Liberal Losers - Obama needs to double down

[Soul Crusher]

http://m.thenation.com/blog/188153-democrats-lost-big-tonight-why-obama-should-double-down

[Soul Crusher]

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

[240 is Back]

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. 

[Dos Equis]

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?? 

[Archer77]

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. 

[240 is Back]

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.

[Archer77]

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. 

[240 is Back]

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. 

[Archer77]

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.

[240 is Back]

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. 

[Archer77]

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.

[Archer77]

“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.

[Soul Crusher]

“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

[Archer77]

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.”

[Soul Crusher]

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

[Dos Equis]

“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. 

[Archer77]

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.

[Soul Crusher]

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

[Dos Equis]

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. 

[240 is Back]

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.

[James]

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.

[Dos Equis]

and you not only voted for him twice, but have supported him non stop on here for 6 years.

But but but . . . impeachment . . . .

[Straw Man]

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.

[Archer77]

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. 

[Straw Man]

Who said its a myth. I've said it plenty of times. 

fair enough

I don't read all of  your posts