Something to ponder re: the 2016 election
 

People voted for Clinton (twice) because they were tired of Reagan and Bush 1.

They voted for W (twice) because they were tired of Clinton.

They voted for Obama (twice) because they were tired of W.

Maybe there's hope for 2016. That's just my half-assed theory, anyway- that politics is like a pendulum- swings one way for a while, then comes back and swings the other.

I hope that's the case, anyway.

Welfare programs will continue to be expanded for the next four years. Millions of illegals will be added to the voter rolls, who vote 75% Democrat. Our Republic is now a Democracy where the majority give themselves money from the minority.

I agree about the ideological pendulum swings, to a degree.

I have a somewhat different take though. The American people didn't elect Clinton out of a rejection of Bush. I say this for two reasons.

1) In Clinton's first campaign in 1992, he actually ran a very conservative campaign for a Democrat. Certainly nothing like Mondale or Dukakis did. Of course those of us who knew better, knew he was lying about his intentions. But still though, there were no particularly radical positions he was campaigning on.

2) The real reason Clinton was elected was because of Ross Perot. Had it not been for Perot entering the race, Bush most likely would've been reelected in 1992, although most likely a close election.

If Hillary doesn't run, I think the republicans could put up Quayle and win.

:rofl::rofl::rofl: True. HH

From here on out, elections are no longer @policy.... It's about which party can give me more freebies...

Obama did not win on "freebies." Romney lost because the Republicans have become blithering idiots. HH

Quote:
~ "A democracy is always temporary in nature.....it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that "voters" discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, ***which is always followed by a dictatorship`
***We now have too many takers and not enough givers, to fix things" ~

Are you dumb or just stoopid??? :faint:

There but for the grace of God...goes everyone. HH

While Obama got a lot of votes from the FSA. It should be noted that FEWER people voted this past Tuesday then four years ago. Obama actually received FEWER votes Tuesday than he did four years ago. Roughly 3 million votes separated Obama and Romney this past Tuesday which was FEWER than the votes that separated Obama from McCain four years earlier.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/
Obama: 66,882,230 votes - 365 Electoral Votes
McCain: 58,343,671 votes - 173 Electoral Votes

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/main
Obama: 61,617,148 votes - 303 Electoral Votes
Romney: 58,460,704 votes - 206 Electoral Votes

The truth that almost no one wants to believe.

Plan. Prepare.

This is what has been missing from press coverage. Obama is a severely dimished president now.

2014 should be interesting. By then I suspect many Dems on the edge will tell him to stay away. The Dems in 2016 may very well be saying they will not be like Obama. Remember Gore not using Bill Clinton? Same thing.

Maybe. Maybe not. All I know is I want my "Bama-phone"

Check the exit polls. It was all about Gvt supplied freebies....

This may be one of my last posts on this topic.

1. The composition of our population has changed. There are far more minorities who are now interested in politics, and who are eligible to vote, compared to 12 years ago.

2. More women are voting as well.

Those two blocks of voters tend to prefer the party that is seen as more compassionate. The party that takes care of and looks out for the fellow man. The party that is not hasty to war. The party that is open minded on abortion. The party that recognizes that although someone is here illegally, they may still be a "decent" person (kinda like the fact that while many break the speed limit on multiple occasions each day they are not filled with visions of being the rebirth of Charles Manson).

Those people would rather to see the entire country implode into a black hole of debt and under the crush of those who leech from the system than cut one entitlement.

If .gov ran like I run my house when expenditure exceeds income I cut spending, or as a last resort, borrow.

When people show up, or attempt to show up at my door uninvited I refuse them entry.

I try to not be bothered about how my neighbor lives his life, UNLESS he brings harm to his dependents, or infringes on my own freedoms.

...but that's just me. YMMV.

Until the Republicans ditch the Christian Conservative nonsense, we'll never win another election.

When I'm talking to my fellow Republicans, none of them has ever mentioned abortion, birth control, gay marriage, or marijuana.

The times have changed, if we don't we'll end up like the dinosaurs. They were unwilling to change too.

Very few want to admit that the Jerry Falwell virus that infected the republican party is what's killing it.

It needs to be purged. No one wants to live in a theocracy regardless of what they call their invisible man.

Christian Conservative vote is very importation with out them the Republicans go no where.

Where did the Christian Conservatives take them this election?



There was an interesting article a few weeks before the election where the author wrote about Catholics. Essentially saying that they were a bellweather for how the election would go. He used plenty of historical data to make his point. Even though Catholics are very religous and can vote accordingly they are also capable of separating their religious values from their earthly needs.

The Christian Conservatives act like the American Taliban sometimes. It turns off a lot of voters.

The Christian Conservatives helped elect Ronald Reagan and helped Bush II, but look haw close that one was. They are like the New Deal Coalition for the Dems. They were very powerful until times changed. Now I would argue there is an Obama Coalition.

The GOP needs to get with the times. I suspect they won't until they loose again in 2016. They may have to do it in 2020 too before the message gets recieved by all.

The difference is ...

Clinton signed welfare reform into law, which reduced his support from welfare recipients.

Obama is expanding welfare, which increases his support from welfare recipients.

2016 will mean the welfare recipients will vote for whoever can keep the free stuff flowing.

There is much to ponder when looking at the CNN exit polling information...
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/res...ent#exit-polls

Is the GOP establishment listening? If I had to guess, probably not.

Very interesting. Looking over the data, the GOP should be careful as to what positions they should change otherwise they may do even worse.

They have strong support from certain groups they need not alienate.

There is room for improvement but Obama defined the Republicans and the sheeple bought it.

Going Democrat -Lite will not work.

More and more I believe Romney lost because he is a Mormon.

What a shame.

The GOP went Dem-lite with both McCain and Romney. Didn't work.

What the sheeple bought was the MSM created image of both Obama and Romney. No matter what Romney did he was painted by the MSM as some sort of racist, woman hating, religious nut out to cut every one's government entitlements.