Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
  1. #1

    Question Just how exactly did Romney almost win?

    48% of the vote... with the nebulous "tax plan," the politicizing of the Libya event (before he even got his facts in order), the "47%" remarks, lack of clarity on what his stances on various issues are due to taking both sides (or three) on them, the numerous other policy-related gaffes, etc.

    Just trying to figure out how, exactly.

  2. #2
    Elder Member Jeff Brady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by []D[]/\/\[]D @ Nite/So-tite View Post
    48% of the vote... with the nebulous "tax plan," the politicizing of the Libya event (before he even got his facts in order), the "47%" remarks, lack of clarity on what his stances on various issues are due to taking both sides (or three) on them, the numerous other policy-related gaffes, etc.

    Just trying to figure out how, exactly.
    Morons and bigots still have the right to vote. The End.
    Google is your friend. Have a question? Look it up. ∙ BlogSequential Salon

  3. #3
    Elder Member Wjowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,377

    Default

    Because the South will head to the polls and vote for an old fishing boot for President if it meant keeping a black man out of the White House.

  4. #4
    OMG!!! INTERNET! Agent Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    WRESTLE SCHOOL!
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Simple. He didn't.

    While the election certainly wasn't a massive landslide victory for Obama, the media narrative leading up to it was making it seem so close because... well, it makes for a better media narrative. A close election generates rating and ad hits more than a foregone conclusion. But it wasn't really an "almost" for Romney. 51% to 48% of the popular vote may seem like a tiny margin, but it isn't, and Obama pretty much roundly trounced Romney in the Electoral College. Romney was the "best we had" candidate the entire time, since he was pulled from a bumper crop of psychopaths during the Primaries. Sure, they put everything they had into electing him, but he never really had that great a shot of winning.
    Broke down laughing and screaming for more/If this changed your life, did you have one before?
    sketches - Updated 2/26/2012

  5. #5
    Member chrisgiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Brady View Post
    Morons and bigots still have the right to vote. The End.
    This is pretty much the answer right here.

    If you haven't seen this, watch now.



    I love the part at 4:25 where the dude has to tell her you can't be a Muslim and an Atheist at the same time.

  6. #6
    Elder Member jesse_custer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    20,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Helix View Post
    Simple. He didn't.

    While the election certainly wasn't a massive landslide victory for Obama, the media narrative leading up to it was making it seem so close because... well, it makes for a better media narrative. A close election generates rating and ad hits more than a foregone conclusion. But it wasn't really an "almost" for Romney. 51% to 48% of the popular vote may seem like a tiny margin, but it isn't, and Obama pretty much roundly trounced Romney in the Electoral College. Romney was the "best we had" candidate the entire time, since he was pulled from a bumper crop of psychopaths during the Primaries. Sure, they put everything they had into electing him, but he never really had that great a shot of winning.
    This is the correct answer.

    Also, Romney would've gotten even fewer votes if Obama had done better in the first debate.

  7. #7
    OMG!!! INTERNET! Agent Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    WRESTLE SCHOOL!
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Had Obama not slouched his way through the first debate, people would have been calling the election then. Romney was never a truly viable candidate. Again, certainly not a landslide Reagan vs. Mondale victory for Obama, but not a squeaker by any means. Romney was too thoroughly unlikeable, too thoroughly vague on policy, too thoroughly gaffe prone to ever have really had a shot.
    Broke down laughing and screaming for more/If this changed your life, did you have one before?
    sketches - Updated 2/26/2012

  8. #8
    Elder Member jesse_custer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    20,646

    Default

    I still think Jon Huntsman would've been the smart choice for the Republicans. Perhaps if the party changes (which it has to if it wants to stay competitive), he'll get more attention should he run again.

  9. #9
    OMG!!! INTERNET! Agent Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    WRESTLE SCHOOL!
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Huntsman would have been a lot smarter a choice than Romney, but he wasn't visible enough during the Primaries. He was a better candidate, but he didn't fit the current GOP narrative for this election.
    Broke down laughing and screaming for more/If this changed your life, did you have one before?
    sketches - Updated 2/26/2012

  10. #10
    Cat smells like fish StoneGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    45,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jesse_custer View Post
    I still think Jon Huntsman would've been the smart choice for the Republicans. Perhaps if the party changes (which it has to if it wants to stay competitive), he'll get more attention should he run again.
    He's also not the candidate the GOP wanted. He's the GOP candidate Democrats wanted. It's like saying Democrats should have gone with... having trouble thinking of a name off the top of my head, but the bluest of Blue Dog Democrats. Yeah, it might help with some voters in the general election, but do you really want to nominate the guy?
    The Punisher: Iím going to cauterize your rectum, sealing it shut, so when you turn those delicious Pink Pantsô Fruit Pies into waste products the bilirubin in your feces will leach into your bloodstream and youíll die screaming! And Iíll watch while having sex with this grateful prostitute!

    Trussed-Up Hooker: Blueberry are my favorite!

    In other words, what StoneGold said.
    -Expletive Deleted

    Check out my travel site, Geekations.com

  11. #11
    Elder Member jesse_custer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    20,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneGold View Post
    He's also not the candidate the GOP wanted. He's the GOP candidate Democrats wanted. It's like saying Democrats should have gone with... having trouble thinking of a name off the top of my head, but the bluest of Blue Dog Democrats. Yeah, it might help with some voters in the general election, but do you really want to nominate the guy?
    If you want any chance of defeating Obama, then yes, you do want to nominate him.

    Here's the key to American politics: fear. A lot of people voted Republican solely because they feared what Obama might do. They would've voted for Huntsman as easily as they did for Romney. And we know for damn sure that Hunstman would've done better with moderates and, yes, liberals. He would've had a shot at taking the presidency.

    Given that all of this is true, he's the exact opposite of what the Democrats want. They want someone they can soundly beat. They want someone who only appeals to the dying traditional white public.

  12. #12
    Elder Member Wjowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneGold View Post
    He's also not the candidate the GOP wanted. He's the GOP candidate Democrats wanted. It's like saying Democrats should have gone with... having trouble thinking of a name off the top of my head, but the bluest of Blue Dog Democrats. Yeah, it might help with some voters in the general election, but do you really want to nominate the guy?
    Not to mention either way the candidate would have the GOP's extremist, cultist behavior dragging them down. That probably hurt Romney's campaign at least as much as him being Romney.

  13. #13
    Elder Member jesse_custer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    20,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wjowski View Post
    Not to mention either way the candidate would have the GOP's extremist, cultist behavior dragging them down. That probably hurt Romney's campaign at least as much as him being Romney.
    At the same time, Romney did a poor job of distancing himself from certain extreme comments. Blaming the most extreme politicians of the party only goes so far.

  14. #14
    Senior Member J. Robb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oil Country
    Posts
    4,847

    Default

    It was conservatives voting against Obama more than voting for Romney. The Republicans could have ran a dog for president and it would get over 40% of the vote.

  15. #15
    Hey, Larry! Darrell D.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    11,368

    Default

    Yeah, it wasn't close by any means.
    Like Helix said, Romney was simply the best out of a pack of total batshit insane primary candidates. I knew Romney had the nomination sewn up from the beginning, as the GOP wasn't going to let any of the other contenders near the nomination.
    I mean, Newt Gingrich? Ron Paul is always there, with the stink of his white supremacist following, but Santorum and Bachmann were total whack-jobs, and Herman Fucking Cain quoted Pokeman the Movie in his exit speech.
    Huntsman was the smart choice, and that was the problem. He was smart.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •