...well then that was "liberal bias" in the media.
Alt Ex. Anthony Wiener when he did his stupidity showing his wiener ...well he just faded away, after being mocked. (no call of con bias)

Why can't conservatives just take the blame? instead of blaming everything else... Nooo...they can't be guilty.

Funny...they say they want people to stand on their own...then when they themselves don't, can't be them.
Man up.
You fuck up...take it.

That or the spineless libs are actually showing more spine. At least they go away when wrong.

Or at least that pattern seems to me...correct me if I'm wrong.
At least I won't blame it on "liberal bias"

Tully Mars · Nov 11, 2012

rogue49 said: ↑

After watching all these years...I've found the "liberal bias" is this.
When the media actually calls you on bullshit or exaggeration
or emphasizes the contradiction in values that supposedly everyone is supposed to follow.

For some reason, the conservatives tend to use this as a scapegoat when they are called on their shenanigans.

Whereas liberals or dems tend to just try to slink away...

Ex. Akins (R) when he said something stupid about rape...and it was noted ...well then that was "liberal bias" in the media.
Alt Ex. Anthony Wiener when he did his stupidity showing his wiener ...well he just faded away, after being mocked. (no call of con bias)

Why can't conservatives just take the blame? instead of blaming everything else... Nooo...they can't be guilty.

Funny...they say they want people to stand on their own...then when they themselves don't, can't be them.
Man up.
You fuck up...take it.

That or the spineless libs are actually showing more spine. At least they go away when wrong.

Or at least that pattern seems to me...correct me if I'm wrong.
At least I won't blame it on "liberal bias"
Click to expand...

Ok, that's pretty good. Mind if I steal some of these and post them elsewhere?

rogue49 · Nov 11, 2012

Tully Mars said: ↑

Ok, that's pretty good. Mind if I steal some of these and post them elsewhere?
Click to expand...

BTW...here's a bit of factual backup on the current myth of "liberal bias"...
Turns out that the predominate amount of bias was towards the GOP...both in the polls and in reporting.

Not only did the media focus on negative stories on the Dems and Obama by around 17%
But they gave more time to Conservatives by around 44%
Study
and a good summary Article

Then there's the polls themselves, analyzed by Mr. Stats himself...Nate Silver of 538
(**he got EVERYTHING correct this time, except one senate race in North Dakota)
You can see how many predominately leaned towards the GOP.

And this is a problem in itself, not because of "fairness" but how can you be a poll with your data off?? Isn't that what you sell on??
And how can you make a call on how well you're doing (or how bad) so you can adjust your strategy...

There's too much info and data to post here, so...
Which Polls Fared Best (and Worst) in the 2012 Presidential Race

The GOP polling debacle
By: Alexander Burns - November 11, 2012

For Republicans, one of the worst parts of the GOP’s 2012 trouncing was that they didn’t see it coming.

Top party strategists and officials always knew there was a chance that President Barack Obama would get reelected, or that Republicans wouldn’t gain control of the Senate. But down to the final days of the national campaign, few anticipated the severe setbacks that Republicans experienced on Nov. 6.

The reason: Across the party’s campaigns, committees and super PACs, internal polling gave an overly optimistic read on the electorate. The Romney campaign entered the last week of the election convinced that Colorado, Florida and Virginia were all but won, that the race in Ohio was neck and neck and that the Republican nominee had a legitimate shot in Pennsylvania.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee consistently had a more upbeat assessment of races in North Dakota and Montana, among others, than their Democratic counterparts. One GOP poll even showed Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock holding even with his opponent, even as public polls showed the embattled Republican hemorrhaging support. A Republican poll taken by Susquehanna Polling and Research showed Pennsylvania Senate candidate Tom Smith leading Democratic Sen. Bob Casey by 2 points a few weeks before the election; Casey won by 9 points.

