Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on November 05, 2014, 12:41:47 PM
-
http://m.thenation.com/blog/188153-democrats-lost-big-tonight-why-obama-should-double-down
-
http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/his-party-is-at-a-low-point-and-obama-seems-passive-20141105
Obama has been awesome for the GOP and terrible for the commies
-
Obama has been awesome for the GOP and terrible for the commies
Obamacare has been awesome for the GOP?
IMO, Obama has been awesome for the goals of the liberals.
-
http://m.thenation.com/blog/188153-democrats-lost-big-tonight-why-obama-should-double-down
Yeah that's the ticket. Completely polarize DC even more than it is now, and don't do what Reagan and Clinton did by reaching across the aisle. Who is this hack??
-
I guarantee that the left doesn't put much stock in the mid-term elections. They will write the results off as being a by-product of their base not showing up for the mid-terms. For the left, the results should not be considered representative of the will of the people. According to the lefts math, the will of the people is the sum total of the people who voted left, those who lean left and stayed home, those who lean left but don't vote and those who can't vote like illegals. This means the left will not change it's tune at all because it still feels its agenda is the will of the people.
-
I guarantee that the left doesn't put much stock in the mid-term elections. They will write the results off as being a by-product of their base not showing up for the mid-terms. For the left, the results should not be considered representative of the will of the people. According to the lefts math, the will of the people is the sum total of the people who voted left, those who lean left and stayed home, those who lean left but don't vote and those who can't vote like illegals. This means the left will not change it's tune at all because it still feels its agenda is the will of the people.
I think it's because the brutal beatdown the Dems received in 2010.... then 2 years later... Repubs can't even choose a conservative, and they lose bigtime in 2012 POTUS election.
When EVERYONE shows up - for presidential elections -the Dems have an edge, and we all know it. I think that's why they aren't as panicked now. IF repubs choose another RINO, it'll be similar to 08 and 12. Everyone will show up to vote, and 53% will vote for the dem.
Now, that ALL changes if repubs choose a conservative like Cruz or even rand.
-
I think it's because the brutal beatdown the Dems received in 2010.... then 2 years later... Repubs can't even choose a conservative, and they lose bigtime in 2012 POTUS election.
When EVERYONE shows up - for presidential elections -the Dems have an edge, and we all know it. I think that's why they aren't as panicked now. IF repubs choose another RINO, it'll be similar to 08 and 12. Everyone will show up to vote, and 53% will vote for the dem.
Now, that ALL changes if repubs choose a conservative like Cruz or even rand.
The Democrats aren't going to have the same turnout in 2016 even if they run Hilary. Black voters aren't going to show up in the same numbers for an old white lady as they did for Obama. The enthusiasm won't be there. The Dems may pull out a win but it will be a close race. 2016 is not 2008.
-
The Democrats aren't going to have the same turnout in 2016 even if they run Hilary. Black voters aren't going to show up in the same numbers for an old white lady as they did for Obama. The enthusiasm won't be there. The Dems may pull out a win but it will be a close race. 2016 is not 2008.
Sorry, but I have to disagree, and I have proof why it's not the case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#mediaviewer/File:Barack_Obama%27s_Presidential_Job_Approval_Ratings,_2009-2012_(Gallup_Poll).svg
By mid 2012 (right before the 2012 elections), Obama was very low (Lower than he even is today) - and he still won by a large margin over Romney.
Voters DID show up for an unpopular obama, just as they did for a popular obama - which tells me it's not about obama - it's about "voting against the Repub". And that's fine.
The PROBLEM is that 20% of 2004 voter Repubs stayed home in 2008. A few more showed up in 2012, but not enough to help.
-
Sorry, but I have to disagree, and I have proof why it's not the case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#mediaviewer/File:Barack_Obama%27s_Presidential_Job_Approval_Ratings,_2009-2012_(Gallup_Poll).svg
By mid 2012 (right before the 2012 elections), Obama was very low (Lower than he even is today) - and he still won by a large margin over Romney.
Voters DID show up for an unpopular obama, just as they did for a popular obama - which tells me it's not about obama - it's about "voting against the Repub". And that's fine.
The PROBLEM is that 20% of 2004 voter Repubs stayed home in 2008. A few more showed up in 2012, but not enough to help.
I'm not sure how this relates to my post.
-
I'm not sure how this relates to my post.
my point is that obama can drop 10 points and he still wins by same margin.
-
my point is that obama can drop 10 points and he still wins by same margin.
I was talking about 2016 and unless you know something I don't he won't be running.
