Let’s Not Panic Over Romney’s Defeat

[RosieS]

F

The whole point of the original OP is.... screw you pretenders. As if you gave a crap about Republicans and now you are going to offer all this help to show us the way. Again, screw you. If becoming a democrat is the only way to win another election then I am more then happy to never win another election. The democrats have led us onto the road to destruction and I'll be damned if I am going help.

Nothing really changed in this election, power didn't shift. There was no mandate. People just are idiots and vote for whomever is in office. All the crying about term limits but when push comes to shove the blacks and Hispanics are going to vote democrat as if they have their best interest at heart. NOTHING can be done to change that they have been fully indoctrinated.

If there is no other reason to not become a democrat it is their nasty attitude. Obama ran the nastiest campaign i can remember and the American hypocritical people reelected him, truly disappointing.

All right...so go ahead and panic then.

Regards from Rosie

 

[Mustang]

The American Spectator : Let

First of all, Romney ran a damned good race. He was up in the polls by as much as 7 points (Gallup) going into the last week. Where he got sandbagged was Hurricane Sandy. The storm captured the nation's attention and pushed the election off the front page. It gave President Obama a chance to act presidential (with vague memories of President George Bush Jr.'s initial inaction on Hurricane Katrina reverberating in the background) and to shake hands with Chris Christie. Now I don't fault Christie either and don't see any nefarious plot to maneuver for 2016. A governor has to act on behalf of his state. Parts of New Jersey were devastated, and if Christie had snubbed Obama, it would have put thousands of his constituents in immediate danger -- and been interpreted as his fault as well.

I can't wait to hear a conservatives say that it was the liberal hoax of global warming that led to Romney's defeat.

The damn liberals have done it AGAIN!

 

[Mustang]

Personally, I blame Aardvark Ratnik.

 

[Toro]

The American Spectator : Let

First of all, Romney ran a damned good race. He was up in the polls by as much as 7 points (Gallup) going into the last week. Where he got sandbagged was Hurricane Sandy. The storm captured the nation's attention and pushed the election off the front page. It gave President Obama a chance to act presidential (with vague memories of President George Bush Jr.'s initial inaction on Hurricane Katrina reverberating in the background) and to shake hands with Chris Christie. Now I don't fault Christie either and don't see any nefarious plot to maneuver for 2016. A governor has to act on behalf of his state. Parts of New Jersey were devastated, and if Christie had snubbed Obama, it would have put thousands of his constituents in immediate danger -- and been interpreted as his fault as well.

I can't wait to hear a conservatives say that it was the liberal hoax of global warming that led to Romney's defeat.

The damn liberals have done it AGAIN!

The OP is another example of clueless conservative denial. There were a couple dozen polls showing an Obama victory prior to Sandy but instead, they choose an outlier - one of two polls - to cling to this notion that Romney was leading. You just had to follow the polls in the swing states to know that Romney was almost certainly going to lose.

 

[Toro]

The whole point of the original OP is.... screw you pretenders. As if you gave a crap about Republicans and now you are going to offer all this help to show us the way. Again, screw you. If becoming a democrat is the only way to win another election then I am more then happy to never win another election. The democrats have led us onto the road to destruction and I'll be damned if I am going help.

Nothing really changed in this election, power didn't shift. There was no mandate. People just are idiots and vote for whomever is in office. All the crying about term limits but when push comes to shove the blacks and Hispanics are going to vote democrat as if they have their best interest at heart. NOTHING can be done to change that they have been fully indoctrinated.

If there is no other reason to not become a democrat it is their nasty attitude. Obama ran the nastiest campaign i can remember and the American hypocritical people reelected him, truly disappointing.

Over 40% of Hispanics voted for Bush in 2000. Romney barely captured half that.

The Republican Party has become a Small Tent .

 

[Cowman]

The American Spectator : Let

First of all, Romney ran a damned good race. He was up in the polls by as much as 7 points (Gallup) going into the last week. Where he got sandbagged was Hurricane Sandy. The storm captured the nation's attention and pushed the election off the front page. It gave President Obama a chance to act presidential (with vague memories of President George Bush Jr.'s initial inaction on Hurricane Katrina reverberating in the background) and to shake hands with Chris Christie. Now I don't fault Christie either and don't see any nefarious plot to maneuver for 2016. A governor has to act on behalf of his state. Parts of New Jersey were devastated, and if Christie had snubbed Obama, it would have put thousands of his constituents in immediate danger -- and been interpreted as his fault as well.

If sunshine and rainbows affected the entire country, Romney still would have lost.

