Ultimately, why did Obama win?

One chart tells the tale.

cares.JPG


it seems Obama manged to win because he ran the most negative campaign in history, outspending Romney and portraying him as a guy that doesn't care.

I guess Obama had better propaganda than Romeny. But what numbers are leading you to think Obama outspent Romney? And Romney portrayed himself as not caring for over 50% of Americans, so those Americans rejected him. LMAO!!:badgrin:










No Romney didn't in fact portray that! The liberal media and the democrats defined him that way and you drank the koolaid. If you're going to have a conversation for once in your miserable know nothing life stop telling lies. They aren't necessary any more. You won.

Oh don't get me started about the media and their manner of doing business. Yet with that even in play people/voters need to smarten the hell up and learn the facts on their own and many do not. I wish I could tell you how many people I know who vote based solely on commercials and endorsements they have seen.
 
One chart tells the tale.

it seems Obama manged to win because he ran the most negative campaign in history, outspending Romney and portraying him as a guy that doesn't care.
I guess projecting is more a more successful system of lying to gullible people than I thought.
 
Judging by the numbers of repubs who stayed home, I think it's safe to say that Romney and the neocon RNC ran off the Santorum and Paul voters.

I know you guys have to say this to justify your political beliefs but it just isn't true.

Look at the final numbers. We lost because our brand is outdated. Women and Latinos flocked to the dems. Had we had just a bit more of the share of their votes we would have won.

I voted for Rick in the primaries and I followed through with a Romney vote in the general. Your analogy is flawed.
I'm not saying it to justify jack shit.

The fact remains that there were somewhere between 2-3 million potential GOP voters who stayed home...Enough for Romney to win....I guarantee you that it wasn't because the party didn't pander to Latinos.

You're so busy falling for the lamestream media line that the GOP needs to be more "inclusive", while your party alienates a good chunk of its own potential base electorate.

I don't watch msm sources. Nor do I listen to much talk radio. My opinions are mine alone just as yours are.
 
Judging by the numbers of repubs who stayed home, I think it's safe to say that Romney and the neocon RNC ran off the Santorum and Paul voters.

I know you guys have to say this to justify your political beliefs but it just isn't true.

Look at the final numbers. We lost because our brand is outdated. Women and Latinos flocked to the dems. Had we had just a bit more of the share of their votes we would have won.

I voted for Rick in the primaries and I followed through with a Romney vote in the general. Your analogy is flawed.
I'm not saying it to justify jack shit.

The fact remains that there were somewhere between 2-3 million potential GOP voters who stayed home...Enough for Romney to win....I guarantee you that it wasn't because the party didn't pander to Latinos.

You're so busy falling for the lamestream media line that the GOP needs to be more "inclusive", while your party alienates a good chunk of its own potential base electorate.

Substantially more democratic voters stayed home than did those from the GOP, that's a BS premise.

The GOP's shift to the radical right cost them the election, and with virtually every teabagger "heavy hitter" thrown out on their asses, that's a clear message to the GOP from the american people to the stop with their radical right wing fascist agenda, and return to sanity.
 
I don't understand how Romney could have lost.

Because most Americans wanted a president with magic underpants and 8 wives.
 
I don't watch msm sources. Nor do I listen to much talk radio. My opinions are mine alone just as yours are.
Then why is it you're parroting the same garbage that lamestream media "thinkers" are?

Your party got 2+ million fewer votes this time around than in '08....A number that just happens to mirror the amount of potential republican voters who stayed home....That didn't happen because there wasn't enough pandering to Latinos.
 
I don't watch msm sources. Nor do I listen to much talk radio. My opinions are mine alone just as yours are.
Then why is it you're parroting the same garbage that lamestream media "thinkers" are?

Your party got 2+ million fewer votes this time around than in '08....A number that just happens to mirror the amount of potential republican voters who stayed home....That didn't happen because there wasn't enough pandering to Latinos.

Dunno what you're talking about. Romney all but told the Latinos to fuck off during the primaries.

You keep on talking about the base as if they have magical election powers. Without the middle the base is going no where. And Paul supporters aren't in the middle.

As to why I sound like the media well, maybe its just common sense.
 
One chart tells the tale.

cares.JPG


it seems Obama manged to win because he ran the most negative campaign in history, outspending Romney and portraying him as a guy that doesn't care.

Because members of Romney's own party (and fellow GOP presidential candidates) calling the eventual Republican nominee a vulture capitalist couldn't possibly have had ANY effect on how the general electorate perceived him...
 
I know you guys have to say this to justify your political beliefs but it just isn't true.

Look at the final numbers. We lost because our brand is outdated. Women and Latinos flocked to the dems. Had we had just a bit more of the share of their votes we would have won.

I voted for Rick in the primaries and I followed through with a Romney vote in the general. Your analogy is flawed.
I'm not saying it to justify jack shit.

The fact remains that there were somewhere between 2-3 million potential GOP voters who stayed home...Enough for Romney to win....I guarantee you that it wasn't because the party didn't pander to Latinos.

You're so busy falling for the lamestream media line that the GOP needs to be more "inclusive", while your party alienates a good chunk of its own potential base electorate.

Substantially more democratic voters stayed home than did those from the GOP, that's a BS premise.

The GOP's shift to the radical right cost them the election, and with virtually every teabagger "heavy hitter" thrown out on their asses, that's a clear message to the GOP from the american people to the stop with their radical right wing fascist agenda, and return to sanity.

To be fair, the GOP has only shifted to the right on social issues. They've gone into far left field when it comes to everything else.
 
One chart tells the tale.

cares.JPG


it seems Obama manged to win because he ran the most negative campaign in history, outspending Romney and portraying him as a guy that doesn't care.

I guess Obama had better propaganda than Romeny. But what numbers are leading you to think Obama outspent Romney? And Romney portrayed himself as not caring for over 50% of Americans, so those Americans rejected him. LMAO!!:badgrin:

Free shit and the media on yourside=winning.

LOL we don't want free stuff. We want good jobs. We want businesses to be held accountable. We want people of all races, gender and sexual orientation to enjoy all same rights that everyone in America gets to.

Fix news isn't telling you the truth, I am. You have an identity crisis and you are losing because of your radical ideas that women aren't raped or that everyone wants free handouts. Thats insulting. We want opportunities for all, not just the rich.
 

Forum List

Back
Top