Mitt Romney is now very close to ... (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 13, 2024, 06:36:19 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Mitt Romney is now very close to ... (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Mitt Romney is now very close to ...  (Read 8736 times)
Statesman
Rookie
**
Posts: 36
United States


« on: November 21, 2012, 08:37:48 PM »

Yeah well 47.47% or 47.54% at least it says, that % of folks didn't want the anointed one & the casual observer can be excused for noticing, that Obama didn't win the popular vote blow-out he had wished for, the first president since Woodrow Wilson to see his support decrease; also Romney did better than Dukakis in 1988, GHWB in 1992, Dole in 1996 (only Kerry in 2004, did marginally better) and McCain in '08; both percentage wise as well as the EV; the anointed one might have been re-elected, but nothing on the blow-out scale he was expecting; that must catch in a few craw's; in terms of EV scoring, Obama only did better than Wilson, Truman, Carter and Dubya...not Mt. Rushmore territory is it? What would be sweet Irony, is if Obama and Dubya are both at 50.73% each...yep those stats are a bitch!

Romney also won a higher percentage of the popular vote than Clinton in 1992, but sorry, he did not and thankfully never will become president. If your party does not bring itself into some passable approximation of reality within the next couple years they will continue losing elections that they could conceivably have won, and will spend an era in opposition. Which I'd be perfectly fine with, frankly. By the way, if you have not figured it out yet, calling President Obama "the anointed one" makes you sound delusional. Perhaps try "the elected one"?
Logged
Statesman
Rookie
**
Posts: 36
United States


« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2012, 02:35:17 AM »
« Edited: November 22, 2012, 02:52:24 AM by Statesman »

The main reason Obama got even the margin he did was because of the left coast loonies in lala land.

I have a suggestion. Please never leave Rhode Island, and never move to Ohio or Florida. I really, really like the fact that your vote doesn't matter.

By the way, where were those left coast so-called loonies when Bush beat Kerry in 2004? They already voted for Kerry, and they did not decide the election. And why this prejudice toward the west coast? Your state is more liberal than mine!

I'm sorry, but Nate Silver and his arithmetic were right. Sorry, those polls weren't skewed. Sorry, not everybody who disagrees with you is automatically an ultra leftist.

The GOP lost because it utterly alienated women, and minorities, who are only a slightly more substantial portion of the U.S. electorate this time around. It sounds to me like with his 47% talk, Romney alienated plenty of moderates, some of whom may have voted for Bush in 2004. Looks like your party has some work to do demographically Losefield, I mean, Winfield. Publicly penning an op-ed titled "Let Detroit go bankrupt" does not help a Republican candidate in Ohio and the upper midwest. This is common sense.

Seriously man. Your party lost Florida, twice in a row, a state that has historically been at least lean GOP. And they did it conditions where they probably should have won the state. I predicted a 303-235 Obama win with Romney winning Florida, but Obama won Florida. What does that tell you? Does it tell you keep doing the same thing? Because if it does at a party-wide level, the Republicans can expect to lose in 2016 and 2020 as well if economic conditions continue to improve, even gradually. If (and it is a big if) we're looking at 6 to 6.5% unemployment in 2016, do the Republicans even have a chance anyway?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 12 queries.