- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,575
- Reaction score
- 6,767
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
Over 97% of the people of Detroit voted for Obama in the last election and it was the same people with the same economic and political understandings who voted for him on a national level. Once is forgivable but twice borders on the criminal.
Romney was the more mature, experienced, knowledgeable and intelligent candidate and I believe most Americans who want the best for their country, and not necessarily for their political party, would dearly love a do-over.
I said the same thing about those that voted for Bush twice.
The guy wanted to be President of half the country. We really don't need that.
Not making excuses...It really was Romney's to take, but he lost because he was out done by what I think will go down in history as the most dishonest campaign in recent memory in this country.
Yes, that seems evident. Which one needs the teleprompter?Sure he was, sure he was :roll:
Romney was a prime example of politics over what is good for the country.
Had people REALLY cared about this country, they wouldn't have voted for either Romney or Obama.
Alas, most people are stuck in the same duopoly system hoping that "this time" will be different and thinking "Their guy" is never the problem. The Dem/Reps are ruining this country and the sheeple keep voting for them.
Yes, that seems evident. Which one needs the teleprompter?
Whereas BHO shied away from politics and did the country some good. His list of accomplishments must make for the type of reading even a product of the Detroit educational system might understand.
Yes. that would have done a lot of good. Perhaps you should have jumped on that bandwagon before it left the station.
After the first term the public could easily see that Barrack Obama was incompetent. As someone else noted, the electorate proved they were not racist after the first election but were just plain stupid after the second election.
Even Bush used a teleprompter, don't think you minded then.
Oh,no!!~! Not Bush again!!! Did you not see we were discussing Romney and Obama!!! What's the matter with you Leftists?
Sounds like Obama wasn't a good president, good thing I didn't vote for him isn't it?
I have no interest in who you voted for.
I didn't vote for Obama, did you vote for Romney? If so you are part of the problem.
Can you not stick to the issues??
Yep, and it should have been clear that the GOP wasn't the right route after Bush too. You would think after numerous Dem and Rep presidents with increased government and debt people would be smart enough NOT to vote for either Dem/Rep. Alas, they are not.
The more simple-minded of the electorate were caught up in the War On Women nonsense, the 47% issue, and so on. The big issues, with the assistance of the dishonest, corrupt and incompetent MSM, were ignored.
Perhaps some States may have to secede, or threaten to, before responsible government is made possible. And many Americans are now leaving the US just as they once abandoned Detroit.
Certainly the electorate can vote for buffoons like Barrack Obama and get their way but when the big issues are ignored and it all becomes a matter of party lines then the country will have to pay a price, and we are seeing that now.
Are you talking about Obama here? Because if you think that Obama represents, or cares about me other than to send his IRS, EPA, FBI, DoJ, and any other agency he has at his disposal, after me, then you probably have a bridge for sale too.
Yes, that seems evident. Which one needs the teleprompter?
Oh,no!!~! Not Bush again!!! Did you not see we were discussing Romney and Obama!!! What's the matter with you Leftists?
Can you not stick to the issues??
Kind of funny. The thread's about Hillary Clinton. Thank god you're keeping us on topic.
And the only one decent, honest and forthright enough to come straight out and say he had no intention of representing 47% of the population.
He didn't say that.
He implied 47% were sucking on the government teet. It's a block of voters the Socialist of Amerika Partei (SAPs) have tried to buy with taxpayer money, and to a large degree have been successful. Therefore it will be a long, hard row to hoe.
."[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
Yeah, he totally didn't say that.
Or whatever . . .
It's precisely what he said... I accurately summed it up an a couple sentences... here is what Romney said:
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. And he'll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean that's what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people—I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the 5 to 10 percent in the center that are independents that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not, what it looks like. I mean, when you ask those people…we do all these polls—I find it amazing—we poll all these people, see where you stand on the polls, but 45 percent of the people will go with a Republican, and 48 or 4…
It's precisely what he said... I accurately summed it up an a couple sentences... here is what Romney said:
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. And he'll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean that's what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people—I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the 5 to 10 percent in the center that are independents that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not, what it looks like. I mean, when you ask those people…we do all these polls—I find it amazing—we poll all these people, see where you stand on the polls, but 45 percent of the people will go with a Republican, and 48 or 4…
He's right.
Yes, but the Left believes that the truth should not be spoken, that a candidate speaking the truth is not Presidential material. And by electing a known liar they proved themselves to be correct..
And the only one decent, honest and forthright enough to come straight out and say he had no intention of representing 47% of the population.
We conservatives could learn a lesson in that. We are always trying to play an honorable tact, when our opponent has no intention of being honest. We need to develop their own tactics and use them against them.
We conservatives could learn a lesson in that. We are always trying to play an honorable tact,
As long as you think Swift Boating, character assassination, and claiming the opponent is an African Muslim with close ties to terrorism and wants to set up "death pannels" is an honorable tact, then yeah.
“We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?