Obama made history yesterday

[Trajan]

He was the first president to win a second term with fewer votes than he got elected with the first time, Obama won the election in 2008 with 66,862,039 popular votes, and won yesterday with 60,366,456. which means 6,495,583 fewer people voted for him, while 747,326 fewer people voted for Romney than McCain.

If I were a Democratic strategist I would be terrified, as amateur pundit and lover of liberty, I see hope for the country. The only reason the worst president in modern history won reelection is the Republicans nominated the only person in the primary that made Newt look palatable.

Your analysis IMO is way off base. Romney was a very good candidate, with a very good campaign for the conservative message up til yesterday. He lost.

Obama is the worst president perhaps ever, yet he was re-elected. That's a fact, at least the second part.

No, the conservatives need to figure out their priorities and how to connect with the changing demographics of the country. Yes, those do matter. Oh some of you may want to cling to what you've known, but you need more than 47% of the electorate to win. Though not in order and God knows that Limbaugh isn't one of my normal sources, they each say something:

In a Nation of Children, Santa Claus Wins - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Two Americas - Michael Barone - National Review Online

Nice Guys Finish Second - By Michael Walsh - The Corner - National Review Online

Your analysis IMO is way off base. Romney was a very good candidate, with a very good campaign for the conservative message up til yesterday. He lost.

I am sorry Annie, though I voted for him, I don't agree.

his history doesn't speak to conservatism and he never ever spoke to me, he did speak to my Buckley side as a semi libertarian slightly, but as a con. no.

He was never fluent in closing those gaps imho. At the end of the day, he never reached any Hispanics who are I think a natural fit for con values either, or he would have not submarined with just 29% of the Hispanic vote and obama was venerable there. Example- Obama outspent him by 10-1 on Hispanic radio and TV sources, he didn't even try it appears.

 

[J.E.D]

So that's your plan? Spend the next 4 years claiming we lost because Romney sucked? Bull shit. Romney ran a very good campaign.

If you call a good campaign one in which you never give specifics, do very few interviews, try to take credit for the incumbent president's popular policies (auto bailout), piss off a state by lying to them a week before the election (the false Jeep ad), and run from your own achievements (Romneycare).

I agree to an extent BUT, pop quiz- when was obamas last press conference,where in he stood for questions with the WH press corp?

did obamas 'brochure' he put put 2 weeks ago do it for you? I saw it, it was one, two paragraph frameworks/explanations....and NO immigration btw.

how about the false auto industry bankruptcy claim?

I don't know about Obama's recent record on interviews. I've seen him do a lot of 'fluff' interviews -- Letterman, The View. Perhaps he didn't do that many hard interviews. I do know that I didn't see much of Romney.

As far as specifics go, I don't recall seeing a detailed plan by Obama; but he did push for the same things that he has been for the last four years -- infrastructure, revenue. This may sound biased (perhaps it is); but I feel that the burden is on the challenger to present a well-detailed plan of what he or she plans on doing. And consistency. Romney couldn't even make the math work in his own tax plan. And he changed positions like most people change shirts. The last debate was incredible to watch. Romney agreed with Obama on 90% of the debate subjects. People know what the incumbent has to offer; what does the challenger have that's better?

Immigration? The biggest hurdle there is congress. It seems like nobody wants to touch it. But at least Obama made an effort (essentially Dream Act by executive order), while Romney offered "self deportation". I suspect that the huge advantage Obama got by winning 70% of the Latino vote will motivate a lot of people (not least of which is the GOP) to tackle this serious issue which is of great importance to America's fastest growing voting bloc.

As far as the auto bailout goes - I don't know enough about the ins and outs of bankruptcy to tell the difference between what Romney thought should have been done and what was actually done. I have heard, however, that under the Obama bailout, the auto industry was given gov't guaranteed loans, whereas under the Romney plan, they would have been looking for loans from private lenders (who were in no position [or didn't want to] at the time to lend to them).

There's also the Jeep ad which was widely criticized as being false almost to the point of being purposely misleading.

But whatever you think about the auto bailout; the fact is that it is very popular in OH and is credited with helping the Oh economy and keeping their EU numbers lower than the national average. Even if Obama did exactly as Romney would have, it wasn't good optics for Romney to be out there trying to take credit for it. And it certainly wasn't good optics for the Romney campaign to air ads critical of the bailout while trying to take credit for it.

 

[squeeze berry]

He was the first president to win a second term with fewer votes than he got elected with the first time, Obama won the election in 2008 with 66,862,039 popular votes, and won yesterday with 60,366,456. which means 6,495,583 fewer people voted for him, while 747,326 fewer people voted for Romney than McCain.

Nixon and Reagan were in 3-way races for their first term elections. And...