Have you fucking SEEN Nate Silver's polls leading up to the election? Shit wasn't good for Romney even before the hurricane.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

 

[aSeattleConserv]

The American Spectator : Let

First of all, Romney ran a damned good race. He was up in the polls by as much as 7 points (Gallup) going into the last week. Where he got sandbagged was Hurricane Sandy. The storm captured the nation's attention and pushed the election off the front page. It gave President Obama a chance to act presidential (with vague memories of President George Bush Jr.'s initial inaction on Hurricane Katrina reverberating in the background) and to shake hands with Chris Christie. Now I don't fault Christie either and don't see any nefarious plot to maneuver for 2016. A governor has to act on behalf of his state. Parts of New Jersey were devastated, and if Christie had snubbed Obama, it would have put thousands of his constituents in immediate danger -- and been interpreted as his fault as well.

Let's face it Freewill, Mitt Romney was "B. Hussein Obama lite". The Republicans have to quit trying to be more like demoncrats, and more like real conservatives.

They lost when they put up moderates like Gerald Ford, Bob Dole and John McLame, what makes you think they'd win with a liberal like Mitt Romney?

Liberal vultures drooling over another liberal

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The whole point of the original OP is.... screw you pretenders. As if you gave a crap about Republicans and now you are going to offer all this help to show us the way. Again, screw you. If becoming a democrat is the only way to win another election then I am more then happy to never win another election. The democrats have led us onto the road to destruction and I'll be damned if I am going help.

Nothing really changed in this election, power didn't shift. There was no mandate. People just are idiots and vote for whomever is in office. All the crying about term limits but when push comes to shove the blacks and Hispanics are going to vote democrat as if they have their best interest at heart. NOTHING can be done to change that they have been fully indoctrinated.

If there is no other reason to not become a democrat it is their nasty attitude. Obama ran the nastiest campaign i can remember and the American hypocritical people reelected him, truly disappointing.

Perhaps one day you’ll understand why that statement is completely devoid of credibility.

Otherwise, no one’s asking anyone to ‘become democrats.’

And that there were no changes with regard to the ‘balance of power,’ particularly with regard to the Senate, fully expected to become republican, is exactly why you need to make significant changes, starting with the social right.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

You nominated a guy who easily changes his principles to try and win elections. What are we supposed to believe?

 

[aSeattleConserv]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

You nominated a guy who easily changes his principles to try and win elections. What are we supposed to believe?

What supposed principles did the flip flopper change? He designed Obamacare in Taxachusetts; he's still pro fag, although he claims that they shouldn't marry. He claims he's pro life now, but as I will show in a thread later, the sodomite movement and baby murdering movement are one in the same.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

You nominated a guy who easily changes his principles to try and win elections. What are we supposed to believe?

When you explain the principles he easily changed, I'd be glad to take you seriously..


While your at it, what principles does Obama hold?

 

[JoeB131]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

I think it is more along the lines of establishing what it is you actually stand for.

Take abortion. You start with the sensible notion that abortion isn't a good thing. Okay. Got it.

There are a lot of things you guys could advocate to reduce the number of abortions that you'd find common ground with moderates and liberals on.

But you can't leave good enough alone. Nope, abortion should be illegal in the cases of rape and incest. Life begins at conception. Women shouldn't get birth control as part of their health care if their employer's religion says that's bad. And if someone protests, your cheerleader on the radio screams she's a "slut' and a "prostitute". YOu insist on making women watch ultrasounds they didn't ask for- and pay for them. You want to see medical records to make sure that heart-breaking late abortion was heart-breaking enough.

In short, you end up taking folks you could have found common ground with and sent them screaming to the other side, running in a serpentine pattern.

NOthing wrong with standing your ground, but sometimes, you have to make sure it's a defensible position.

 

[JoeB131]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

You nominated a guy who easily changes his principles to try and win elections. What are we supposed to believe?

When you explain the principles he easily changed, I'd be glad to take you seriously..


While your at it, what principles does Obama hold?

He was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-universal health care, pro-immigratin reform as "Massachusetts Mitt".

But when he ran for President in 2008, Massachusetts Mitt got replaced by "Iowa Mitt", a right wing reactionary who was pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-shipping them all back where they came from.

And yeah, he tried to get back to the middle around the time of the first debate, and he fooled people for about a week.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

I think it is more along the lines of establishing what it is you actually stand for.

Take abortion. You start with the sensible notion that abortion isn't a good thing. Okay. Got it.

There are a lot of things you guys could advocate to reduce the number of abortions that you'd find common ground with moderates and liberals on.

But you can't leave good enough alone. Nope, abortion should be illegal in the cases of rape and incest. Life begins at conception. Women shouldn't get birth control as part of their health care if their employer's religion says that's bad. And if someone protests, your cheerleader on the radio screams she's a "slut' and a "prostitute". YOu insist on making women watch ultrasounds they didn't ask for- and pay for them. You want to see medical records to make sure that heart-breaking late abortion was heart-breaking enough.

