Only reason the Democrats didn't win the House(or make significant gains) was because of redistricting where the GOP drew the lines recently. Yes Democrats are also guilty of redistricting and it's something that needs to be changed ASAP. It's why things have gotten as divisive as they have since politicians are drawing their own demographics and know whoever they put up with an R in a certain district or a D in a certain district have no chance of losing.
For those curious check out Florida House Districts. Check out those squiggly lines! You literally have some districts surrounding other districts in order to split the vote. So you have a situation where a Democrat would have a seat and a Republican would have a seat(under normal block redistricting) but due to how they drew the lines it split the Democratic vote equally between those two districts leaving Republicans with both seats.
We won't have fair representatives of the people(at least in the house) until this bullshit goes away.
Yeah, this is the most surprising thing I took away from the election. People care more about social issues than economic issues. I whiffed on that one completely.
In fairness it's not like Obama's economic plan was to set fire to the country and claim the insurance, he does have a legitimate track record on the economy. Jobs are being created, it is growing. Whether it's as much as you believe Romney would do is another matter but I don't think people voted for Obama because they didn't care at all about the economy.
Incomes declined every year during his first term. down by $4,300. for middle income families.
32 million on food stamps when Obama took office. Now 47 million on food stamps.
10 trillion dollars in debt when Obama took office. Now16 trillion in debt.
Unemployment is down, but there are also less people being counted that still remain unemployed. I need to dig up the details about this, but there is a lot of concern that un-employment is being understated as a result in the way unemployment is being counted. In essence, being willing and able to work yet remaining unemployed does not mean you are being counted in the unemployment numbers.
"Setting fire" seems a bit extreme, but I'm not seeing how Obama's policy are anything short of failure. Unless of course, you paint the doomsday picture that Obama saved us from.
The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to be the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.[1][2] It resulted in the threat of total collapse of large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments, and downturns in stock markets around the world. In many areas, the housing market also suffered, resulting in evictions, foreclosures and prolonged unemployment. The crisis played a significant role in the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in trillions of US dollars, and a downturn in economic activity leading to the 2008–2012 global recession and contributing to the European sovereign-debt crisis.[3][4] The active phase of the crisis, which manifested as a liquidity crisis, can be dated from August 7, 2007 when BNP Paribas terminated withdrawals from three hedge funds citing "a complete evaporation of liquidity".[5]
The bursting of the U.S. housing bubble, which peaked in 2006,[6] caused the values of securities tied to U.S. real estate pricing to plummet, damaging financial institutions globally.[7][8] The financial crisis was triggered by a complex interplay of government policies that encouraged home ownership, providing easier access to loans for subprime borrowers, overvaluation of bundled sub-prime mortgages based on the theory that housing prices would continue to escalate, questionable trading practices on behalf of both buyers and sellers, compensation structures that prioritize short-term deal flow over long-term value creation, and a lack of adequate capital holdings from banks and insurance companies to back the financial commitments they were making.[9][10][11][12] Questions regarding bank solvency, declines in credit availability and damaged investor confidence had an impact on global stock markets, where securities suffered large losses during 2008 and early 2009. Economies worldwide slowed during this period, as credit tightened and international trade declined.[13] Governments and central banks responded with unprecedented fiscal stimulus, monetary policy expansion and institutional bailouts. Although there have been aftershocks, the financial crisis itself ended sometime between late-2008 and mid-2009.[14][15][16] In the U.S., Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. In the EU, the UK responded with austerity measures of spending cuts and tax increases without export growth and it has since slid into a double-dip recession.[17][18]
Many causes for the financial crisis have been suggested, with varying weight assigned by experts.[19] The U.S. Senate's Levin–Coburn Report asserted that the crisis was the result of "high risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street."[20] The 1999 repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act effectively removed the separation between investment banks and depository banks in the United States.[21] Critics argued that credit rating agencies and investors failed to accurately price the risk involved with mortgage-related financial products, and that governments did not adjust their regulatory practices to address 21st-century financial markets.[22] Research into the causes of the financial crisis has also focused on the role of interest rate spreads.[23]
In response to the financial crisis, both market-based and regulatory solutions have been implemented or are under consideration.[24] Paul Krugman, author of End This Depression Now! (2012), argues that while current solutions have stabilized the world economy, the world economy will not improve unless it receives further stimulus.[25] Buchanan, Gjerstad, and Smith argue that fiscal and monetary policy are ineffective, failing to reignite residential investment and construction as they have in past contractions. The current type of contraction requires balance sheet repair via currency depreciation and export-driven growth. Fiscal stimulus extends a current account deficit and retards export growth.[18][26] If the world economy does not improve, many economists fear sovereign default is a real possibility in several European countries and even the United States.[27]
How's that for painting? Get real, we suffered MASSIVE economic hits, and the damage could have been far worse, all thoughts given print by the likes of Krugman and similar minded economists. The mere fact that you mention a sub-20 million dollar increase in food stamps shows how loaded your hand is; that number is not only tiny but also very likely indicative of something most average people can see very clearly; shit got bad, and people needed assistance. Now is where you pretend that most of those who receive these benefits are lazy, horrible, likely minority citizens, and use that intellectually dishonest label to justify lionizing anyone who wants to cut government spending. Guess what, voters didn't buy the bullshit, so I'd stop selling it like it's a well informed opinion.
There's a reason why no college campus in the country accepts Wikipedia as a reliable source. Jus sayin.
There's a reason why it is an incredibly useful means of sourcing information when prompted via impromptu online message boards, something I'd think a 1000+ poster would know. In fact, amongst pretty much anyone who knows how wikipedia goes about maintaining their high traffic pages, when someone says "oh mah gawd wikipedia so bad", it means they either lack the evidence or the will to actually support a position. Jus sayin.
Edit: I apologize if I appear hostile, I'm only trying to play my doomsayer role.
