We watched the returns on fox news last night. The top excuses I heard were:
Blacks and brown people vs. white people.
Women voting with their vaginas.
Americans have become takers and not givers.
Losing our religion.
Hurricane Sandy.
Linking arms with Chris Christie in his presidential jacket and looking presidential and cooperative.
Did I mention "takers"?
Fox news is part of the problem. Vilifying other Americans because they have different priorities is not how you win elections.
So why did it work so well for Obama?
Ask any Obama campaign rep and they'll say the same things you listed.....only they put it in less insulting terms.
I'm trying to figure out your point other than simply repeating Obama campaign talking points.
All of the above was used on voters and it seems that it was focused mainly in battleground states. The rest of the country seems to be less inclined to believe it. That explains why Red-states gave Romney huge margins of victory, 65%-32% in almost every case. Almost every swing state was won by Obama with extremely narrow margins. Even in California were Obama won by a margin of 59% to 38% and if it weren't for Los Angles and San Francisco it would have been a totally different story. I would have thought that Obama should have won with 68-70%. You know, without California Democrats would have a tough time winning elections yet Democrats are laying waste to the state. Huge gas prices barely made a dent in their liberal support.
So what does it mean?
It means that the cities are running roughshod over the rest of the country. Cities filled with poor and lower-middle-class voters that are getting pinched by extremely high food bills and energy bills along with massive taxation. Yet they want even more of it? I seriously doubt it.
