Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That's 100% true. The problem is, SWING VOTERS don't, and that was who cost you this election. Swing voters thought Palin damaged the ticket. So nominate more and more conservatives if you want (please!), but swing voters will keep on rejecting them. You can't win an election with a nominee that only hard-core party loyalists like. You have to appeal most of all to the 3-4% who switch hit. Obama appealed to them with his talk of bringing people together and fixing the mess, Palin did not appeal to them with her winking and her monkey-waving supporters.
See, I'm not sure if this is exactly a "swing" voter issue or not. IT seems to me, that there may be something else going on. Like, when the Democrats mobilize a ton of young and non-traditional ( read minority) voters, and have record turn outs.. they do well. It's not like these voters were considering Obama or McCain.. they were choosing between Obama and not voting at all. Conversely, the republican party does well when it drums up as much of their traditional base as they can. Base members like balloon guy are always going to vote, and baring shoddy iron play, always going to vote GOP, but not all of the "base" are as good and consistent of citizens ( if gambling off your vote is considered good citizenship. The money he gave the campaign was worth more than his vote, anyway). The "Swing" voters, the people who vote Dem or Gop, from year to year, I would wager do so way less about the policy of the candidate, and way more with the politics of it.. IE how they feel about the candidate. Right now people feel angry and feel they want a change, and they feel that Obama is a leader. Before, they felt that W was a down to earth guy, like them, who you could trust. Swing voters, I think, give way less of a shit about "issues" and way more of a shit about how they perceive the candidates "leadership qualities" and how well they are doing economically at the time ( which rarely has anything to do with the president anyway, but people get pissed the economy is bad, and are looking for someone to blame.) I know BG wants to feel extra loved by the national candidates, and wants candidates that support his specific interests, and because of that, he is biased into thinking that "his" candidates are more electable. The truth is, policy matters way less than thinking people would like to believe, and who gets elected has way more to do with how the candidates make people feel. Elections are popularity contests, a bare step above beauty contest.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 630
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes, this is horrible, this post.

Turns out I'd do, what I've always done, cash farm subsidy checks and compulsively masturbate.

The majority didn't vote against him. The majority stayed home.   The GOP candidate had less votes in 2016 than in 2012 or 2008, when they lost both times.   Dems (and repubs) just HATED Hillar