I wish I could pretend to understand all the intracacies that propel the economy in a positive or negative direction. There is enough speculation out there to evidence a position for and against the necessity of Obama's economic policies during the last four years.
What I do understand are simple facts. Those are easy. We're making less money than we were before Obama took office. We're paying more for everyday goods. Unemployment remains way to high. Our national debit has increased by 6 trillion dollars.
I'm not sure any amount of spin can paint these things as a success. "Hey, it could have been worse" doesn't seem like much of an argument to me.
You should know that middle class income has been dropping since 2000.
You should also know that Obama is actually a net-job creator (more jobs have been created than lost during his term, raw numbers not the unemployment / underemployment / work force participation numbers; actually payroll figures).
Things were terrible in 2007/8. It's really easy to forget that, but just think how unpopular those things Obama did? Bail out the banks? Release a stimulus? Pander to the auto unions by rescuing GM/Crystler from bankruptcy?
*All* of that was started under Bush and the Republican controlled Congress. That's how dire the situation was. Not only did those programs get bipartisan support, they survived virtually intact under Obama and the Democrats.
Bush signed the first stimulus in 2008 early enough so it could take effect for tax day. That summer they started working on TARP, signing it into law in the fall. Then they started holding hearings about Detroit, eventually sending them an emergency bailout that was to take effect under Obama (which he did).
The funny thing is, Romney kept hammering Obama on his followup stimulus plans and famously opposed the Detroit bailout. There wasn't really any point there except to revise history to forget how everyone saw these things as vitally necessary. Well I guess, since the programs ended up being so fully associated with Obama, that it let Romney prove his conservative bonafides.
Its been dropping since Reagan........
Some blame globalization, some blame Reagan. I think its a combination of both tbh.
Saying "middle class income" has been dropping makes no sense, but no, compensation per hour worked has not been dropping, it has been steadily increasing.
adjusted for inflation and growth of the economy? I don't think so. The percentages have been HEAVILY skewed towards the "upper class" and the middle class has little if anything to show for it.
On November 08 2012 11:07 Maxyim wrote: Looks like the Republican party is done; left-wing voters resoundingly outnumber right-wing voters now within the USA; the election was not even close, yet Republicans were the party with the momentum!
Hillary will win in 2016 after another "slow recovery" period by positioning herself as a more moderate Democrat than Obama. Pretty soon, the moderate Democrats will be running against the liberal Democrats. Europe, here we come!!!
On a brighter note, America just voted to re-elect a minority president after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. Perhaps we can finally stop talking about racism now.
MAINSTREAM REPUBLICANS, ESP. THOSE PLANNING TO RUN FOR POTUS / CONGRESS, OR ADVISE SAID CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM:
It's time for a serious, and I mean FUCKING serious attitude adjustment. We know now (although some of us already knew before, but you were too fucking STUPID to listen), that, even when we are in the RIGHT (pun intended) on all key issues pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, we will get RAPED UP THE ASS in elections if we utter a peep against abortion or gay marriage. These subjects are NOT RELEVANT. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about them. Who are you to decide whether two people can be in a relationship? Do you have a vagina? If not, why the FUCK are you talking about what someone can or cannot do with one? You realize that there is almost NOTHING that you will ever have a chance to do regarding these issues within the Legislative and Executive branches of Federal government? That's right, they are decided on a STATE level, unless there is a perceived injustice against a minority, in which case the Supreme Court gets involved, not YOU, DUMBASS. READ the Constitution that you all lie through your teeth about being so in love with. STOP falling for TROLOLOL at every possible opportunity!
After another term of Obama and two terms of Hillary, and this country is going to be a very different place. There will be no room for 19th century politics. There will be no room for bigoted ignorance. We need to be able to offer a clear contrast to the left-wing without giving them ANY opportunity to discredit our entire platform with crap that IS NOT RELEVANT. We are the LAST HOLDOUT of conservatism. There IS NO GALT'S GULCH. If there were, do you think that the welfare state would leave it alone? Class warfare is here to stay, and God help us that we can pull together enough votes to keep it at bay every now and then; it will be difficult enough without all of your MORONIC DISTRACTIONS!
Obama had less then one percent more of the population vote for him then romney. You're really blowing this out of proportion. There was this one election a little while back where the republican candidate won all but one state in the union. did the democrats die out because of that?
Quite literally nothing changed from the election and its looking like thats going to stick. Republicans are holding more gov seats then ever and have a redistricting advantage in the house.
Like literally bachmann is still going back to Washington. If that doesn't say anything to you then you need to reexamine your view of politics in america.
My friend, you forget that Obama was running for reelection after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. He won IN SPITE of his record. He has literally accomplished nothing in four years. Obamacare is a perceived failure by over 50% of the electorate. The economy was rated as the top area of concern by something like 75% of the electorate.
Women and minorities decided this election, for reasons specifically stated above. Bachmann survived by the skin of her teeth; West and Love are out...I don't see where you are going with your argument.
On November 08 2012 11:22 farvacola wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:21 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:18 Maxyim wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:13 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On November 08 2012 10:54 babylon wrote: [quote] After hearing Fox News say, on air, that they think they lost this election because Romney was too moderate ... I don't know what to think. They said the same thing about McCain too. Sigh.
Independents need a choice. Independents were given a choice in 2010. They came out in droves. The choice was very clear, a more limited government, more fiscal responsibility, vs. expansive government, obamacare, etc.
When independents don't see a clear difference between the candidates, they stay home. When Mitt Romney or McCain try to come across as moderate, when they don't distinguish themselves from Obama with a clear and articulated philosophy, then they are making it a pure popularity contest, a beauty contest. McCain and Romney are not going to win a beauty contest with Obama. The only chance they could possibly have is to articulate a philosophy so that people can vote philosophy and not vote popularity contest, which they are doomed to fail.
There is a market for the ideas, 2010 proved that. When the ideas are push aside, Republicans lose. When ideals are championed, as they were with Reagan, with Rubio, with Rand... You can see victory.
