Why Romney % GOP lost and will continue to lose

[Simon W. Moon]

Since you obviously don't know what the economy looked like for 8 years, and you refuse to Google it, I'll help you.The unemployment under Bush in his worst month was 7.8%.
What else would you like me to help you with?

You could help me figure out how to explain to you that whoever makes an assertion in a debate is the person who has the obligation to provide support for that assertion.
Or you could Google up the fact that unemployment under Bush was 135.8%

Either way.

 

[Grant]

evangelical/religious.
The party Tre, the party. He's the party candidate, and the party is associated with it, like it or not.
Romney's mormonism is front in center in both his life and displayed in the campaign.
Religous reasons back the opposition to abortion.
It backs the opposition to gay marriage/rights.
It backs a lot of the opposition to women, i.e. the common theme in old school religions of men running the family
It's an attack in general on science, see stem cell research, see global warming, see the underlying theme of god/prayer in school, and on and on.

Don't argue about such obvious things. It's that sort of head-in-the-sand mentality that leads to failure, this like election.

Romney didn't fail. He offered his services to the American people and they refused.

He'll continue to make millions per year and probably involve himself somewhere else, continuing to do very well. It was the American people who failed , and largely by focusing on the issues you've outlined rather than what was genuinely important.

 

[iliveonramen]

Okay. So tell me, what exactly is Obama's plan to fix Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and create the jobs that the young voters desperately need? Please be specific. What's your plan?

I really don't have time to do an exhaustive list..but here are some. Also...Social Security is fine...Medicare and medical costs in general are our problem...which we spend as a % of our GDP much higher than any industrialized country in the world. Medicare and Medicaid in (the public sector) has by far seen the lower % of growth in cost and is much more inline to what the rest of the world spends for healthcare (barring pharma costs...thanks Medicare Part D!).

Obama care includes panels to reduce costs where they can and eliminate waste in Medicare.

He's proposed Medicare being able to bargain for drug costs like Medicaid can (Medicaid spends 1/3 less on drugs than Medicare does) which of course is due to Bush and the Republican Congresses pro pharma Medicare Part D. This would save 10's of billions.

Obamacare is going to reduce healthcare costs.. Heritage stated it when they came up with the plan in the 90's and economists agree....Obamacare will reduce the ridiculous healthcare cost growth rate in this country.

He's definately made headway in stopping a future class of educated Americans (the future of our country) living their lives under crushing debt just to attain the American dream and make our country competitive. Republicans of course have given us the finger.

Social Security in large part is fine....small changes are in order from changing retirment ages etc which will make the program fine.

As for creating jobs....he' already done a pretty good job after what was left for him. Sorry if the idea that tax cuts and deregulation sounds like garbage. It sure as **** has caused more problems than it's solved for the past decades.

the 12 million jobs Mitt promised under his administration is the baseline expected growth for the next 4 years in jobs. Republicans were banking on taking over during the expected recovery and benefiting from it. They wont...and in 4 years Obama will get the credit he deserves for turning around and stopping the bleeding from the worst financial disaster in decades...brought about by horrible policies pushed by conservative sources.

Republicans don't have any legs to walk on when talking about the economy. They've been horrible on every account. Deficits have ballooned thanks to "deficits don't matter" views when it comes to expansions due to national security and tax cuts.

 

[tres borrachos]

Would you please drop the conservative talking points? The stimulus did what it was intended to do: lower the unemployment rate and boost GDP above non-stimulus levels. The economic projections were off because the recession was worse than estimated. The president joking about difficulties with shovel ready projects does not translate to "there were no shovel ready jobs." In fact thousands of projects were accomplished with the help of stimulus funding.

Thank you for the Democratic talking points. Too bad the facts prove otherwise.

Or maybe it was just that Obama lied. Who really knows?

 

[zimmer]

The GOP lost because it actively ostracized women, blacks, and Hispanics. They don't necessarily need to pander to the non-white-male demographic, but they definitely need to stop actively turning them off if they want to win more of the bigger elections (senate and president).

