Romney 2012: The Last Great White Campaign

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The GOP back then had a decent-sized progressive wing which was willing to work with FDR, and FDR (in hindsight a morally gray move) agreed to ignore civil rights in exchange for having conservative Southern Democrats vote with him on those 100 Days agreements.

If the GOP cared about moving America forward instead of waiting 4 years to get their turn, they'd work with the President on creating jobs.

[Link]

This might be the first election which doesn't have a racist element.  If Obama loses, it won't be because he's black.  If Romney wins, it won't be because he's white.

So just because he loses for other reasons means there is no way there is any racial element?  Says who?  What is with the unsubstantiated pronouncements?

The country suddenly became racist in four years?  The same group that selected him, rejected him, if he is rejected.  Obama wins or loses re-election based on his job performance.

Your non sequiturs are getting old.  That's why no one takes you seriously.

This might be the first election which doesn't have a racist element.

Did you see this...

The plant, oh sure.

Gee, I wonder if anyone suggested she was in the wild by reptiles. 

I love how you guys always have an excuse for this type of behavior and can follow it up with a wink.  Stay classy.

[AmericanNation]

This might be the first election which doesn't have a racist element.  If Obama loses, it won't be because he's black.  If Romney wins, it won't be because he's white.

So just because he loses for other reasons means there is no way there is any racial element?  Says who?  What is with the unsubstantiated pronouncements?

The country suddenly became racist in four years?  The same group that selected him, rejected him, if he is rejected.  Obama wins or loses re-election based on his job performance.

Your non sequiturs are getting old.  That's why no one takes you seriously.

This might be the first election which doesn't have a racist element.

Did you see this...

The plant, oh sure.

Gee, I wonder if anyone suggested she was in the wild by reptiles. 

I love how you guys always have an excuse for this type of behavior and can follow it up with a wink.  Stay classy.

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.  The interesting thing is that I've noticed teenagers make fun of this imagined racism stuff all the time.  It makes sense when you think about it, they know they aren't racist, their parents aren't, their friends aren't, their teachers aren't, almost nobody they know or have ever met under 60 years old is, so when someone makes a flimsy claim they just laugh at it without flinching. 

[J. J.]

[
The country suddenly became racist in four years?[/b]  The same group that selected him, rejected him, if he is rejected.  Obama wins or loses re-election based on his job performance.

Your non sequiturs are getting old.  That's why no one takes you seriously.

Oh, Link, you are rambling again.  You apparently don't understand that race isn't the factor; performance is.  People would suddenly fire someone that is doing a job because of his race. 

I love how you guys always have an excuse for this type of behavior and can follow it up with a wink.  Stay classy.

I don't excuse it, but I question if it:

A.  Was a delegate.

B.  Was racial, as opposed to being appalled by CNN.

The guy who did it was removed.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.

You mean fabrications like Republicans support Voter ID laws because they'll stop rampant voter fraud rather than because they'll impact Democratic-leaning voting groups most?

[opebo]

It is absurd to expect a president to change one's class condition.  Global capitalism clearly requires that nearly all American voters be impoverished, and neither candidate is opposing capitalism.

I agree with the first line.  Obama shouldn't have promised it

They all promise it, J.J., but their real function is to impoverish the serfs.  We have no anti-capitalist party.

[J. J.]

It is absurd to expect a president to change one's class condition.  Global capitalism clearly requires that nearly all American voters be impoverished, and neither candidate is opposing capitalism.

I agree with the first line.  Obama shouldn't have promised it

They all promise it, J.J., but their real function is to impoverish the serfs.  We have no anti-capitalist party.

That is because most Americans like success and see the failures of other systems.

[AmericanNation]

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.

You mean fabrications like Republicans support Voter ID laws because they'll stop rampant voter fraud rather than because they'll impact Democratic-leaning voting groups most?

I don't have first hand experience across the country, but I know voter fraud is a problem in Milwaukee, it is a problem in Chicago, and it was a problem in Racine this June.  Yes, democrats are the party that benefits from voter fraud, so they will be negatively effected if it is curtailed, but that isn't a reason to allow them to continue breaking the law.     

[後援会]

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.

You mean fabrications like Republicans support Voter ID laws because they'll stop rampant voter fraud rather than because they'll impact Democratic-leaning voting groups most?

Chillax. Here's Nate Silver explaining why chillaxing is good. Voter ID law doesn't make a huge impact.