In the House, where the Republicans easily held on to their majority, the GOP still lost several races they expected to win. Utah Democrat Jim Matheson, who was down 15 points in a September poll by the firm Public Opinion Strategies, won by a single point. New York Rep. Tim Bishop, who trailed by 5 in a mid-October McLaughlin & Associates poll, won by just over 4 points. Another poll showed Massachusetts Rep. John Tierney trailing his GOP challenger by 17 points less than a month before the vote; Tierney won by a point. California GOP Rep. Mary Bono Mack, who led her opponent by double digits in a mid-October survey by consultant Arthur Finkelstein, lost by nearly 3 points. In Illinois’s 12th Congressional District and New York’s 18th Congressional District, private Republican polls left the party surprised by Democratic wins.

Now that that mountain of rosy polling data has come crashing down, Republicans are beginning to comb through the wreckage to try to figure out where they went wrong.

“On the Republican side, this was the worst cycle ever for polling and there’s nothing that even comes close to it,” said GOP strategist Curt Anderson, who helms the media and polling firm OnMessage. “It was a colossal disaster and it wasn’t confined to the presidential campaign.”

Anderson said the proliferation of different groups — campaigns, outside spenders, etc. — polling the same states had made it exceptionally difficult to decode the political state of play and develop strategy accordingly.

“It seemed like you had people taking polls in different universes at the same time,” Anderson said. “Three, four points [of disagreement], that’s the margin of error, but I’m talking 10-, 15-point differences.”

It’s not as if the party is totally at a loss to explain where it went off course. Sources familiar with Romney’s polling say that it underestimated the Democrats’ 6-point voter identification edge, nationally, and put far too much stock in what one Republican operative called “false signs of Republican enthusiasm.” Multiple Republican pollsters also acknowledged that they misjudged how many young people and minorities would show up to vote.

“We need to rethink what voters we screen out, because clearly, we’re screening people out who are going to vote, and that’s manifestly affecting the numbers we’re looking at,” said NRSC executive director Rob Jesmer, who said the presidential race effectively swamped the GOP “likely voter” model. “It’s more apt in a presidential cycle, but we need to think about it.”

One GOP strategist involved in congressional races said the party’s pollsters need to gather “a conference of sorts between all of them to figure out what to do going forward,” pointing especially to the question of how to sample cell phone users who make up a growing share of the electorate.

Democrats had argued for months before the election that Republican polling was screening out voters who would ultimately turn up to support Obama. In fact, Obama advisers said, if you applied a tighter likely voter screen to Democratic polling — counting only the very likeliest voters as part of the electorate — you could come up with results similar to what the GOP was looking at.

By assuming that only the most enthusiastic voters would actually show up, Republicans greatly overestimated their national position. Operatives and activists rejected public polling data that showed substantially more voters identifying themselves as Democrats in states like Ohio and Virginia, giving Republicans an unwarranted sense of confidence that crumbled last Tuesday.

Democratic pollster Jef Pollock said it was incomprehensible to him how strategists on the other side so dramatically missed the mark in so many races — especially, he said, since “many of the polls that were in the public domain were proven to be right.”

“The unwritten truth is that there were a tremendous number of polls that were clearly incorrect. And unfortunately, many of those polls seemed to come in congressional and other races by Republican polling firms,” said Pollock, who heads the firm Global Strategy Group and polled for the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action. “I wish I could tell you how those numbers came to pass — numbers in congressional districts where they showed challengers ahead by 5 points and they ended up losing. Numbers in congressional districts where they showed challengers ahead by 5 points and Mitt Romney winning by double digits in a congressional district he ended up losing.”

“Those are unexplainable things,” Pollock continued. “Those are things I can’t explain and it’s not my job to explain.”

The crux of the party’s challenge in 2012, said Republican pollster David Winston, was figuring out whether the electorate would look more like the 2004 voting population, when Republicans and Democrats turned out in equal numbers, or the 2008 electorate, which was more Democratic than Republican by 7 points.

Winston questioned how rigorously some campaigns tested their assumptions about who would show up.

“The results fell within the 2004 result and the 2008 result, obviously closer to 2008,” said Winston, who advises the House GOP leaders — who fared well on Tuesday. “That was clearly how everybody had been describing what the potential range was. The question is, as people were assessing their individual campaigns, whether it be the presidential or down ballot for that, was how were they working through the potential scenarios as far as what could happen.”