In short, you end up taking folks you could have found common ground with and sent them screaming to the other side, running in a serpentine pattern.

NOthing wrong with standing your ground, but sometimes, you have to make sure it's a defensible position.

So, I get that your not in favor of individual free speech and baby killing turns you on..

On principle, I could never agree..

 

[Toro]

One thing that is common amongst ideological extremists of all stripes is that they believe that if they just had someone leading them who believes what they do, everyone else will really, really, really want them to.

Of course, that's crap.

Let's do some simple math for the Small Tent Republicans. According to Fox News, 45% of voters identified themselves as moderates. There were about 120 million voters. Thus, there were 54 million moderates. Also according to Fox News, moderates voted for Obama 56%-41%, a 15% advantage for Obama. That means that roughly 8 million more moderates voted for Obama than Romney.

But according to the Kool-Aid drinkers, what these moderates really want is to have an even more conservative candidate. Or, there are millions of disenchanted conservatives sitting on their couch at home who couldn't be bothered to vote because a True Conservative wasn't nominated, even though they didn't care enough about the country to vote against the supposedly worst President In The History of the Union who was running the country into the ground with his socialism.



I often wonder what color the sky is in their world.

 

[JoeB131]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

I think it is more along the lines of establishing what it is you actually stand for.

Take abortion. You start with the sensible notion that abortion isn't a good thing. Okay. Got it.

There are a lot of things you guys could advocate to reduce the number of abortions that you'd find common ground with moderates and liberals on.

But you can't leave good enough alone. Nope, abortion should be illegal in the cases of rape and incest. Life begins at conception. Women shouldn't get birth control as part of their health care if their employer's religion says that's bad. And if someone protests, your cheerleader on the radio screams she's a "slut' and a "prostitute". YOu insist on making women watch ultrasounds they didn't ask for- and pay for them. You want to see medical records to make sure that heart-breaking late abortion was heart-breaking enough.

In short, you end up taking folks you could have found common ground with and sent them screaming to the other side, running in a serpentine pattern.

NOthing wrong with standing your ground, but sometimes, you have to make sure it's a defensible position.

So, I get that your not in favor of individual free speech and baby killing turns you on..

On principle, I could never agree..

Not what I said at all.

Free speech does not always mean because you CAN say a thing, you should say a thing. What Limbaugh said offended people. He had every right to say it, but what he said had consequences because it was so darned offensive.

And frankly, using rhetoric like "baby-killers" hasn't worked for 40 years on this issue. What makes you think it's going to work now?

 

[Toro]

I find it interesting that Liberals believe it would be so easy for Conservatives to change their principles to win elections.

I think it is more along the lines of establishing what it is you actually stand for.

Take abortion. You start with the sensible notion that abortion isn't a good thing. Okay. Got it.

There are a lot of things you guys could advocate to reduce the number of abortions that you'd find common ground with moderates and liberals on.

But you can't leave good enough alone. Nope, abortion should be illegal in the cases of rape and incest. Life begins at conception. Women shouldn't get birth control as part of their health care if their employer's religion says that's bad. And if someone protests, your cheerleader on the radio screams she's a "slut' and a "prostitute". YOu insist on making women watch ultrasounds they didn't ask for- and pay for them. You want to see medical records to make sure that heart-breaking late abortion was heart-breaking enough.

In short, you end up taking folks you could have found common ground with and sent them screaming to the other side, running in a serpentine pattern.

NOthing wrong with standing your ground, but sometimes, you have to make sure it's a defensible position.

So, I get that your not in favor of individual free speech and baby killing turns you on..

On principle, I could never agree..

And the two Senatorial candidates who agree with you on rape and abortion lost elections they should have won.

So congratulations, you have an even more liberal Senate.

If that's your goal, good job.

 

[Lumpy 1]

You nominated a guy who easily changes his principles to try and win elections. What are we supposed to believe?

When you explain the principles he easily changed, I'd be glad to take you seriously..


While your at it, what principles does Obama hold?

He was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-universal health care, pro-immigratin reform as "Massachusetts Mitt".

But when he ran for President in 2008, Massachusetts Mitt got replaced by "Iowa Mitt", a right wing reactionary who was pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-shipping them all back where they came from.

And yeah, he tried to get back to the middle around the time of the first debate, and he fooled people for about a week.

And what are Obama's principles? do not include integrity, honesty or loyalty or I'll just figure you're lying..

 

[JakeStarkey]

Either the GOP reaches out to women and hispanics honestly to where those constituencies live, or it will never win another national election.