Of course, I need to be clear which ideas I'm talking about. I'm not talking about gay marriage, or abortion, or any social issue. I'm talking about individualism and limited government. We talk and think too much of Democracy itself and too little of the values which it serves.
I disagree with you 100%. We lost the election because of the superfluous crap that taints Republicans. Romney offered a clear fiscal and foreign policy alternative to Obama. Obama already had a poor track record in these areas. Yet none of that could stop the 5% margin from increased turnout by pissed-off women, gays and Latinos. GG, no re for 12 years; can we try something different then?
Do you honestly think Republicans could ever win anything playing the "we're less liberal than they are" game? That's a death sentence. It makes no sense at all to say that the way to beat Democrats is to be more Democrat.
Unless the country is.....you know.......more Democrat.
This. There is no other explanation.
Obama has accomplished things in his first term, don't really know what you're talking about.
He went into his first term with a super majority in the senate a soundly defeated enemy and the most super charged and connected populace the country has ever seen. Then he managed to fuck up the first thing he did in office (obamacare) and things went downhill from there when he lost control of the house and lost his super majority in the senate.
I hope to god that a president does something with the kind of advantage that obama had in his first term. He did nowhere near what he said he was going to do
Republican intransigence at least has to take part of the blame for those things, and indeed the political system as a whole. It doesn't give him a free pass, but equally voters probably remembered the numerous Republican-instigated roadblocks that were holding up everything, especially if it pertained to their own personal circumstances like the funding of unemployment and the likes.
The Republicans have nobody but themselves to blame for losing this one if Obama's handling of the economy was as catastrophic as they claimed, and given the cited stat earlier that 75% of voters had this as their number one concern it seems curious that Obama won.
Perhaps Romney's own financial plans weren't that good?
Obama had a whole fucking year of super majority you can't do shit to stop us from doing what we want legislative time. Its from that "we're taking over and we're not going to let the republicans have any credit for this health care reform" attitude that caused such problems as in the second half of his term.
Yeah its Romney's fault that he lost. Is anyone accusing something otherwise here? He was a bad uninteresting candidate that will be remembered more for his mistakes then his success's.
Plenty in this thread are blaming other elements, hell I've seen posts claiming that ethnic minorities and women are holding the country to hostage.
And really, it's Obama and the Democrats not 'letting the Republicans have any credit for this healthcare reform' that is to blame for the poisonous partisan atmosphere that is worse than I can personally recall?
On November 08 2012 12:30 Hrrrrm wrote: Only reason the Democrats didn't win the House(or make significant gains) was because of redistricting where the GOP drew the lines recently. Yes Democrats are also guilty of redistricting and it's something that needs to be changed ASAP. It's why things have gotten as divisive as they have since politicians are drawing their own demographics and know whoever they put up with an R in a certain district or a D in a certain district have no chance of losing.
For those curious check out Florida House Districts. Check out those squiggly lines! You literally have some districts surrounding other districts in order to split the vote. So you have a situation where a Democrat would have a seat and a Republican would have a seat(under normal block redistricting) but due to how they drew the lines it split the Democratic vote equally between those two districts leaving Republicans with both seats.
We won't have fair representatives of the people(at least in the house) until this bullshit goes away.
Gerrymandering is something both sides do. It's completely hilarious, because given how my neighborhood is split, my neighbors vote under one sub-section and I vote another.
See the anti-Obama protests at Ole Miss on Drudge? Apparently hundreds of students protesting/rioting, chanting racial slurs together and lighting things on fire.
On November 08 2012 12:50 Saryph wrote: See the anti-Obama protests at Ole Miss on Drudge? Apparently hundreds of students protesting/rioting, chanting racial slurs together and lighting things on fire.
Classy.
Mississippi gonna Mississip. Ole Miss has a beautiful campus though I must say.
On November 08 2012 12:30 Hrrrrm wrote: Only reason the Democrats didn't win the House(or make significant gains) was because of redistricting where the GOP drew the lines recently. Yes Democrats are also guilty of redistricting and it's something that needs to be changed ASAP. It's why things have gotten as divisive as they have since politicians are drawing their own demographics and know whoever they put up with an R in a certain district or a D in a certain district have no chance of losing.
For those curious check out Florida House Districts. Check out those squiggly lines! You literally have some districts surrounding other districts in order to split the vote. So you have a situation where a Democrat would have a seat and a Republican would have a seat(under normal block redistricting) but due to how they drew the lines it split the Democratic vote equally between those two districts leaving Republicans with both seats.
We won't have fair representatives of the people(at least in the house) until this bullshit goes away.
On November 08 2012 12:50 Saryph wrote: See the anti-Obama protests at Ole Miss on Drudge? Apparently hundreds of students protesting/rioting, chanting racial slurs together and lighting things on fire.
Classy.
Yeah. I live in Mississippi. What an embarrassment to our state. I am disappoint.
On November 08 2012 11:07 Maxyim wrote: Looks like the Republican party is done; left-wing voters resoundingly outnumber right-wing voters now within the USA; the election was not even close, yet Republicans were the party with the momentum!
Hillary will win in 2016 after another "slow recovery" period by positioning herself as a more moderate Democrat than Obama. Pretty soon, the moderate Democrats will be running against the liberal Democrats. Europe, here we come!!!
On a brighter note, America just voted to re-elect a minority president after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. Perhaps we can finally stop talking about racism now.
MAINSTREAM REPUBLICANS, ESP. THOSE PLANNING TO RUN FOR POTUS / CONGRESS, OR ADVISE SAID CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM:
It's time for a serious, and I mean FUCKING serious attitude adjustment. We know now (although some of us already knew before, but you were too fucking STUPID to listen), that, even when we are in the RIGHT (pun intended) on all key issues pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, we will get RAPED UP THE ASS in elections if we utter a peep against abortion or gay marriage. These subjects are NOT RELEVANT. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about them. Who are you to decide whether two people can be in a relationship? Do you have a vagina? If not, why the FUCK are you talking about what someone can or cannot do with one? You realize that there is almost NOTHING that you will ever have a chance to do regarding these issues within the Legislative and Executive branches of Federal government? That's right, they are decided on a STATE level, unless there is a perceived injustice against a minority, in which case the Supreme Court gets involved, not YOU, DUMBASS. READ the Constitution that you all lie through your teeth about being so in love with. STOP falling for TROLOLOL at every possible opportunity!