One top GOP pollster expressed dismay at the ultimate composition of the electorate: “I had no expectation that Democratic advantage on party ID would be the same as it was in 2008. I thought there would be more Democrats than Republicans, but I didn’t think it would be equal to 2008.

“There were just too many damn Democrats,” the pollster said.

Romney pollster Neil Newhouse and other members of his firm, Public Opinion Strategies, declined or did not respond to requests for comment on the record. In addition to polls for Romney, one POS poll that drew notice late in the election showed former New Mexico Rep. Heather Wilson ahead by 1 in the state’s Senate race; she lost by 6 points.

Several Republicans pointed out that the surveys released for public consumption by GOP groups — or shared with Romney donors by Newhouse and others — may only have represented the most optimistic end of internal polling. It’s standard for campaigns to work through multiple potential turnout scenarios to make sure they’re not caught off guard on Election Day.

One top Republican operative said it was only a pretty upbeat data set that leaked out from Boston: “We kept getting, ‘Hey, this is what the Romney campaign internals are. And you think, ‘That’s a lot better than what I can find online.’ ”

Not all pollsters on the Republican side misjudged the electorate dramatically, but even survey-takers with a comparatively strong track record agreed that 2012 was a warning sign for the GOP.

Because the electorate is changing so rapidly, and because more and more voters are using cell phones that are harder to poll, both parties will have to adjust their models going into 2014 and beyond. But Democrats appear to have more or less nailed the racial composition and age distribution of the 2012 electorate — on the national level if not in every down-ballot race — while many Republicans did not.

Republican pollster Whit Ayres, of North Star Opinion Research, said that “one of the great success stories of this election from the Democratic perspective was that they were able to recreate the same kind of turnout among minorities and young people that occurred in 2008.”

But that doesn’t mean, he said, that so many Republicans should have been caught off guard.

“It is a mistake to place rosy assumptions on a likely electorate, that are at variance — and substantial variance — with recent history. The idea that you could arbitrarily say that we were going to have an electorate like 2004, with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, is as fanciful as saying we’re going to have an electorate that has 12 points more Democrats than Republicans in it,” Ayres said.

Another Republican fumed at the party’s unwillingness to heed the Obama campaign’s publicly broadcast intentions to expand the 2012 electorate and keep minority and youth turnout high.

“For a year, they were saying in their YouTube videos and memos, ‘This is what we’re going to do, we’re going to turn all these people out,’ ” the Republican said. “They told us exactly what they were going to do and we just didn’t believe it.”

Other senior party strategists pushed back on the notion that Republican data was broadly based on flawed assumptions. If some presidential and Senate polling failed to predict the result accurately, that doesn’t necessarily signal a systemic problem with opinion research.

Besides, Tarrance Group pollster Ed Goeas argued, events do have a way of changing outcomes. So does a superior turnout operation of the kind Obama employed.

“Clearly, I think the one takeaway here is, all indications are we did a good job on the early vote but lost the vote on Election Day and that is not the trend in past campaigns,” said Goeas, whose firm worked for winning Senate campaigns in Nevada and Arizona. “It seems like [Democrats] got a little boost at the end.”

Pollster John McLaughlin — who produced Mourdock’s upbeat poll and worked for unsuccessful Senate candidates in Connecticut and Virginia — argued that Republican candidates may have experienced a drop-off in support at the end, thanks to Romney’s weakness at the top of the ticket.

“In the last week he was really collapsing, and on Election Day he really did collapse,” McLaughlin said. “The incumbents who had a longstanding image were able to withstand it. The challengers we had? It was like, ‘Oh, you’re with him.’ ”

© 2012 POLITICO LLC
Click to expand...

rogue49 · Nov 12, 2012

Ok...this sums it up so completely for me...it makes want to cry.
Cry with laughter.

Letter to a future Republican strategist regarding white people
November 9, 2012

To whom it may concern regarding the United States federal elections of 2014, 2016 and beyond:

Allow me to introduce myself to you, the existing (or aspiring!) strategist for the Republican Party. My name is Eric Arnold Garland and I am a White Man. Boy, am I ever – you need sunglasses just to look at my photo!