-
“To everyone that voted, I want you to know that I heard you,” Obama began. “To two-thirds of voters that chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too.”
This is an example of how Obama and the Democrats think. The election has no meaning for these people. No one should be surprised when he continues to do exactly what he planned to do. People and pundits will scratch their heads in confusion but its fairly obvious where the lefts head is.
-
“To everyone that voted, I want you to know that I heard you,” Obama began. “To two-thirds of voters that chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too.”
This is an example of how Obama and the Democrats think. The election has no meaning for these people. No one should be surprised when he continues to do exactly what he planned to do. People and pundits will scratch their heads in confusion but its fairly obvious where the lefts head is.
He is hell bent on destroying this nation - its that simple
-
He is hell bent on destroying this nation - its that simple
He doesn't look at it that way. He thinks hes acting in the best interest of the people including the illegals he considers citizens. Voting doesn't mean much in their opinion. The results of the election are not representative of the peoples will.
His election is the will of the people therefore his policy is the will of the people. This is how he thinks.
Obama made sure to draw a contrast with Republicans in Congress by noting that he is the figure with the most political legitimacy. “I’m the guy who is elected by everybody and not just from a particular state or a particular district,” Obama said when asked to address the “devastating losses” his party endured, “and they want me to push hard to close some of these divisions, break through some of the gridlock, and just get stuff done.”
-
He doesn't look at it that way. He thinks hes acting in the best interest of the people including the illegals he considers citizens. Voting doesn't mean much in their opinion. The results of the election are not representative of the peoples will.
His election is the will of the people therefore his policy is the will of the people. This is how he thinks.
Obama made sure to draw a contrast with Republicans in Congress by noting that he is the figure with the most political legitimacy. “I’m the guy who is elected by everybody and not just from a particular state or a particular district,” Obama said when asked to address the “devastating losses” his party endured, “and they want me to push hard to close some of these divisions, break through some of the gridlock, and just get stuff done.”
He sees himself as a dictator and king. F him
-
“To everyone that voted, I want you to know that I heard you,” Obama began. “To two-thirds of voters that chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too.”
This is an example of how Obama and the Democrats think. The election has no meaning for these people. No one should be surprised when he continues to do exactly what he planned to do. People and pundits will scratch their heads in confusion but its fairly obvious where the lefts head is.
Pure arrogance.
He previously said go win an election, and now that Republicans have won an election, he says it doesn't matter.
-
Pure arrogance.
He previously said go win an election, and now that Republicans have won an election, he says it doesn't matter.
He thinks the election results are just the grumblings of a small vocal minority. According to his math, the majority of the people still support him and his agenda. Like I said before, his America is composed of those that voted for him, those that stayed home, those that don't vote and those who can't vote. Add that all together and in his mind you have a majority.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/06/white-house-reporter-its-as-if-obama-didnt-quite-pay-attention-to-midterm-results-video
He does not give a fuck whatasoever
-
He thinks the election results are just the grumblings of a small vocal minority. According to his math, the majority of the people still support him and his agenda. Like I said before, his America is composed of those that voted for him, those that stayed home, those that don't vote and those who can't vote. Add that all together and in his mind you have a majority.
Maybe a lot of the people who stayed home thinks he sucks? I doubt he believes that, but I bet they make up a substantial number of the no-shows.
-
He sees himself as a dictator and king. F him
he's a big wuss if that is the case.
saddam was a dicator. he would shoot and hang and torture his political enemies on the streets.
obama's a leader of at Constitution-based federal republic.
Not the same as a dictatorship.
-
he's a big wuss if that is the case.
saddam was a dicator. he would shoot and hang and torture his political enemies on the streets.
obama's a leader of at Constitution-based federal republic.
Not the same as a dictatorship.
and you not only voted for him twice, but have supported him non stop on here for 6 years.
-
and you not only voted for him twice, but have supported him non stop on here for 6 years.
But but but . . . impeachment . . . .
-
I guarantee that the left doesn't put much stock in the mid-term elections. They will write the results off as being a by-product of their base not showing up for the mid-terms. For the left, the results should not be considered representative of the will of the people. According to the lefts math, the will of the people is the sum total of the people who voted left, those who lean left and stayed home, those who lean left but don't vote and those who can't vote like illegals. This means the left will not change it's tune at all because it still feels its agenda is the will of the people.
yeah, it's just a myth that turnout it low for the mid-terms
don't believe it even if the facts support it
It's just a myth
http://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361820838/midterm-elections-may-have-had-record-low-turnout
It's well known that the turnout in midterm elections is a lot lower than in presidential years. In the past two presidential elections, around 130 million Americans cast votes. In the midterms four years ago, 91 million voters took part. That number represented 42 percent of the American population of voting age. This year - well, the numbers aren't official yet, and political scientist Michael McDonald of the University of Florida who tracks such things told me today that the total is likely to rise a little as late arriving mail-in ballots and other missing votes are counted.