Ostracized? Bull****.
They didn't pander to them, and they shouldn't.
But this is the Balkanized USA the Dems love. Genitals and color... what a disgusting way to treat a nation. Divide and lie.
Truly pathetic.

The wakeup call will come on a couple fronts.

1. Middle east.
2. Fiscal.

One morning America will wake up and think... WTF were we thinking reinstating The Amateur.

 

[tres borrachos]

I really don't have time to do an exhaustive list..but here are some. Also...Social Security is fine...Medicare and medical costs in general are our problem...which we spend as a % of our GDP much higher than any industrialized country in the world. Medicare and Medicaid in (the public sector) has by far seen the lower % of growth in cost and is much more inline to what the rest of the world spends for healthcare (barring pharma costs...thanks Medicare Part D!).

Obama care includes panels to reduce costs where they can and eliminate waste in Medicare.

He's proposed Medicare being able to bargain for drug costs like Medicaid can (Medicaid spends 1/3 less on drugs than Medicare does) which of course is due to Bush and the Republican Congresses pro pharma Medicare Part D. This would save 10's of billions.

Obamacare is going to reduce healthcare costs.. Heritage stated it when they came up with the plan in the 90's and economists agree....Obamacare will reduce the ridiculous healthcare cost growth rate in this country.

He's definately made headway in stopping a future class of educated Americans (the future of our country) living their lives under crushing debt just to attain the American dream and make our country competitive. Republicans of course have given us the finger.

Social Security in large part is fine....small changes are in order from changing retirment ages etc which will make the program fine.

As for creating jobs....he' already done a pretty good job after what was left for him. Sorry if the idea that tax cuts and deregulation sounds like garbage. It sure as **** has caused more problems than it's solved for the past decades.

the 12 million jobs Mitt promised under his administration is the baseline expected growth for the next 4 years in jobs. Republicans were banking on taking over during the expected recovery and benefiting from it. They wont...and in 4 years Obama will get the credit he deserves for turning around and stopping the bleeding from the worst financial disaster in decades...brought about by horrible policies pushed by conservative sources.

Republicans don't have any legs to walk on when talking about the economy. They've been horrible on every account. Deficits have ballooned thanks to "deficits don't matter" views when it comes to expansions due to national security and tax cuts.

You lost me at "Social Security is fine". If you believe that, then I can't even read the rest.

 

[tres borrachos]

You could help me figure out how to explain to you that whoever makes an assertion in a debate is the person who has the obligation to provide support for that assertion.
Or you could Google up the fact that unemployment under Bush was 135.8%

Either way.

Except unemployment under Bush wasn't 135.8%, but I suspect you already knew that.

 

[imagep]

I was one until a few years ago.

I live in Georgia, and most of the Republicans I know are angry white southerners. I do count many of them among my close friends too, we just refrain from talking about politics.

I live in SC and I am pretty much in the same situation. Before I picked up an economics book I typically voted republican, sometimes libertarian, then I became a little more educated and started looking at things not through emotion, but from a standpoint of education and reality.

Many of the people that I come into contact with are ignorant trailer park republicans or tea partyers. The guy dressed up in a revolutionary war costume that they always show on fox news every time that fox has a segment discussing the tea party - I personally know that guy, he is a member of my community and puts out a small monthly newsletter which is distributed all over my community. He's also a whacko.

 

[tres borrachos]

evangelical/religious.
The party Tre, the party. He's the party candidate, and the party is associated with it, like it or not.
Romney's mormonism is front in center in both his life and displayed in the campaign.
Religous reasons back the opposition to abortion.
It backs the opposition to gay marriage/rights.
It backs a lot of the opposition to women, i.e. the common theme in old school religions of men running the family
It's an attack in general on science, see stem cell research, see global warming, see the underlying theme of god/prayer in school, and on and on.

Don't argue about such obvious things. It's that sort of head-in-the-sand mentality that leads to failure, this like election.

So Romney should have lied and said he wasn't Mormon?

You didn't list a single thing that Romney said he would do based on his religious views.

 

[zimmer]

Personal responsibility, my man. Don't blame the press for your ignorance. They only sell what people are buying.

I am personally responsible; I don't look for the government to thieve for me.

I also looked at what was most troubling about the nation... looked through the Goebbels styled Propaganda machine and chose wisely. Too many didn't. They were worried about head fakes; and bought the goods Goebbels Inc. USA sold.

 

[iguanaman]

Truthfully, Ric, I'm not hurting at all. In fact this election is probably very beneficial to me personally. I'm Canadian so there will probably be a lot of money moving here, the economy is doing well, and I'm involved in the tourism industry in Costa Rica and will probably have more US investors for a joint venture there as well. I've always been pro American because they've been great friends and neighbors so am sad to see them go in this old direction which has failed every time. I assumed that they would learn from history, that they were more economically sophisticated, but I was clearly wrong.

So you were going to suffer financially under Romney but supported him anyway because............
We alll will do better under Obama, Romney would have put us back in recession. In fact the economy always does better under Democrats, ironic isn't it?

 

[Andalublue]

Okay, here's my dime's worth.

Romney lost because of a combination of the following factors:

• Declining base. The GOP base turned out in numbers to prevent an Obama second term, unfortunately for him, that base of white, religious, socially conservative individuals is a declining demographic.
• Unfairness. In a country with single-digit unemployment almost half the electorate are receiving some kind of federal assistance, be it benefits or tax breaks. Those working people receiving benefits don't see them as fortunate and unnecessary entitlements so much as a way to survive difficult times. If you want to change attitudes towards entitlement you need to address the issues that cause working people to need them i.e. the low-wage economy, job insecurity and the widening wealth gap. Romney, unsurprisingly, had nothing to say on this matter.
• Wrong priorities. At a time when most people are feeling the pinch, talking about further austerity for the middle class while at the same time proposing more spending on unpopular wars and military build-up will be seen as a contradiction.
• Extremist base. The GOP in general, beyond its diminishing base, has been seen to be obsessed with extremist social policies such as abortion and gay marriage. The hard-line base and the soft, moderate middle are incompatible and impossible to reconcile in a balanced manner. Tucker pointed out that pandering to base alienated a lot of potential Romney voters.
• Character and Image. Whether our DP Romneybots can admit it or not, Obama represents the fruition of the American dream. A middle class, mixed-race boy who worked his ass off to better his position and who takes a 'there but for the grace of God, go I' attitude towards the great majority who are struggling. Romney on the other hand is seen as a product of silver-spoon privilege who, while highly successful in business, achieved that success by capitalising on the misery of others through Bain Capital's carpet-bagging activities. A lot of people might like to achieve his success but would hope they wouldn't do it the same way he did.
• Fear of a return to Bush militarism. I don't think the American people have any desire to go back to the neo-con era of foreign adventurism and go-it-alone world policing. Romney made it clear with his statements on Iran and his dismissive attitude towards America's closest allies that this is exactly what he intended. In order to justify that massive increased in military spending he proposed he had to.
• Bad campaigning. I think Romney could have won. He wasn't a terrible candidate like Kerry or McCain, but he was out-campaigned. He didn't get the base/swing voter balance right and he wasn't helped at all by the antics of some of the more extreme elements of the GOP machine (Akins, Mourdock). Had he dealt more firmly with them, proving that the GOP doesn't hate women and minorities, he might well have squeezed a few more votes out of those demographics. After all, he didn't lose Virginia and Ohio by very much at all.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Except unemployment under Bush wasn't 135.8%, but I suspect you already knew that.

Well, what about the way to explain to you that the person who makes an assertion is the person with the responsibility to provide the support for their assertion?

Can you help me out with that one?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Except unemployment under Bush wasn't 135.8%, but I suspect you already knew that.

Let me Google that for you

 

[tres borrachos]

Well, what about the way to explain to you that the person who makes an assertion is the person with the responsibility to provide the support for their assertion?

Can you help me out with that one?

I already gave you one thing to back up his claim. I asked if you wanted more things, and you don't seem to want them.