If I read the news correctly, I fit a profile that is of extreme importance to the GOP, as I embody the archetype that fits your narrative of Real Americans. Just how much should my profile interest you? Are you sitting down?
My family lineage goes back to the MAYFLOWER, BOAT ONE!!! (Garland family of New England-> John Adams -> Howard Alden -> Plymouth colony ->KINGS OF MUTHAF***IN’ ENGLAND)

I am a heterosexual, married to the super Caucasian mother of my two beautiful children who are, inexplicably, EVEN WHITER THAN I AM.

I am college educated (Master’s degree!) and affluent.

I am a job creator and small businessman.

We pay a lot of taxes! Every year!

I grew up in a rural area and despise laziness!

Having started my own business, I have complained at length about the insanity of federal, state and local bureaucracy – and its deleterious impact on the innovative small businessman.

I currently live in the suburbs in a historically Red state.

HOLY WHITE PEOPLE, BATMAN!!! Wow, you’re thinking – this is not some Mexirican in the Sun Belt we need to attract via harsh anti-Castro policies or appeals to “valores de familia” - this is the BREAD AND BUTTER OF THE GRAND OLD PARTY, a Mayflower-descended small business owner, burdened by taxation, looking out for his beautiful White family in the suburbs of a city (St Louis) surrounded by racial tension and urban blight!

How can I put this gently? My wife and I are not sensitive to your messaging, nor did we vote for the candidates you proposed for us this past Tuesday.

B-b-but, what? Aren’t we investors, hard-workin’ white folk surrounded by same in a manicured cul-de-sac, scared by a vision of economic collapse amidst the takers in a land of fewer givers? Didn’t Mitt Romney’s strong family, wealth, leadership history and chiseled chin give us the uncontrollable urge to high-five him into the White House?

No.

May I explain why not, purely for your education, such that you might be interested in winning an election on the national level at some point in the future? It bears pointing out that I should be your Low Hanging Fruit, the easy vote to get as opposed to, say, African-Americans, Latinos, or Asians – and you’re not even speaking well to me. The reasons why ought to concern you deeply.

As a Card-Carrying White Male I love expressing my opinion irrespective of whether people care to hear it, so let’s get started.

>>>>>>

Science - One of the reasons my family is affluent is that my wife and I have a collective fifteen years of university education between us. I have a Masters degree in Science and Technology Policy, and my wife is a physician who holds degrees in medicine as well as cell and molecular biology. We are really quite unimpressed with Congressional representatives such as Todd Akin and Paul Broun who actually serve on the House science committee and who believe, respectively, that rape does not cause pregnancy and that evolution and astrophysics are lies straight from Satan’s butt cheeks. These are, sadly, only two of innumerable assaults that the Republican Party has made against hard science – with nothing to say of logic in general. Please understand the unbearable tension this might create between us and your candidates.

Climate - Within just the past 18 months the following events have come to our attention: a record-breaking drought that sent temperatures over 100 degrees for weeks, killing half the corn in the Midwest and half the TREES on our suburban property – AND – a hurricane that drowned not New Orleans or Tampa or North Carolina but my native state of VERMONT. As an encore, a second hurricane drowned lower Manhattan, New Jersey and Long Island. The shouted views of decrepit mental fossil Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma that this is a fraud perpetrated on the American people by evil, conspiring climate scientists is belied by such events and is looking irresponsible to even the most skeptical.

Healthcare - My wife and I are quite familiar with America’s healthcare system due to our professions, and having lived abroad extensively, also very aware of comparable systems. Your party’s insistence on declaring the private U.S. healthcare system “the best in the world” fails nearly every factual measure available to any curious mind. We watch our country piss away 60% more expenditures than the next most expensive system (Switzerland) for health outcomes that rival former Soviet bloc nations. On a personal scale, my wife watches poor WORKING people show up in emergency rooms with fourth-stage cancer because they were unable to afford primary care visits. I have watched countless small businesses unable to attract talented workers because of the outrageous and climbing cost of private insurance. And I watch European and Asian businesses outpace American companies because they can attract that talent without asking people to risk bankruptcy and death. That you think this state of affairs is somehow preferable to “Obamacare,” which you compared ludicrously to Trotskyite Russian communism, is a sign of deficient minds unfit to guide health policy in America.