After another term of Obama and two terms of Hillary, and this country is going to be a very different place. There will be no room for 19th century politics. There will be no room for bigoted ignorance. We need to be able to offer a clear contrast to the left-wing without giving them ANY opportunity to discredit our entire platform with crap that IS NOT RELEVANT. We are the LAST HOLDOUT of conservatism. There IS NO GALT'S GULCH. If there were, do you think that the welfare state would leave it alone? Class warfare is here to stay, and God help us that we can pull together enough votes to keep it at bay every now and then; it will be difficult enough without all of your MORONIC DISTRACTIONS!
Obama had less then one percent more of the population vote for him then romney. You're really blowing this out of proportion. There was this one election a little while back where the republican candidate won all but one state in the union. did the democrats die out because of that?
Quite literally nothing changed from the election and its looking like thats going to stick. Republicans are holding more gov seats then ever and have a redistricting advantage in the house.
Like literally bachmann is still going back to Washington. If that doesn't say anything to you then you need to reexamine your view of politics in america.
My friend, you forget that Obama was running for reelection after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. He won IN SPITE of his record. He has literally accomplished nothing in four years. Obamacare is a perceived failure by over 50% of the electorate. The economy was rated as the top area of concern by something like 75% of the electorate.
Women and minorities decided this election, for reasons specifically stated above. Bachmann survived by the skin of her teeth; West and Love are out...I don't see where you are going with your argument.
On November 08 2012 11:22 farvacola wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:21 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:18 Maxyim wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:13 jdseemoreglass wrote: [quote] Independents need a choice. Independents were given a choice in 2010. They came out in droves. The choice was very clear, a more limited government, more fiscal responsibility, vs. expansive government, obamacare, etc.
When independents don't see a clear difference between the candidates, they stay home. When Mitt Romney or McCain try to come across as moderate, when they don't distinguish themselves from Obama with a clear and articulated philosophy, then they are making it a pure popularity contest, a beauty contest. McCain and Romney are not going to win a beauty contest with Obama. The only chance they could possibly have is to articulate a philosophy so that people can vote philosophy and not vote popularity contest, which they are doomed to fail.
There is a market for the ideas, 2010 proved that. When the ideas are push aside, Republicans lose. When ideals are championed, as they were with Reagan, with Rubio, with Rand... You can see victory.
Of course, I need to be clear which ideas I'm talking about. I'm not talking about gay marriage, or abortion, or any social issue. I'm talking about individualism and limited government. We talk and think too much of Democracy itself and too little of the values which it serves.
I disagree with you 100%. We lost the election because of the superfluous crap that taints Republicans. Romney offered a clear fiscal and foreign policy alternative to Obama. Obama already had a poor track record in these areas. Yet none of that could stop the 5% margin from increased turnout by pissed-off women, gays and Latinos. GG, no re for 12 years; can we try something different then?
Do you honestly think Republicans could ever win anything playing the "we're less liberal than they are" game? That's a death sentence. It makes no sense at all to say that the way to beat Democrats is to be more Democrat.
Unless the country is.....you know.......more Democrat.
This. There is no other explanation.
Obama has accomplished things in his first term, don't really know what you're talking about.
He went into his first term with a super majority in the senate a soundly defeated enemy and the most super charged and connected populace the country has ever seen. Then he managed to fuck up the first thing he did in office (obamacare) and things went downhill from there when he lost control of the house and lost his super majority in the senate.
I hope to god that a president does something with the kind of advantage that obama had in his first term. He did nowhere near what he said he was going to do
Republican intransigence at least has to take part of the blame for those things, and indeed the political system as a whole. It doesn't give him a free pass, but equally voters probably remembered the numerous Republican-instigated roadblocks that were holding up everything, especially if it pertained to their own personal circumstances like the funding of unemployment and the likes.
The Republicans have nobody but themselves to blame for losing this one if Obama's handling of the economy was as catastrophic as they claimed, and given the cited stat earlier that 75% of voters had this as their number one concern it seems curious that Obama won.
Perhaps Romney's own financial plans weren't that good?
Obama had a whole fucking year of super majority you can't do shit to stop us from doing what we want legislative time. Its from that "we're taking over and we're not going to let the republicans have any credit for this health care reform" attitude that caused such problems as in the second half of his term.
Yeah its Romney's fault that he lost. Is anyone accusing something otherwise here? He was a bad uninteresting candidate that will be remembered more for his mistakes then his success's.
Plenty in this thread are blaming other elements, hell I've seen posts claiming that ethnic minorities and women are holding the country to hostage.
And really, it's Obama and the Democrats not 'letting the Republicans have any credit for this healthcare reform' that is to blame for the poisonous partisan atmosphere that is worse than I can personally recall?
I'm not 100% sure how it works in your country but a 2 party system tends to breed these things. There really isn't a single party to blame for any situation at hand. Its always traceable to going back and forth over how it all started. The only real distinction is who did what last. Things got obviously really really bad for the repubicans after the bush presidency. Thus when the democrats came sweeping to power in such strong numbers they belived that they didn't need to compromise with republicans and really ran the country for a bit there. Now the republicans realized that the only way that they'd be able to turn the tide was to make sure that the democrats weren't able to get though healthcare reform as a democrat only initiative and otherwise make sure that obama didn't have such a flawless and wonderful time in the white house as everyone thought he would. Now after that Obama shifted from being an idealist in his election to being a pragmatic and while not having the political experience to navigate this whole mess things then just slipped into a cold war until a more extremist faction of the republican party (the tea party) rallied from the perceived total power of the democratic party and won back the house in 2 years effectively completing the objective that the republicans wanted. HOWEVER, this has now taken away at the republicans ability to effectively pivot to the center for general elections and with such a motivated extremist faction within the republican party the good candidates that were able to pivot to said center for the general elections are being defeated in primary elections (the elections that the parties have to decide who gets to run against the other party in the general election) giving the republican party candidates that embaress themselves and their party talking about rape and losing the election pretty quickly and decisively.
