Location: Resident of Alfred.. Yes the town named after Batman's butler
Now Playing:
Posts: 10,317
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor S
To answer Mana's question from another thread: My feelings on Pennsylvania being in play were based on exactly that, feeling. Romney had a huge turnout at a rally in Bucks Co PA, but I later learned many of those in attendance were from NJ and NY. It proved a mirage.
That, and I thought Romney would do much better in Philly suburbs than McCain, and he did, but not enough to make a difference.
But overall, this number shocks me: Pres. Obama received 9 million fewer votes this year compared to 2008 (69.4 mil to 58.7 mil). If as many Republicans voted for Romney as they did for McCain (59.9 mil), we'll have a new President Elect. But Romney received nearly 4 million fewer votes. Considering there was a tremendous economic crash in 2008 under Bush, and a demoralized Rep base, I find that fact amazing and the Republican party better take notice.
They had a softball this year, and whiffed.
Yeah a lot of folks saying it was their race to lose.. and they managed to do it.. in grand fashion as well.
I just feel like in order to appeal to their vocal mass, they really alienated too many other voters
Even in the fall-out of the election, a lot of their supporters don't blame the candidates or the campaigns.. but the others...
Those good for nothing, take, take, take segment of America who is all about having unprotected sex so they can have their weekly abortions, live off the government's money and food and illegals.
And I just don't get their play.. they need to start casting those aside, and focus on casting a wider net.
~Edit~
Also, I think they need to start dealing in the world of facts.
The fact that it caught so many off-base that Obama, not only won re-election but with a pretty hefty margin in the PV and EC shouldn't have been too shocking if you were following the polls.
But for weeks, we heard that the polls were skewed.. that they couldn't be taken at face value.. they oversampled Democrats.. that there was an air around Romney... none of that was ever proven in fact, but they went with it.
When your own candidate begins to believe this non-sense, and is shocked that he lost.. it becomes a problem.
Now Playing: Shut the hell up and quit asking me questions
Posts: 3,412
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by BreakABone
~Edit~
Also, I think they need to start dealing in the world of facts.
The fact that it caught so many off-base that Obama, not only won re-election but with a pretty hefty margin in the PV and EC shouldn't have been too shocking if you were following the polls.
But for weeks, we heard that the polls were skewed.. that they couldn't be taken at face value.. they oversampled Democrats.. that there was an air around Romney... none of that was ever proven in fact, but they went with it.
When your own candidate begins to believe this non-sense, and is shocked that he lost.. it becomes a problem.
Thank you.
The media needs to start doing this too. Who cares what the democrats or republicans say, both sides will always say whatever it takes to make their voters more confident that they have a chance. Focus on neutral polls and don't make excuses. Obviously the pre election polling isn't 100% accurate, but at least point out that it would be a huge upset of Romney were to pull it off.
__________________ "I have been saying this for some time, but customers are not interested in grand games with higher-quality graphics and sound and epic stories,"-Hiroshi Yamauchi
Great article, one point I thought I would draw out:
Quote:
Mitt Romney won the nomination for the simple reason that every other contender was utterly beyond the pale of national acceptability
Why was every candidate so terrible? Normally I'd say it's because none of the really good candidates wanted to run against an incumbent, but I see you guys saying things like "they had a softball and whiffed." If it was truly that easy to oust the current president, why didn't "better" candidates step up?
I mean, c'mon. Santorum? Rick Perry? Those guys are joke fodder for the Daily Show, nothing more.
__________________
3DS Friend Code: 2707-1776-3011
Nintendo ID: Valabrax
Great article, one point I thought I would draw out:
Why was every candidate so terrible? Normally I'd say it's because none of the really good candidates wanted to run against an incumbent, but I see you guys saying things like "they had a softball and whiffed." If it was truly that easy to oust the current president, why didn't "better" candidates step up?
I made those comments in hindsight, and they were more about how many votes the Romney lost than Pres. Obama lost. I don't think the Republican party ever thought they wouldn't have an increase in turnout in this election, and that's why they were so confident.
As for bad candidates, I think that can be attributed to 1) self-promotion, and 2) the misguided idea that taking a hard right turn in the social realm of politics would push up Republican turnout.
Location: Resident of Alfred.. Yes the town named after Batman's butler
Now Playing:
Posts: 10,317
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor S
I made those comments in hindsight, and they were more about how many votes the Romney lost than Pres. Obama lost. I don't think the Republican party ever thought they wouldn't have an increase in turnout in this election, and that's why they were so confident.
As for bad candidates, I think that can be attributed to 1) self-promotion, and 2) the misguided idea that taking a hard right turn in the social realm of politics would push up Republican turnout.
I also think.. at least to me.. that most on the right weren't pushing for Romney..but pushing to remove Obama.
Dislike can only get you so far.. they really needed to show WHY we needed Romney.. not just why Obama should go.
Feel same thing happened in 04 with Bush and Kerry
Any candidate who gets nominated automatically must be an 'evil' rich-douche. Obammy included. Evil rich-douche against evil rich-douche means most Americans can't see past the 9th inning in a 170+ game season, so they put their money on the one team who is most likely not to totally fuck up their hope for a good stretch. Chance at actual pennant.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread
Linear Mode