War - Nations do have to go to war sometimes, but that Iraq thing was pretty bad, to put it mildly. Somebody should have been, I dunno – FIRED for bad performance. Aren’t you the party of good corporate managers or something? This topic could get 10,000 words on its own. Let’s just leave it at: You guys suck at running wars.

Deficits and debt - Whenever the GOP is out of power, it immediately appeals to the imagination of voters who remember the Lyndon Baines Johnson (!) administration and claim that the Republican alternative is the party of “cutting spending” and “reducing the deficit.” The only problem with your claim is that Republican governments throughout my entire 38 year life (Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43) have failed to cut spending and deficit and debt EVEN ONCE. I hope you understand that your credibility suffers every time you promise one thing for three decades and do the EXACT OPPOSITE. Egads – if you actually were the party of fiscal responsibility – you might win our votes despite your 13th century view of science!

Gay marriage - As the child of Baby Boomers who got divorced (as was the fashion!) in the 80s and 90s, and for whom 50% of my friends had their homes broken by divorce in the critical years before age 18, I sure am unsympathetic to your caterwauling bullshit that “gays will destroy the sanctity of marriage.” Perhaps if everyone in your generation didn’t take the period of 1978 – 1995 to start surreptitiously banging their neighbors and coworkers, only to abandon their kids because “they just weren’t happy,” I would take your defense of marriage more seriously. The institution of Middle Class suburban marriage was broken by the generation of aging white Baby Boomers who populate what is left of the Republican Party, so your defense is wrongheaded and disingenuous. And moreover, as someone who got called “faggot” about 127 times a day from the years 1985 through 1991 – guess what – I grew up to be pretty good friends with actual homosexuals, whose sexual orientation is usually the least significant thing about them. The Republican perseveration on homosexuals as any sort of threat consigns them to history’s trough of intellectual pig dung.

>>>>>>

That’s quite enough for one essay, wouldn’t you say? Now, given my initial description as a wealthy, hard-working, job creating, heterosexual, married suburban White Male – doesn’t your current platform look woefully insufficient to the task of gaining my vote? This doesn’t even get into the demographic tensions that show that people of my exact profile are going away permanently in America. You can’t even win on what you perceive to be “home field advantage.”

Uh oh, wait, I can already hear you through the web browser, dismissing all of my above points because THAT GUY WAS NEVER GONNA BE A REPUBLICAN ANYHOW, CUZ HE’S A LIBRUL WHO HATES AMERICA AND…

All right, let’s do one last point:

Meanness- Your party is really mean, mocking and demonizing everyone who does not follow you into the pits of hell. You constantly imply – as Mitt Romney did in his “47% speech” – that anybody who disagrees with you does so not by logic or moral conviction, but because they are shiftless, lazy parasites who want “free stuff” from “traditional Americans.” Wow, you guys managed to follow up a stunning electoral defeat with insulting the very people you wish to attract for a majority in the political system! Brilliant! You are losing elections because being angry and defensive and just-plain-mean is more important than being smart and winning elections – and thus you deserve everything happening to you.

If you want to know exactly where you failed in 2012, and will continue to fail, here it is. Look you assholes, I’m as traditional an American as it gets, and I do not “want free stuff.” I am a taxpayer, and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. I got my first job – dragging bags of cow manure, horse feed and fertilizer around a farm store – when I was 12. I started my first company when I was 28. I have followed the vast majority of the rules set out for middle class white males (for good and for ill.) And if it weren’t bad enough that your policy positions are a complete clusterfuck for the reasons I lay out in great detail, you manage to follow up the whole exercise with insulting me, my wife, and my friends of every stripe who didn’t vote for your political party – all of whom are hard-working, taxpaying, job creating, law abiding, great AMERICANS of EVERY COLOR AND CREED.