I have to agree with this as most politicians are going to lie to you about the issues anyway. For one thing, we ask them to lie to us. In order to get elected a politician has to tell you what you want to hear. If they don't then you don't vote for them. It's also true of the so-called character issues. In order to be a politician and succeed you have to be willing to throw anybody including close friends under the bus to win votes. How many of you have had or have someone in your wider circle that would be a detriment to your running for office? And would you be willing to trash them to get elected? But obviously this is what we require of our politicians. If you want to get right down to it, the POTUS has more in common with a mafia don than with Mother Theresa. They have to be able to compartmentalize enough not to have nightmares about ordering our military to take out a target knowing full well that there could and probably will be innocent civilians even children killed. And they have to be able to do that and then turn around and meet with say a group of school children in the Rose Garden afterwards without missing a beat. It's the kind of thing that gives our soldiers PTSD. It's something that a normal human being would say "shit no" to but which we ask of our POTUS to be able to do. We want them to be able to order such a hit and still be able to go to church and even have the balls to ask them to be "pro-life". This means that the person we elect to be POTUS can't really be the kind of guy we would want to have a beer with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's 100% true. The problem is, SWING VOTERS don't, and that was who cost you this election. Swing voters thought Palin damaged the ticket. So nominate more and more conservatives if you want (please!), but swing voters will keep on rejecting them. You can't win an election with a nominee that only hard-core party loyalists like. You have to appeal most of all to the 3-4% who switch hit. Obama appealed to them with his talk of bringing people together and fixing the mess, Palin did not appeal to them with her winking and her monkey-waving supporters.
Again, we had the MOST attractive person to these so called important swing voters, and we lost big. The facts say you are wrong.Here is the battleground poll results for politcal leanings in americaIn August 2008, Americans answered that question this way: (1) 20% of Americans considered themselves to be very conservative; (2) 40% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat conservative; (3) 2% of Americans considered themselves to be moderate; (4) 27% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat liberal; (5) 9% of Americans considered themselves to be very liberal; and (6) 3% of Americans did not know or refused to answer.LinkAny Republican running for office that puts the 2% ahead of the 60% deserves to lose. coughChris Shaycough
I'm guessing you mean the VP debate got higher ratings than any of the presidential debates? Anyways, I don't see that as a point for Palin. The reason everybody was so interested in the debate was because she was so unknown, and had recently been criticized for her lack of qualifications. So people tuned in to see if she was any good, or to see just how bad she was.
Have we ever known any of the VP picks?How do you think she did in that debate?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, we had the MOST attractive person to these so called important swing voters, and we lost big. The facts say you are wrong.Here is the battleground poll results for politcal leanings in americaIn August 2008, Americans answered that question this way: (1) 20% of Americans considered themselves to be very conservative; (2) 40% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat conservative; (3) 2% of Americans considered themselves to be moderate; (4) 27% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat liberal; (5) 9% of Americans considered themselves to be very liberal; and (6) 3% of Americans did not know or refused to answer.LinkAny Republican running for office that puts the 2% ahead of the 60% deserves to lose. coughChris Shaycough
If people style themselves "conservative" but vote democratic, what use is a poll like that? Results matter and the Senate, the House of rep and the president all say you're wrong.
Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you think she did in that debate?
I thought she did ok, maybe about a 3 out of 10, if 10 is absolutely awesome and 1 is incoherent rambling and cursing. I'm not saying Biden did great either, but he won by any reasonable person's estimation. My favorite part was when she agreed with Dick Cheney that the position of VP has "a lot of flexibility," when asked whether she thought the VP was also a member of the legislature. Biden countered that, "Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. [Cheney] works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."
Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought she did ok, maybe about a 3 out of 10, if 10 is absolutely awesome and 1 is incoherent rambling and cursing. I'm not saying Biden did great either, but he won by any reasonable person's estimation. My favorite part was when she agreed with Dick Cheney that the position of VP has "a lot of flexibility," when asked whether she thought the VP was also a member of the legislature. Biden countered that, "Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. [Cheney] works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."
Biden confused which part of the Constitution covers the Executive Branch (it is Article II, not Article I). More importantly, the notion that the vice president can preside over the Senate only when there is a tie vote is simply wrong. Nor is it true that the only legislative involvement the vice president has is to break tie votes. The vice president is the president of the Senate, where he interprets the rules and can only be overridden by a vote of 60 senators.it was Palin who got it right. Besides correctly stating that the vice president holds positions in both the executive and legislative branches, she also noted that:Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chooses to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html
Link to post
Share on other sites
Biden confused which part of the Constitution covers the Executive Branch (it is Article II, not Article I).
Constitution of the United StatesArticle 1, Section 3:The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Constitution of the United StatesArticle 1, Section 3:The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
Article 2 Covers the Executive BranchArticle Two describes the presidency (the executive branch). The article establishes the manner of election and qualifications of the President, the oath to be affirmed and the powers and duties of the office. The President must be a natural born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. It also provides for the office of Vice President, and specifies that the Vice President succeeds to the presidency if the President is removed, unable to discharge the powers and duties of office, dies while in office, or resigns. The original text ("the same shall devolve") leaves it unclear whether this succession was intended to be on an acting basis (merely taking on the powers of the office) or permanent (assuming the Presidency itself). After the death of William Henry Harrison, John Tyler set the precedent that the succession was permanent, and this was followed in practice; the 25th Amendment explicitly states that the Vice President becomes President in those cases. Article Two also provides for the impeachment and removal from office of all officers of the government.from the debate:Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.Joe Biden
Link to post
Share on other sites
Article 2 Covers the Executive BranchArticle Two describes the presidency (the executive branch). The article establishes the manner of election and qualifications of the President, the oath to be affirmed and the powers and duties of the office. The President must be a natural born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. It also provides for the office of Vice President, and specifies that the Vice President succeeds to the presidency if the President is removed, unable to discharge the powers and duties of office, dies while in office, or resigns. The original text ("the same shall devolve") leaves it unclear whether this succession was intended to be on an acting basis (merely taking on the powers of the office) or permanent (assuming the Presidency itself). After the death of William Henry Harrison, John Tyler set the precedent that the succession was permanent, and this was followed in practice; the 25th Amendment explicitly states that the Vice President becomes President in those cases. Article Two also provides for the impeachment and removal from office of all officers of the government.from the debate:Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.Joe Biden
I don't understand what you mean. Biden's statement there is not refuted by the paragraph preceding it. Also you have yet to explain what you mean by "More importantly, the notion that the vice president can preside over the Senate only when there is a tie vote is simply wrong. Nor is it true that the only legislative involvement the vice president has is to break tie votes."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.The Role of the executive branch is in Article 2 - Not 1This is what the Constitution says about any and all roles of the Vice President:1.The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided. 2.The Senate shall chose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.3.The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term.4."In the Electoral College" The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.5.Then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.6.If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President.7.If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified.8.Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4."In the Electoral College" The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.Legislative duties...The point was the Consitutional Scholar Joe Biden got the the answer wrong in the debate