FDR got less votes in 1944 than 1940... so...you FAIL.

If I were a Democratic strategist I would be terrified, as amateur pundit and lover of liberty, I see hope for the country. The only reason the worst president in modern history won reelection is the Republicans nominated the only person in the primary that made Newt look palatable.

You're not smart enough to be Dem strategist.

what was happening in 1944 that wasn't happening in 1940


you think you are smart but you aren't

 

[AmyNation]

He was the first president to win a second term with fewer votes than he got elected with the first time, Obama won the election in 2008 with 66,862,039 popular votes, and won yesterday with 60,366,456. which means 6,495,583 fewer people voted for him, while 747,326 fewer people voted for Romney than McCain.

If I were a Democratic strategist I would be terrified, as amateur pundit and lover of liberty, I see hope for the country. The only reason the worst president in modern history won reelection is the Republicans nominated the only person in the primary that made Newt look palatable.

So that's your plan? Spend the next 4 years claiming we lost because Romney sucked? Bull shit. Romney ran a very good campaign.

He was the best choice of a bad lot, and I agree he ran a good campaign, but Obama ran a better won.

 

[AmyNation]

Your analysis IMO is way off base. Romney was a very good candidate, with a very good campaign for the conservative message up til yesterday. He lost.

Obama is the worst president perhaps ever, yet he was re-elected. That's a fact, at least the second part.

No, the conservatives need to figure out their priorities and how to connect with the changing demographics of the country. Yes, those do matter. Oh some of you may want to cling to what you've known, but you need more than 47% of the electorate to win. Though not in order and God knows that Limbaugh isn't one of my normal sources, they each say something:

In a Nation of Children, Santa Claus Wins - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Two Americas - Michael Barone - National Review Online

Nice Guys Finish Second - By Michael Walsh - The Corner - National Review Online

I don't agree. Conservatives cease to be conservative when they change who we are based on who's voting

If we are forever a dwindling minority it will be a badge of honor considering the path the progressive majority wants to take us down.

Giving up is not a badge of honor.

Suggesting "I don't want my party to change, so I'd rather it cease to exist" is a cop out.

 

[skookerasbil]

Been a blast around here for well over a year......now its going to be dull as hell.

 

[R.D.]

Your analysis IMO is way off base. Romney was a very good candidate, with a very good campaign for the conservative message up til yesterday. He lost.

Obama is the worst president perhaps ever, yet he was re-elected. That's a fact, at least the second part.

No, the conservatives need to figure out their priorities and how to connect with the changing demographics of the country. Yes, those do matter. Oh some of you may want to cling to what you've known, but you need more than 47% of the electorate to win. Though not in order and God knows that Limbaugh isn't one of my normal sources, they each say something:

In a Nation of Children, Santa Claus Wins - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Two Americas - Michael Barone - National Review Online

Nice Guys Finish Second - By Michael Walsh - The Corner - National Review Online

I don't agree. Conservatives cease to be conservative when they change who we are based on who's voting

If we are forever a dwindling minority it will be a badge of honor considering the path the progressive majority wants to take us down.

Giving up is not a badge of honor.

Suggesting "I don't want my party to change, so I'd rather it cease to exist" is a cop out.

Yeah, "but everybody does it" is already the liberal mantra

 

[EriktheRed]

n.
The only reason the worst president in modern history won reelection is the Republicans nominated the only person in the primary that made Newt look palatable.

Then why didn't Newt win the nomination?

 

[EriktheRed]

He was the first president to win a second term with fewer votes than he got elected with the first time, Obama won the election in 2008 with 66,862,039 popular votes, and won yesterday with 60,366,456. which means 6,495,583 fewer people voted for him, while 747,326 fewer people voted for Romney than McCain.

If I were a Democratic strategist I would be terrified, as amateur pundit and lover of liberty, I see hope for the country. The only reason the worst president in modern history won reelection is the Republicans nominated the only person in the primary that made Newt look palatable.

So that's your plan? Spend the next 4 years claiming we lost because Romney sucked? Bull shit. Romney ran a very good campaign.

Yeah, he did a great job letting the Obama campaign shut down his Bain Capital experience talking points.

He also did a stellar job in the 2nd two debates after President Obama let Mittens walk all over him in the first one.

Great job lying at the end, too.

 

[AmyNation]

I don't agree. Conservatives cease to be conservative when they change who we are based on who's voting

If we are forever a dwindling minority it will be a badge of honor considering the path the progressive majority wants to take us down.

Giving up is not a badge of honor.

Suggesting "I don't want my party to change, so I'd rather it cease to exist" is a cop out.

Yeah, "but everybody does it" is already the liberal mantra

Lol wut?