From this white, Mayflower-descended strategic analyst, allow me to offer you the three strategic options you have before you:

1. You drastically moderate your platform to harmonize with the policy positions I present above

2. You disband the party and reorganize it to reflect current realities

3. You kick and scream and stamp your feet and call me and my friends names – and submit to several decades of one party rule

While I do not want a one-party system, I also don’t particularly care which of these options you choose. If you look carefully at the numbers on Tuesday, nobody else cares, either.

Just a word to the wise from one White Man to (presumably) another.
Click to expand...

Tully Mars · Nov 12, 2012

I could not have said it better.

redux · Nov 12, 2012

At last count, residents from 19 states have filed petitions on the White House We the People site to allow their respective states to secede from the union.

Proud and patriot Americans until the election doesnt go their way.

Tully Mars · Nov 12, 2012

redux said: ↑

At last count, residents from 19 states have filed petitions on the White House We the People site to allow their respective states to secede from the union.
Click to expand...

My thought? Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out. No, that's not true. I really don't care if the door hits them or not.

samcol · Nov 12, 2012

i'm not saying, but i'm just saying...

Barack Obama received more than 99% of the vote in more than 100 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio on election day. In fact, there were a substantial number of precincts where Mitt Romney got exactly zero votes.
Click to expand...

http://marketdailynews.com/2012/11/12/election-fraud-barack-obama-won-more-than-99-percent-of-the-vote-in-more-than-100-ohio-precincts/#kiFCWOlAIDv5Qp66.99

redux · Nov 12, 2012

samcol said: ↑

i'm not saying, but i'm just saying...

http://marketdailynews.com/2012/11/12/election-fraud-barack-obama-won-more-than-99-percent-of-the-vote-in-more-than-100-ohio-precincts/#kiFCWOlAIDv5Qp66.99
Click to expand...

It happened in precincts in Philly as well.

And in Atlanta and Chicago in '08.

It is really a surprise that inner city precincts that are probably at or very near 100% Democrat registrations would vote Democrat?

Tully Mars · Nov 12, 2012

Wow! Did you know in King County Texas Obama got only 3% of the vote? Romney got 97% that's not right. We need a recount ASAP.

samcol · Nov 20, 2012

redux said: ↑

It happened in precincts in Philly as well.

And in Atlanta and Chicago in '08.

It is really a surprise that inner city precincts that are probably at or very near 100% Democrat registrations would vote Democrat?
Click to expand...

yes it is a surprise because it wreaks of fairly widespread voting machine error or fraud. i'm not saying this just because obama won. i've been skeptical of these machines for more than a couple elections. romney getting 1 or 2 votes at a precinct, that's bullshit period? there's that vid on youtube of the guy who literally could not vote for obama on the machine because it selected romney everytime.

these machines dont work very well to say the least and there's ample evidence from every election to show it. whether it's out right fraud or just a terrible design could be debated.
--- merged: Nov 13, 2012 4:39 AM ---

Tully Mars said: ↑

Wow! Did you know in King County Texas Obama got only 3% of the vote? Romney got 97% that's not right. We need a recount ASAP.
Click to expand...

50 precints 2 votes or less for romney. lets be serious.

Tully Mars · Nov 12, 2012

Hey I'm not talking about precincts here I'm talk a whole county with lots of precincts. Just to be serious.

redux · Nov 12, 2012

Or maybe black voters were so pissed at the Republicans in OH and PA for their attempts at voters suppression legislation that even those who might have voted for Romney said "fuck that...these bastards need to see they cant shit on our rights" and voted for a third party instead.

Log in or Sign up

Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Charlatan sous les pavés, la plage

Tully Mars Very Tilted

Random McRandom Starry Eyed

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

roachboy Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Tully Mars Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Tully Mars Very Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

samcol Getting Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

samcol Getting Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Log in or Sign up

Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Charlatan sous les pavés, la plage

Tully Mars Very Tilted

Random McRandom Starry Eyed

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

roachboy Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Tully Mars Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Tully Mars Very Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

samcol Getting Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

samcol Getting Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

redux Very Tilted

Useful Searches