2012 Presidential Election Thread

[Fox 6]

....Wow...

VERY VERY NSFW

http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw

I think the best part is when she blames Sarah Palin for Republicans losing the election because she didnt run.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Fox 6

....Wow...

VERY VERY NSFW

http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw

I think the best part is when she blames Sarah Palin for Republicans losing the election because she didnt run.

On the bright side, she finally got people to watch her YouTube videos!

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Fox 6

....Wow...

VERY VERY NSFW

http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw

I think the best part is when she blames Sarah Palin for Republicans losing the election because she didnt run.

She needs to chill lol

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Fox 6

....Wow...

VERY VERY NSFW

http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw

I think the best part is when she blames Sarah Palin for Republicans losing the election because she didnt run.

She reminds me of Francis (boogie2988), except serious. XD

[Bond]

I will never understand what possesses one to communicate political views on Facebook (or YouTube I guess) ... just seems like a no-win situation to me.

[Typhoid]

This is going to be the most overstated, (stoned and) obvious comment of the year - but you guys need at least another viable party. I think nearly every single political problem with your Republic stems from only having 2 real options.

No country can run on a basis of 2 parties. You get no middle ground. You get no real compromise, no real overlapping issues. You just get black and white. All or nothing. Republican or Democrat; As if you can define every issue that 300 million people have easily into one of those two categories. You can't run a country on ultimatums, that shit isn't right, nor is it remotely politically fair.

Do you really want a country of 300 million people to be run on the campaign of "Vote for me, because I'm not that guy."
Because that's basically what every one of your elections is, and that's no way to pick the leader of a country.

I'm sure so many people on both sides voted for _______ because he wasn't ______; rather than what ________ was saying/thought/felt about ________.

One believes one thing, so the other has to believe the other - because it's the opposite. But with another party in there, each party can form legitimate positions on things that aren't simply because "The other guys think the other way", and each party, and candidate (and voter) can not only stop and think "Wait, how do I feel on this", and can actually express their real political views, opposed to spewing proper trash to garner votes.

Hell, your country is so split down the middle and typically always has been it seems sort of ridiculous to force nearly half of 300 million people to live unhappily with a leader they don't agree with. That's typically why countries fracture in the first place.
You can't rise above things like that if nothing ever changes politically, it will just continue to fracture.

You need more parties and more legitimate candidates not only so your candidates have more outlets for hate and negative ads - but so they can also simply stop being puppets to a two party system.

Ramble ramble rant and such.

[Professor S]

To answer Mana's question from another thread: My feelings on Pennsylvania being in play were based on exactly that, feeling. Romney had a huge turnout at a rally in Bucks Co PA, but I later learned many of those in attendance were from NJ and NY. It proved a mirage.

That, and I thought Romney would do much better in Philly suburbs than McCain, and he did, but not enough to make a difference.

But overall, this number shocks me: Pres. Obama received 9 million fewer votes this year compared to 2008 (69.4 mil to 58.7 mil). If as many Republicans voted for Romney as they did for McCain (59.9 mil), we'll have a new President Elect. But Romney received nearly 4 million fewer votes. Considering there was a tremendous economic crash in 2008 under Bush, and a demoralized Rep base, I find that fact amazing and the Republican party better take notice.

They had a softball this year, and whiffed.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Professor S

To answer Mana's question from another thread: My feelings on Pennsylvania being in play were based on exactly that, feeling. Romney had a huge turnout at a rally in Bucks Co PA, but I later learned many of those in attendance were from NJ and NY. It proved a mirage.

That, and I thought Romney would do much better in Philly suburbs than McCain, and he did, but not enough to make a difference.

But overall, this number shocks me: Pres. Obama received 9 million fewer votes this year compared to 2008 (69.4 mil to 58.7 mil). If as many Republicans voted for Romney as they did for McCain (59.9 mil), we'll have a new President Elect. But Romney received nearly 4 million fewer votes. Considering there was a tremendous economic crash in 2008 under Bush, and a demoralized Rep base, I find that fact amazing and the Republican party better take notice.

They had a softball this year, and whiffed.

Yeah a lot of folks saying it was their race to lose.. and they managed to do it.. in grand fashion as well.

I just feel like in order to appeal to their vocal mass, they really alienated too many other voters

Even in the fall-out of the election, a lot of their supporters don't blame the candidates or the campaigns.. but the others...

Those good for nothing, take, take, take segment of America who is all about having unprotected sex so they can have their weekly abortions, live off the government's money and food and illegals.

And I just don't get their play.. they need to start casting those aside, and focus on casting a wider net.

~Edit~
Also, I think they need to start dealing in the world of facts.
The fact that it caught so many off-base that Obama, not only won re-election but with a pretty hefty margin in the PV and EC shouldn't have been too shocking if you were following the polls.

But for weeks, we heard that the polls were skewed.. that they couldn't be taken at face value.. they oversampled Democrats.. that there was an air around Romney... none of that was ever proven in fact, but they went with it.

When your own candidate begins to believe this non-sense, and is shocked that he lost.. it becomes a problem.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

~Edit~
Also, I think they need to start dealing in the world of facts.
The fact that it caught so many off-base that Obama, not only won re-election but with a pretty hefty margin in the PV and EC shouldn't have been too shocking if you were following the polls.

But for weeks, we heard that the polls were skewed.. that they couldn't be taken at face value.. they oversampled Democrats.. that there was an air around Romney... none of that was ever proven in fact, but they went with it.

When your own candidate begins to believe this non-sense, and is shocked that he lost.. it becomes a problem.

Thank you.

The media needs to start doing this too. Who cares what the democrats or republicans say, both sides will always say whatever it takes to make their voters more confident that they have a chance. Focus on neutral polls and don't make excuses. Obviously the pre election polling isn't 100% accurate, but at least point out that it would be a huge upset of Romney were to pull it off.