I spent way too much time on that but that's basically the situation that the republican party finds itself in right now. Basically everyone's problems are because of bush and the things that happened because of bush.
Looking back at this post I'm pretty happy with it. With it I will not be coming back to the thread. Its been a really great run but politics are over now and I've got better things to do. Cheers everyone and thank you to the mods that have been so diligently patrolling this thread throughout the whole season.
On November 08 2012 12:30 Hrrrrm wrote: Only reason the Democrats didn't win the House(or make significant gains) was because of redistricting where the GOP drew the lines recently. Yes Democrats are also guilty of redistricting and it's something that needs to be changed ASAP. It's why things have gotten as divisive as they have since politicians are drawing their own demographics and know whoever they put up with an R in a certain district or a D in a certain district have no chance of losing.
For those curious check out Florida House Districts. Check out those squiggly lines! You literally have some districts surrounding other districts in order to split the vote. So you have a situation where a Democrat would have a seat and a Republican would have a seat(under normal block redistricting) but due to how they drew the lines it split the Democratic vote equally between those two districts leaving Republicans with both seats.
We won't have fair representatives of the people(at least in the house) until this bullshit goes away.
Really redistricting should be delegated to the federal government with strong rules for what would consist of a district. Considering seniority holds power in congress, which means protecting seats means more power for the state.
Yes people that vote Democrat are the people that want things. Meanwhile Romney was gonna give everyone a 20% tax cut. Better luck next time.
Can you disprove his statement though? I can tell you that out of the 30 or so people I know that openly voted for Obama, 13 of them mentioned they would get more "stuff" for free easier on their Facebook page. One even joked that Obama was personally sending him a new iPhone. Whether or not they will get "Free" items, they believed it will happen and voted based of that assumption. Is it right? I do not think so, but they are over 18 and can vote
Facts are... 12% unemployment for people without a high school diploma, 10% of those with no secondary education are unemployed as well. That's what the numbers say and those individuals helped shape the future of American Democracy.
On November 08 2012 11:07 Maxyim wrote: Looks like the Republican party is done; left-wing voters resoundingly outnumber right-wing voters now within the USA; the election was not even close, yet Republicans were the party with the momentum!
Hillary will win in 2016 after another "slow recovery" period by positioning herself as a more moderate Democrat than Obama. Pretty soon, the moderate Democrats will be running against the liberal Democrats. Europe, here we come!!!
On a brighter note, America just voted to re-elect a minority president after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. Perhaps we can finally stop talking about racism now.
MAINSTREAM REPUBLICANS, ESP. THOSE PLANNING TO RUN FOR POTUS / CONGRESS, OR ADVISE SAID CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM:
It's time for a serious, and I mean FUCKING serious attitude adjustment. We know now (although some of us already knew before, but you were too fucking STUPID to listen), that, even when we are in the RIGHT (pun intended) on all key issues pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, we will get RAPED UP THE ASS in elections if we utter a peep against abortion or gay marriage. These subjects are NOT RELEVANT. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about them. Who are you to decide whether two people can be in a relationship? Do you have a vagina? If not, why the FUCK are you talking about what someone can or cannot do with one? You realize that there is almost NOTHING that you will ever have a chance to do regarding these issues within the Legislative and Executive branches of Federal government? That's right, they are decided on a STATE level, unless there is a perceived injustice against a minority, in which case the Supreme Court gets involved, not YOU, DUMBASS. READ the Constitution that you all lie through your teeth about being so in love with. STOP falling for TROLOLOL at every possible opportunity!
After another term of Obama and two terms of Hillary, and this country is going to be a very different place. There will be no room for 19th century politics. There will be no room for bigoted ignorance. We need to be able to offer a clear contrast to the left-wing without giving them ANY opportunity to discredit our entire platform with crap that IS NOT RELEVANT. We are the LAST HOLDOUT of conservatism. There IS NO GALT'S GULCH. If there were, do you think that the welfare state would leave it alone? Class warfare is here to stay, and God help us that we can pull together enough votes to keep it at bay every now and then; it will be difficult enough without all of your MORONIC DISTRACTIONS!
Obama had less then one percent more of the population vote for him then romney. You're really blowing this out of proportion. There was this one election a little while back where the republican candidate won all but one state in the union. did the democrats die out because of that?
Quite literally nothing changed from the election and its looking like thats going to stick. Republicans are holding more gov seats then ever and have a redistricting advantage in the house.
Like literally bachmann is still going back to Washington. If that doesn't say anything to you then you need to reexamine your view of politics in america.
My friend, you forget that Obama was running for reelection after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. He won IN SPITE of his record. He has literally accomplished nothing in four years. Obamacare is a perceived failure by over 50% of the electorate. The economy was rated as the top area of concern by something like 75% of the electorate.
Women and minorities decided this election, for reasons specifically stated above. Bachmann survived by the skin of her teeth; West and Love are out...I don't see where you are going with your argument.
On November 08 2012 11:22 farvacola wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:21 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:18 Maxyim wrote: [quote]
I disagree with you 100%. We lost the election because of the superfluous crap that taints Republicans. Romney offered a clear fiscal and foreign policy alternative to Obama. Obama already had a poor track record in these areas. Yet none of that could stop the 5% margin from increased turnout by pissed-off women, gays and Latinos. GG, no re for 12 years; can we try something different then?
Do you honestly think Republicans could ever win anything playing the "we're less liberal than they are" game? That's a death sentence. It makes no sense at all to say that the way to beat Democrats is to be more Democrat.