But as of today, according to numbers from the Associated Press, a bit over 83 million people voted. As a share of the voting-eligible population, that is 36.6 percent. It was a lot higher than that in Colorado and New Hampshire where there were very hard-fought Senate races.
But if after all the votes are counted, if the national turnout rate doesn't reach 38.1 percent, it would be the lowest turnout since the midterm elections of 1942. And as Michael McDonald points out, that was in the middle of the Second World War.
-
yeah, it's just a myth that turnout it low for the mid-terms
don't believe it even if the facts support it
It's just a myth
http://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361820838/midterm-elections-may-have-had-record-low-turnout
Who said its a myth. I've said it plenty of times.
-
Who said its a myth. I've said it plenty of times.
fair enough
I don't read all of your posts
-
Obama before the election: "My policies are on the ballot"
Obama after the election: "I dont want to read tea leaves"....“The principles that we’re fighting for, the things that motivate me every single day and motivate my staff every day, those things aren’t going to change. There’s going to be a consistent focus on how we deliver more opportunity to more people in this country.”
-
Obama before the election: "My policies are on the ballot"
Obama after the election: "I dont want to read tea leaves"....“The principles that we’re fighting for, the things that motivate me every single day and motivate my staff every day, those things aren’t going to change. There’s going to be a consistent focus on how we deliver more opportunity to more people in this country.”
Like I said, Obama doesn't believe the people who voted the mid-terms represent the will of the people. They aren't to whom he refers when he talks about delivering more opportunity to more people in this country.
-
Like I said, Obama doesn't believe the people who voted the mid-terms represent the will of the people. They aren't to whom he refers when he talks about delivering more opportunity to more people in this country.
I dont know, I actually think he might believe that the people voting against his policies means that will of the people doesnt want his agenda.
The issue is that he simply doesnt give a shit.....
-
Interesting information
To understand the difficulties Dems will face in a post-Obama environment, it’s essential to understand what happened in their recent nationwide wipe-out. Conventional wisdom argues that the main reason the administration and its allies went from champs to chumps involved the “paler and frailer” midterm electorate, with fewer minorities and young people than in the presidential contest of two years before. According to this assumption, reduced participation by blacks, Latinos and under-thirties allowed aging, angry white guys to dominate the Congressional elections and take over the Senate, governorships and state legislatures.
But the numbers indicate that voting goes down for every group in mid-terms – even declining somewhat for older white males. As a result, the percentage of black voters fell by only one point – from 13% in 2012 to 12% in 2014 – hardly a decisive or catastrophic collapse. The overall percentage of white voters increased only modestly in the Republicans’ recent triumph, hardly enough to explain the dramatically different outcomes in the two most recent contests. In 2012, white, non-Hispanic voters comprised 72% of the electorate; this week, in the mid-term elections, they amounted to 75%.
Moreover, among that white majority, Republican candidates in 2014 almost exactly replicated Mitt Romney’s dominance of two years before. The GOP nominee earned 59% of white voters against Barack Obama, while Republican candidates this year got 60%.
The real improvement for the GOP showed up in their electoral performance among non-white voters. Republicans of 2014 nearly doubled Romney’s pathetic 6% share of the black vote. They also significantly increased their percentage of Latino voters: scoring 36% instead of 27%. Most notably, they actually got a full 50% of Asian ballots (while making a major effort to reach out to this growing community), in stark contrast to Romney’s miserable Asian showing of 26% in 2012.
And what about the age factor? It’s true that young people voted at a lower rate in the mid-term elections – they always do when a presidential contest isn’t on the ballot. Among the 2014 electorate, voters below age 30 represented 13% of the total, compared to 19% of all voters in 2012. But similarly striking was the more competitive appeal of Republicans when it came to attracting these youthful citizens, drawing 43% this year instead of 37% just two years ago. Among all other age groups in the population, GOP support almost exactly replicated the results of 2012, so the difference-maker for 2014 wasn’t just that fewer young people showed up, but that Republicans also did much better among those who did.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/medved-obama-role-race-and-gop-victory
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/04/us/politics/2014-exit-polls.html