The more likely political calculus is that considering 70-75% of Americans support Voter ID laws, the Republicans know that pushing it is a political winner, largely because Democrats do not chillax and find themselves acting very angrily on the more unpopular side of the issue.

[Person Man]

It is absurd to expect a president to change one's class condition.  Global capitalism clearly requires that nearly all American voters be impoverished, and neither candidate is opposing capitalism.

I agree with the first line.  Obama shouldn't have promised it

They all promise it, J.J., but their real function is to impoverish the serfs.  We have no anti-capitalist party.

That is because most Americans like success and see the failures of other systems.

This. And the morbid truth is the only reason why people were openminded during the Depression was because captialism wasn't working. As long as it sorta works, people will maintain it as the worst system...except for all the others....as long as it is kept in check.

[AmericanNation]

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.

You mean fabrications like Republicans support Voter ID laws because they'll stop rampant voter fraud rather than because they'll impact Democratic-leaning voting groups most?

Chillax. Here's Nate Silver explaining why chillaxing is good. Voter ID law doesn't make a huge impact.

The more likely political calculus is that considering 70-75% of Americans support Voter ID laws, the Republicans know that pushing it is a political winner, largely because Democrats do not chillax and find themselves acting very angrily on the more unpopular side of the issue.

It's popular because their isn't any downside and their is an upside.  
Less fraud and more confidence in the process vs. ??

We had voter ID for 1 election before it got tied up in a court injunction and the democrats were combing the state for someone who had been "disenfranchised" because they didn't have an ID.  They couldn't find a single person.  One guy had an ID, but refused to vote 'in protest' LOL.

 I heard one state had a provision in the law for the theoretical people in the state that would have an actual problem voting, that the polling place could take a picture of them and allow them to vote.  Not sure how you could object to such a common sense measure.  

[J. J.]

It is absurd to expect a president to change one's class condition.  Global capitalism clearly requires that nearly all American voters be impoverished, and neither candidate is opposing capitalism.

I agree with the first line.  Obama shouldn't have promised it

They all promise it, J.J., but their real function is to impoverish the serfs.  We have no anti-capitalist party.

That is because most Americans like success and see the failures of other systems.

This. And the morbid truth is the only reason why people were openminded during the Depression was because captialism wasn't working. As long as it sorta works, people will maintain it as the worst system...except for all the others....as long as it is kept in check.

And even there, in four to six years, it was back.

[Link]

I don't have first hand experience across the country, but I know voter fraud is a problem in Milwaukee, it is a problem in Chicago, and it was a problem in Racine this June.  Yes, democrats are the party that benefits from voter fraud, so they will be negatively effected if it is curtailed, but that isn't a reason to allow them to continue breaking the law.     

[jaichind]

Maybe we would have gotten more done if the GOP were willing to work with us at all. Their stated goal was to block as much as possible to stagnate Obama and make him easier to beat.

My view is that Dems does it to themselves.  Lets take the economic situation now.  I feel
it will continue to slide as various busineses will not spend money to invest until they know what
will happen to the fiscal cliff.  But the bad economy is one of the major factors making it hard
for Obama to get re-elected.  Dems seem to accuxe the GOP of trying to make the economy bad
so Obama easier to beat.  In response Dems does not seem to want to even come up with a deal with the GOP today to take this factor off the table as something that will make the investment climate worse.  Dems should offer a deal of pushing out the Bush II tax rates for 2 more years with the GOP to take the fiscal cliff off the table.  And whoever wins the 2012 elections have a whole year and maybe two to do whatever tax/fiscal/entitlement reform necessary to get this debt under control.  It is totally possible that the GOP will not take such a deal but I do not even seem the Dems trying.

[Sbane]

That is exactly the wrong approach and will only hurt the economy, Jaichind. A tax code that is permanent is needed but there is too much childishness and ego in Washington to get it done. Remember the fiscal cliff was set up in just that sort of deal. We can't continue doing that forever.

[後援会]

Maybe we would have gotten more done if the GOP were willing to work with us at all. Their stated goal was to block as much as possible to stagnate Obama and make him easier to beat.