Unless the country is.....you know.......more Democrat.
This. There is no other explanation.
Obama has accomplished things in his first term, don't really know what you're talking about.
He went into his first term with a super majority in the senate a soundly defeated enemy and the most super charged and connected populace the country has ever seen. Then he managed to fuck up the first thing he did in office (obamacare) and things went downhill from there when he lost control of the house and lost his super majority in the senate.
I hope to god that a president does something with the kind of advantage that obama had in his first term. He did nowhere near what he said he was going to do
Republican intransigence at least has to take part of the blame for those things, and indeed the political system as a whole. It doesn't give him a free pass, but equally voters probably remembered the numerous Republican-instigated roadblocks that were holding up everything, especially if it pertained to their own personal circumstances like the funding of unemployment and the likes.
The Republicans have nobody but themselves to blame for losing this one if Obama's handling of the economy was as catastrophic as they claimed, and given the cited stat earlier that 75% of voters had this as their number one concern it seems curious that Obama won.
Perhaps Romney's own financial plans weren't that good?
Obama had a whole fucking year of super majority you can't do shit to stop us from doing what we want legislative time. Its from that "we're taking over and we're not going to let the republicans have any credit for this health care reform" attitude that caused such problems as in the second half of his term.
Yeah its Romney's fault that he lost. Is anyone accusing something otherwise here? He was a bad uninteresting candidate that will be remembered more for his mistakes then his success's.
Plenty in this thread are blaming other elements, hell I've seen posts claiming that ethnic minorities and women are holding the country to hostage.
And really, it's Obama and the Democrats not 'letting the Republicans have any credit for this healthcare reform' that is to blame for the poisonous partisan atmosphere that is worse than I can personally recall?
I'm not 100% sure how it works in your country but a 2 party system tends to breed these things. There really isn't a single party to blame for any situation at hand. Its always traceable to going back and forth over how it all started. The only real distinction is who did what last. Things got obviously really really bad for the repubicans after the bush presidency. Thus when the democrats came sweeping to power in such strong numbers they belived that they didn't need to compromise with republicans and really ran the country for a bit there. Now the republicans realized that the only way that they'd be able to turn the tide was to make sure that the democrats weren't able to get though healthcare reform as a democrat only initiative and otherwise make sure that obama didn't have such a flawless and wonderful time in the white house as everyone thought he would. Now after that Obama shifted from being an idealist in his election to being a pragmatic and while not having the political experience to navigate this whole mess things then just slipped into a cold war until a more extremist faction of the republican party (the tea party) rallied from the perceived total power of the democratic party and won back the house in 2 years effectively completing the objective that the republicans wanted. HOWEVER, this has now taken away at the republicans ability to effectively pivot to the center for general elections and with such a motivated extremist faction within the republican party the good candidates that were able to pivot to said center for the general elections are being defeated in primary elections (the elections that the parties have to decide who gets to run against the other party in the general election) giving the republican party candidates that embaress themselves and their party talking about rape and losing the election pretty quickly and decisively.
I spent way too much time on that but that's basically the situation that the republican party finds itself in right now. Basically everyone's problems are because of bush and the things that happened because of bush.
Looking back at this post I'm pretty happy with it. With it I will not be coming back to the thread. Its been a really great run but politics are over now and I've got better things to do. Cheers everyone and thank you to the mods that have been so diligently patrolling this thread throughout the whole season.
Seeing how the Popular vote was 50/50 for President Obama and Gov. Romney, I would like to say it was not a decisive loss at all. It was an electoral loss, yes, but decisive? No.
On November 08 2012 11:07 Maxyim wrote: Looks like the Republican party is done; left-wing voters resoundingly outnumber right-wing voters now within the USA; the election was not even close, yet Republicans were the party with the momentum!
Hillary will win in 2016 after another "slow recovery" period by positioning herself as a more moderate Democrat than Obama. Pretty soon, the moderate Democrats will be running against the liberal Democrats. Europe, here we come!!!
On a brighter note, America just voted to re-elect a minority president after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. Perhaps we can finally stop talking about racism now.
MAINSTREAM REPUBLICANS, ESP. THOSE PLANNING TO RUN FOR POTUS / CONGRESS, OR ADVISE SAID CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM:
It's time for a serious, and I mean FUCKING serious attitude adjustment. We know now (although some of us already knew before, but you were too fucking STUPID to listen), that, even when we are in the RIGHT (pun intended) on all key issues pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, we will get RAPED UP THE ASS in elections if we utter a peep against abortion or gay marriage. These subjects are NOT RELEVANT. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about them. Who are you to decide whether two people can be in a relationship? Do you have a vagina? If not, why the FUCK are you talking about what someone can or cannot do with one? You realize that there is almost NOTHING that you will ever have a chance to do regarding these issues within the Legislative and Executive branches of Federal government? That's right, they are decided on a STATE level, unless there is a perceived injustice against a minority, in which case the Supreme Court gets involved, not YOU, DUMBASS. READ the Constitution that you all lie through your teeth about being so in love with. STOP falling for TROLOLOL at every possible opportunity!
After another term of Obama and two terms of Hillary, and this country is going to be a very different place. There will be no room for 19th century politics. There will be no room for bigoted ignorance. We need to be able to offer a clear contrast to the left-wing without giving them ANY opportunity to discredit our entire platform with crap that IS NOT RELEVANT. We are the LAST HOLDOUT of conservatism. There IS NO GALT'S GULCH. If there were, do you think that the welfare state would leave it alone? Class warfare is here to stay, and God help us that we can pull together enough votes to keep it at bay every now and then; it will be difficult enough without all of your MORONIC DISTRACTIONS!
Obama had less then one percent more of the population vote for him then romney. You're really blowing this out of proportion. There was this one election a little while back where the republican candidate won all but one state in the union. did the democrats die out because of that?