 

[haymarket]

**** the blame game....Obama won fair and square and to all Romney supporters....The genie is out of the bottle and cannot be put back in. Bite the bullet and move forward.

No bitching or moaning is going to change that

I agree that Obama won fair and square. And if the GOP does not accept an important reason why he won, they are doomed.

 

[AdamT]

I am personally responsible; I don't look for the government to thieve for me.

I also looked at what was most troubling about the nation... looked through the Goebbels styled Propaganda machine and chose wisely. Too many didn't. They were worried about head fakes; and bought the goods Goebbels Inc. USA sold.

No, you specifically bought into the conservative propoganda machine and they predictably led you astray. Think for yourself.

 

[haymarket]

No, the American culture is changing and will die. That's just the way it is.

My posts agree that America is changing. It always has been changing. Either one adapts to the change or you die because America is going to be around for the foreseeable future regardless of what happens to the current GOP.

 

[iliveonramen]

You lost me at "Social Security is fine". If you believe that, then I can't even read the rest.

The reason I say Social Security is fine...is because you make changes at the margin to fix it. The surplus is valued at 2.7 trillion...based on projections it will last until 2033....at that point taxes collected will pay about 75% of the benefits. By increasing the ages, making small changes is inflation adjustments or taxes paid you can avert any problems. Solvency of Social Security can be fixed with much lower amounts of tweaking. It's a game of of slowing growth predictions or increasing revenue at much smaller levels since there's so much time to work with. Medicare is a different beast mainly due to US healthcare costs.

Of course you know all this since by being conservative you are an economics guru!

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I already gave you one thing to back up his claim. I asked if you wanted more things, and you don't seem to want them.

1) I am all but totally un-interested in his claim.
B) You made another mere assertion w/o providing any source other than your say-so
III) The idea that we don't have to back up what we say is silly.

 

[Mach]

So Romney should have lied and said he wasn't Mormon? You didn't list a single thing that Romney said he would do based on his religious views.

You're consistently also not getting it. He represents the Republican party, associated direclty with conservatives, FOx news, Rush, etc., etc. There is no denying this, it's bewildering to see you take a stance against the association of Christianity with Republicans.

And to answer another way, stop putting forward ultra-religious candidates and the questions you ask would be irrelevant (as they probably should be). Admit that many republicans oppose Obama for things he also never has come out and said or directly campaigned on, and you might start down the road to recovery.

 

[Amigo]

The lack of education was more evident on your side I'm afraid. It is your opinions that have been struck down as unacceptable to Americans.

Yes, lack of education from the government. That is a good thing.

 

[tres borrachos]

You're consistently also not getting it. He represents the Republican party, associated direclty with conservatives, FOx news, Rush, etc., etc. There is no denying this, it's bewildering to see you take a stance against the association of Christianity with Republicans.

And to answer another way, stop putting forward ultra-religious candidates and the questions you ask would be irrelevant (as they probably should be). Admit that many republicans oppose Obama for things he also never has come out and said or directly campaigned on, and you might start down the road to recovery.

I'm a Republican, and I don't associate with Fox, Rush or any religion. Never have...I was raised in a non-religious home. I never vote based on religion or because of what's on my television.

As I said, Romney never pushed anything based on his religious views. Nobody can name a single thing.

 

[Grant]

Would you please drop the conservative talking points? The stimulus did what it was intended to do: lower the unemployment rate and boost GDP above non-stimulus levels. The economic projections were off because the recession was worse than estimated. The president joking about difficulties with shovel ready projects does not translate to "there were no shovel ready jobs." In fact thousands of projects were accomplished with the help of stimulus funding.

What thousands of projects?

The infrastructure still suffers as we can see from what happened from Sandy the Frankenstorm. . It clearly shows the weakness of the system and the lack of leadership. A confusion of bureaucracies coupled with a lack of foresight. investment and direction.

 

[tres borrachos]

1) I am all but totally un-interested in his claim.
B) You made another mere assertion w/o providing any source other than your say-so
III) The idea that we don't have to back up what we say is silly.

So I guess the answer is "No, I don't want any more facts about the Bush economy". Okay, fair enough.