My view is that Dems does it to themselves.  Lets take the economic situation now.  I feel
it will continue to slide as various busineses will not spend money to invest until they know what
will happen to the fiscal cliff.  But the bad economy is one of the major factors making it hard
for Obama to get re-elected.  Dems seem to accuxe the GOP of trying to make the economy bad
so Obama easier to beat.  In response Dems does not seem to want to even come up with a deal with the GOP today to take this factor off the table as something that will make the investment climate worse.  Dems should offer a deal of pushing out the Bush II tax rates for 2 more years with the GOP to take the fiscal cliff off the table.  And whoever wins the 2012 elections have a whole year and maybe two to do whatever tax/fiscal/entitlement reform necessary to get this debt under control.  It is totally possible that the GOP will not take such a deal but I do not even seem the Dems trying.

There's a problem with this. In short, Republicans want the sequesters to not happen (they're mostly) a lot more than the Democrats. And Republicans want the current tax code extended a lot more than the Democrats.

So this idea that both parties will meet in the middle is hard to see unfolding, because they're not negotiating from equal positions. My prediction is that the Democrats will refuse to offer the Republicans any kind of deal besides "do what we want", the Republicans will obviously not do what they want, and then we'll sail off the fiscal cliff.

[Sbane]

Don't underestimate the military industrial complex, Koenkai.

[後援会]

Don't underestimate the military industrial complex, Koenkai.

From what I've heard from family friends working in the defense industry, their clout is on the wane. And Pat Murray openly suggested sailing over the fiscal cliff despite being from Washington, home of Boeing, is a testament to their decreased influence. Not to mention the defense industry has never been as influential as people thought. Certainly they get a voice at the table, but the idea of a military-industrial complex is hyperbolic.

If anything, the biggest driver for defense spending has been congressman from economically distressed areas (see: Jack Murtha), who realize their districts are highly dependent on defense spending. And it's why Boehner's move to kill the F-35 engines was so surprising.

[Sbane]

Yes, both parties are dependent on military spending in their impoverished districts. But since they do tend to be concentrated more in rural (small town) areas, maybe Democrats are not as beholden to it as they were previously. They don't really hold the Murtha type districts anymore, replaced by populist Republicans.

[後援会]

Yes, both parties are dependent on military spending in their impoverished districts. But since they do tend to be concentrated more in rural (small town) areas, maybe Democrats are not as beholden to it as they were previously. They don't really hold the Murtha type districts anymore, replaced by populist Republicans.

They still hold some. Less than before, but still some.

But they do hold less. Which would naturally lead to Democrats being much more willing to jump off the fiscal cliff.

[LastVoter]

You would probably ignore this racial crap if you had fabrications thrown at you constantly.

You mean fabrications like Republicans support Voter ID laws because they'll stop rampant voter fraud rather than because they'll impact Democratic-leaning voting groups most?

Chillax. Here's Nate Silver explaining why chillaxing is good. Voter ID law doesn't make a huge impact.

The more likely political calculus is that considering 70-75% of Americans support Voter ID laws, the Republicans know that pushing it is a political winner, largely because Democrats do not chillax and find themselves acting very angrily on the more unpopular side of the issue.

It's popular because their isn't any downside and their is an upside.  
Less fraud and more confidence in the process vs. ??

We had voter ID for 1 election before it got tied up in a court injunction and the democrats were combing the state for someone who had been "disenfranchised" because they didn't have an ID.  They couldn't find a single person.  One guy had an ID, but refused to vote 'in protest' LOL.

 I heard one state had a provision in the law for the theoretical people in the state that would have an actual problem voting, that the polling place could take a picture of them and allow them to vote.  Not sure how you could object to such a common sense measure.  

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/17/1121432/-I-was-denied-free-voter-ID-today-Pennsylvania
 Voter ID law is about rigging elections for Republicans.

[後援会]

Remember, anecdotal evidence is superior to statistical research, especially if it's done by a left-leaning thinker.

[LastVoter]

Remember, anecdotal evidence is superior to statistical research, especially if it's done by a left-leaning thinker.

I thought Republicans liked anecdotal evidence?

[後援会]

Remember, anecdotal evidence is superior to statistical research, especially if it's done by a left-leaning thinker.

I thought Republicans liked anecdotal evidence?

Projection?

Seriously though, the tendency of certain people (from my opinion, usually leftists, but of course, not always) to assign negative traits to all people of very large political movements either betrays severe intellectual laziness, seriously disordered thinking, or the profile of a twelve-year old still living in a black&white-dichotomized world stumbling upon the interwebz.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Remember, anecdotal evidence is superior to statistical research, especially if it's done by a left-leaning thinker.

Like all that statistical research that showed about 3 cases of voter impersonation in Texas?