Quite literally nothing changed from the election and its looking like thats going to stick. Republicans are holding more gov seats then ever and have a redistricting advantage in the house.
Like literally bachmann is still going back to Washington. If that doesn't say anything to you then you need to reexamine your view of politics in america.
My friend, you forget that Obama was running for reelection after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. He won IN SPITE of his record. He has literally accomplished nothing in four years. Obamacare is a perceived failure by over 50% of the electorate. The economy was rated as the top area of concern by something like 75% of the electorate.
Women and minorities decided this election, for reasons specifically stated above. Bachmann survived by the skin of her teeth; West and Love are out...I don't see where you are going with your argument.
On November 08 2012 11:22 farvacola wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:21 jdseemoreglass wrote: [quote] Do you honestly think Republicans could ever win anything playing the "we're less liberal than they are" game? That's a death sentence. It makes no sense at all to say that the way to beat Democrats is to be more Democrat.
Unless the country is.....you know.......more Democrat.
This. There is no other explanation.
Obama has accomplished things in his first term, don't really know what you're talking about.
He went into his first term with a super majority in the senate a soundly defeated enemy and the most super charged and connected populace the country has ever seen. Then he managed to fuck up the first thing he did in office (obamacare) and things went downhill from there when he lost control of the house and lost his super majority in the senate.
I hope to god that a president does something with the kind of advantage that obama had in his first term. He did nowhere near what he said he was going to do
Republican intransigence at least has to take part of the blame for those things, and indeed the political system as a whole. It doesn't give him a free pass, but equally voters probably remembered the numerous Republican-instigated roadblocks that were holding up everything, especially if it pertained to their own personal circumstances like the funding of unemployment and the likes.
The Republicans have nobody but themselves to blame for losing this one if Obama's handling of the economy was as catastrophic as they claimed, and given the cited stat earlier that 75% of voters had this as their number one concern it seems curious that Obama won.
Perhaps Romney's own financial plans weren't that good?
Obama had a whole fucking year of super majority you can't do shit to stop us from doing what we want legislative time. Its from that "we're taking over and we're not going to let the republicans have any credit for this health care reform" attitude that caused such problems as in the second half of his term.
Yeah its Romney's fault that he lost. Is anyone accusing something otherwise here? He was a bad uninteresting candidate that will be remembered more for his mistakes then his success's.
Plenty in this thread are blaming other elements, hell I've seen posts claiming that ethnic minorities and women are holding the country to hostage.
And really, it's Obama and the Democrats not 'letting the Republicans have any credit for this healthcare reform' that is to blame for the poisonous partisan atmosphere that is worse than I can personally recall?
I'm not 100% sure how it works in your country but a 2 party system tends to breed these things. There really isn't a single party to blame for any situation at hand. Its always traceable to going back and forth over how it all started. The only real distinction is who did what last. Things got obviously really really bad for the repubicans after the bush presidency. Thus when the democrats came sweeping to power in such strong numbers they belived that they didn't need to compromise with republicans and really ran the country for a bit there. Now the republicans realized that the only way that they'd be able to turn the tide was to make sure that the democrats weren't able to get though healthcare reform as a democrat only initiative and otherwise make sure that obama didn't have such a flawless and wonderful time in the white house as everyone thought he would. Now after that Obama shifted from being an idealist in his election to being a pragmatic and while not having the political experience to navigate this whole mess things then just slipped into a cold war until a more extremist faction of the republican party (the tea party) rallied from the perceived total power of the democratic party and won back the house in 2 years effectively completing the objective that the republicans wanted. HOWEVER, this has now taken away at the republicans ability to effectively pivot to the center for general elections and with such a motivated extremist faction within the republican party the good candidates that were able to pivot to said center for the general elections are being defeated in primary elections (the elections that the parties have to decide who gets to run against the other party in the general election) giving the republican party candidates that embaress themselves and their party talking about rape and losing the election pretty quickly and decisively.
I spent way too much time on that but that's basically the situation that the republican party finds itself in right now. Basically everyone's problems are because of bush and the things that happened because of bush.
Looking back at this post I'm pretty happy with it. With it I will not be coming back to the thread. Its been a really great run but politics are over now and I've got better things to do. Cheers everyone and thank you to the mods that have been so diligently patrolling this thread throughout the whole season.
Seeing how the Popular vote was 50/50 for President Obama and Gov. Romney, I would like to say it was not a decisive loss at all. It was an electoral loss, yes, but decisive? No.
On November 08 2012 11:07 Maxyim wrote: Looks like the Republican party is done; left-wing voters resoundingly outnumber right-wing voters now within the USA; the election was not even close, yet Republicans were the party with the momentum!
Hillary will win in 2016 after another "slow recovery" period by positioning herself as a more moderate Democrat than Obama. Pretty soon, the moderate Democrats will be running against the liberal Democrats. Europe, here we come!!!
On a brighter note, America just voted to re-elect a minority president after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. Perhaps we can finally stop talking about racism now.
MAINSTREAM REPUBLICANS, ESP. THOSE PLANNING TO RUN FOR POTUS / CONGRESS, OR ADVISE SAID CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM:
It's time for a serious, and I mean FUCKING serious attitude adjustment. We know now (although some of us already knew before, but you were too fucking STUPID to listen), that, even when we are in the RIGHT (pun intended) on all key issues pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, we will get RAPED UP THE ASS in elections if we utter a peep against abortion or gay marriage. These subjects are NOT RELEVANT. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about them. Who are you to decide whether two people can be in a relationship? Do you have a vagina? If not, why the FUCK are you talking about what someone can or cannot do with one? You realize that there is almost NOTHING that you will ever have a chance to do regarding these issues within the Legislative and Executive branches of Federal government? That's right, they are decided on a STATE level, unless there is a perceived injustice against a minority, in which case the Supreme Court gets involved, not YOU, DUMBASS. READ the Constitution that you all lie through your teeth about being so in love with. STOP falling for TROLOLOL at every possible opportunity!