Link to post
Share on other sites
4."In the Electoral College" The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.Legislative duties...The point was the Consitutional Scholar Joe Biden got the the answer wrong in the debate
Cheney has been "opening" too many "certificates" I guess.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just jumping back in since last time I checked this thread someone had posted the hilarious link about how the market tanked after Obama was elected but made no mention of the correlation, and we had some discussion of media bias. I thought I'd throw some more fuel on the fire. So during election night every channel was blathering about how this was an inspiring election and how the american people had so much courage to elect Obama and how the whole world would be inspired by this etc etc. (Like it was unequivically the 'right and good' thing to do to elect him and if McCain had won it would have been a failure for the good people of america to not vote for him etc etc.)So today on CNN.com on the front page I see an ad FROM CNN for a shirt that says: Obama inspires historic victory. You saw it here on CNN!LOL yeah, not biased at all :)Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, I believe that the Republican Party will still be looking more for the social conservative than the fiscal one. And as long as fiscal conservatism is on the back burner, they will have a hard time drawing back those who went Obama or 3rd party this year. Regardless of what you may think it's still "the economy stupid".

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sadly, I believe that the Republican Party will still be looking more for the social conservative than the fiscal one. And as long as fiscal conservatism is on the back burner, they will have a hard time drawing back those who went Obama or 3rd party this year. Regardless of what you may think it's still "the economy stupid".
I know more fiscal conservatives that aren't social conservatives than social conservatives that aren't fiscal conservatives.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I know more fiscal conservatives that aren't social conservatives than social conservatives that aren't fiscal conservatives.
But when push comes to shove the fiscally conservative policies will get jettisoned long before the social ones do.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just jumping back in since last time I checked this thread someone had posted the hilarious link about how the market tanked after Obama was elected but made no mention of the correlation, and we had some discussion of media bias. I thought I'd throw some more fuel on the fire. So during election night every channel was blathering about how this was an inspiring election and how the american people had so much courage to elect Obama and how the whole world would be inspired by this etc etc. (Like it was unequivically the 'right and good' thing to do to elect him and if McCain had won it would have been a failure for the good people of america to not vote for him etc etc.)So today on CNN.com on the front page I see an ad FROM CNN for a shirt that says: Obama inspires historic victory. You saw it here on CNN!LOL yeah, not biased at all :club: Mark
The Washington Post "fairness" editor, or whatever her title is, said "Oh, duh, my analysis shows we were biased in favor of Obama. No shit Sherlock.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...