After another term of Obama and two terms of Hillary, and this country is going to be a very different place. There will be no room for 19th century politics. There will be no room for bigoted ignorance. We need to be able to offer a clear contrast to the left-wing without giving them ANY opportunity to discredit our entire platform with crap that IS NOT RELEVANT. We are the LAST HOLDOUT of conservatism. There IS NO GALT'S GULCH. If there were, do you think that the welfare state would leave it alone? Class warfare is here to stay, and God help us that we can pull together enough votes to keep it at bay every now and then; it will be difficult enough without all of your MORONIC DISTRACTIONS!
Obama had less then one percent more of the population vote for him then romney. You're really blowing this out of proportion. There was this one election a little while back where the republican candidate won all but one state in the union. did the democrats die out because of that?
Quite literally nothing changed from the election and its looking like thats going to stick. Republicans are holding more gov seats then ever and have a redistricting advantage in the house.
Like literally bachmann is still going back to Washington. If that doesn't say anything to you then you need to reexamine your view of politics in america.
My friend, you forget that Obama was running for reelection after a first term chronicled by the worst economic record since the Great Depression. He won IN SPITE of his record. He has literally accomplished nothing in four years. Obamacare is a perceived failure by over 50% of the electorate. The economy was rated as the top area of concern by something like 75% of the electorate.
Women and minorities decided this election, for reasons specifically stated above. Bachmann survived by the skin of her teeth; West and Love are out...I don't see where you are going with your argument.
On November 08 2012 11:22 farvacola wrote:
On November 08 2012 11:21 jdseemoreglass wrote: [quote] Do you honestly think Republicans could ever win anything playing the "we're less liberal than they are" game? That's a death sentence. It makes no sense at all to say that the way to beat Democrats is to be more Democrat.
Unless the country is.....you know.......more Democrat.
This. There is no other explanation.
Obama has accomplished things in his first term, don't really know what you're talking about.
He went into his first term with a super majority in the senate a soundly defeated enemy and the most super charged and connected populace the country has ever seen. Then he managed to fuck up the first thing he did in office (obamacare) and things went downhill from there when he lost control of the house and lost his super majority in the senate.
I hope to god that a president does something with the kind of advantage that obama had in his first term. He did nowhere near what he said he was going to do
Republican intransigence at least has to take part of the blame for those things, and indeed the political system as a whole. It doesn't give him a free pass, but equally voters probably remembered the numerous Republican-instigated roadblocks that were holding up everything, especially if it pertained to their own personal circumstances like the funding of unemployment and the likes.
The Republicans have nobody but themselves to blame for losing this one if Obama's handling of the economy was as catastrophic as they claimed, and given the cited stat earlier that 75% of voters had this as their number one concern it seems curious that Obama won.
Perhaps Romney's own financial plans weren't that good?
Obama had a whole fucking year of super majority you can't do shit to stop us from doing what we want legislative time. Its from that "we're taking over and we're not going to let the republicans have any credit for this health care reform" attitude that caused such problems as in the second half of his term.
Yeah its Romney's fault that he lost. Is anyone accusing something otherwise here? He was a bad uninteresting candidate that will be remembered more for his mistakes then his success's.
Plenty in this thread are blaming other elements, hell I've seen posts claiming that ethnic minorities and women are holding the country to hostage.
And really, it's Obama and the Democrats not 'letting the Republicans have any credit for this healthcare reform' that is to blame for the poisonous partisan atmosphere that is worse than I can personally recall?
I'm not 100% sure how it works in your country but a 2 party system tends to breed these things. There really isn't a single party to blame for any situation at hand. Its always traceable to going back and forth over how it all started. The only real distinction is who did what last. Things got obviously really really bad for the repubicans after the bush presidency. Thus when the democrats came sweeping to power in such strong numbers they belived that they didn't need to compromise with republicans and really ran the country for a bit there. Now the republicans realized that the only way that they'd be able to turn the tide was to make sure that the democrats weren't able to get though healthcare reform as a democrat only initiative and otherwise make sure that obama didn't have such a flawless and wonderful time in the white house as everyone thought he would. Now after that Obama shifted from being an idealist in his election to being a pragmatic and while not having the political experience to navigate this whole mess things then just slipped into a cold war until a more extremist faction of the republican party (the tea party) rallied from the perceived total power of the democratic party and won back the house in 2 years effectively completing the objective that the republicans wanted. HOWEVER, this has now taken away at the republicans ability to effectively pivot to the center for general elections and with such a motivated extremist faction within the republican party the good candidates that were able to pivot to said center for the general elections are being defeated in primary elections (the elections that the parties have to decide who gets to run against the other party in the general election) giving the republican party candidates that embaress themselves and their party talking about rape and losing the election pretty quickly and decisively.
I spent way too much time on that but that's basically the situation that the republican party finds itself in right now. Basically everyone's problems are because of bush and the things that happened because of bush.
Looking back at this post I'm pretty happy with it. With it I will not be coming back to the thread. Its been a really great run but politics are over now and I've got better things to do. Cheers everyone and thank you to the mods that have been so diligently patrolling this thread throughout the whole season.
Seeing how the Popular vote was 50/50 for President Obama and Gov. Romney, I would like to say it was not a decisive loss at all. It was an electoral loss, yes, but decisive? No.
Take it easy Megan Kelly. It was one of the most decisive victories in recorded American history. For a sitting president with between 8 and 16% unemployment, depending how you slice it, to crush a straight, white rich guy whose party swept into the House and almost the Senate is unprecedented. The last time it happened was under FDRs watch.
Shame Sermokala left, as the UK is close to a 2 party state as things stand, albeit it's a bit wonky at the minute with the coalition government, usually either party has an outright majority. However, the parties, while shitting on each other do not do so to near the same degree as the two American parties do in the current climate. Both parties are culpable, but even at the worst days of Bush I don't recall the Democrats filibustering left, right, and centre as the GOP did during the second half of Obama's first term.