quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

quote:

ORIGINAL: FMRFGOPGAL

I'm with you on both sentiments (good work Tazzy), and I too am pooped. We all felt ill at the office around dinner time and were prescribed 2 ounces of Litlle Rhody Medical Marijuana. I am fried and tired.
G'night Tazzy G'Night Lucy

Knowing you're a doper explains volumes...

-SD-

quote:

ORIGINAL: absolutchocolat

sugar, i've studied latin american history in depth, i'm well aware of that. however, religion is not the main predictor of how people vote, though it is influential. posting a map of latin america isn't going to change the fact that we are talking about american citizens with latino heritage who practice a range of different religions, have different life experiences, who vote in the united states.

also, your little map needs to include islands in the caribbean...i'm not sure what site you lifted it from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

quote:

ORIGINAL: FMRFGOPGAL

I'm with you on both sentiments (good work Tazzy), and I too am pooped. We all felt ill at the office around dinner time and were prescribed 2 ounces of Litlle Rhody Medical Marijuana. I am fried and tired.
G'night Tazzy G'Night Lucy

Knowing you're a doper explains volumes...

-SD-

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

so let me get this straight? you dont like freedom to abstain or participate in religion? YOu dont want to own property? you want the right to speak against to be illegal?
the bear to bear to gone?
You dont even what far right....The republican est. certainly doesnt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

quote:

Four... Obama squeaked by... not so much because of who he is.. but who he ran against. Romney was feared by women and the minority vote. Something the GOP may want to keep in mind next time. That doesnt give Obama a pass. He needs to deliver on his promises this time around. Else I see the WH going definitely Republican next time.

This.

Congrats to President Obama.

I hope the republican party will perhaps get the message that they need to choose better who they nominate, if they ever want the WH back.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

chained, I disagree in many ways, yes, the base came out and the ground game was strong, but it takes more than the base, more than the practical aspects of electioneering. The largest fundamental differences in the choice of candidates through the Republican Party was, who is the least objectionable, not who was best qualified. Romney had to suck up to the far right, he had to say the 47% BS, he had to retract his stance on abortion that he had held while governor of Mass, he had to disagree with a program he, himself helped develop, he couldn't be a moderate or a centrist because of who made up the party he was representing. The largest differences in Mitt the Governor, and Mitt the Presidential candidate were the social issues.

The Republicans will not win a Presidential election on social issues, they need to move to the center....stay out of religion, stay out of the people's bedroom, don't tell us what to believe, or that the public's beliefs are somehow not as good as those of the Republican's candidates.

Yes, I am a Democrat, a liberal, a progressive....that makes me on par in most of my beliefs with such people as Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon....amazing stuff...

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

quote:

Four... Obama squeaked by... not so much because of who he is.. but who he ran against. Romney was feared by women and the minority vote. Something the GOP may want to keep in mind next time. That doesnt give Obama a pass. He needs to deliver on his promises this time around. Else I see the WH going definitely Republican next time.

This.

Congrats to President Obama.

I hope the republican party will perhaps get the message that they need to choose better who they nominate, if they ever want the WH back.

I don't think we can simply say that"they need to choose better who they nominate".
Did you watch the debates ?
Did you see how far right Romney had to position himself in order to win ?
As long as the republican base demands that it's candidate move this far to the right in order to get thru the process....they will continue to watch as that candidate crashes and burns in the general.
Romney needed to re-brand himself to convince conservatives that he was conservative enough,having done so,and emerged as the man,he than had to try to find his way back to the center.
His famous "etch a sketch" move,which doesn't really work,no one in the center or left of center believes you,and those on the right feel betrayed/jilted.
A re-branding,a re-evaluation is needed by the Republican party is they ever again wish to place a man/woman in the Oval Office.The forces that make this so are simply growing larger as each day passes.Numbers are numbers and they do not lie.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

so let me get this straight? you dont like freedom to abstain or participate in religion? YOu dont want to own property? you want the right to speak against to be illegal?
the bear to bear to gone?
You dont even what far right....The republican est. certainly doesnt.

Would you mind translating that into fucking English?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Sorebutt McCain wasn't running as a left leaning pseudo-bluedog Conservative. That was how he got knocked out of the primaries against the chimp in 2000, wasn't it?
When he started campaigning in 2008, he went a lot further to the right to try to endear him to the wingnut neocons and Bible felchers, which turned off anybody who might have voted for a less rabid rightist, and many who wanted a right leaning wingnut as they worried that his wingnuttery and grovelling to the Religious right weren't sincere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

chained, I disagree in many ways, yes, the base came out and the ground game was strong, but it takes more than the base, more than the practical aspects of electioneering. The largest fundamental differences in the choice of candidates through the Republican Party was, who is the least objectionable, not who was best qualified. Romney had to suck up to the far right, he had to say the 47% BS, he had to retract his stance on abortion that he had held while governor of Mass, he had to disagree with a program he, himself helped develop, he couldn't be a moderate or a centrist because of who made up the party he was representing. The largest differences in Mitt the Governor, and Mitt the Presidential candidate were the social issues.

The Republicans will not win a Presidential election on social issues, they need to move to the center....stay out of religion, stay out of the people's bedroom, don't tell us what to believe, or that the public's beliefs are somehow not as good as those of the Republican's candidates.

Yes, I am a Democrat, a liberal, a progressive....that makes me on par in most of my beliefs with such people as Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon....amazing stuff...

They have been trying to do it with everybody except nixon and reagan....and they have been defeated...Moderation in governing leads to democrat victory. By his governing record, romney was what every washington establishment, non tea party republican wanted. and he was blue dog democrat running as a conservative...LIKE MCCAIN, and they lose every time. Nixon didnt win because he ran on liberal ideas, he ran on conservative principles....which lead to two landslide victories.
Obama didnt run on his record this election. No mention of obama care. Certainly didnt run on his bipartisianship...He didnt run on one social issue that he was truthful about. War ON women? should post the J-Z about mitt? He didnt run tarp or the bail outs, He didnt run on job creation...He didnt say anything....zero nodda zip.
In the end their is very little difference, in actual governing between mitt and barack....and why change for that.......
it makes the road back to capitalism, freedom much more difficult, but electing in the end may have been like electing mccain.
Moderation doesnt win...Ask the democrats. The win because they want to destroy the republican, kill it, whatever, but they do not moderate at all, they do not talk about reaching across the aisle, None of the crap you hear from the republican party powers that be. NONE OF IT.
the dems will continue to win and win until the repubicans understand that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

chained, I disagree in many ways, yes, the base came out and the ground game was strong, but it takes more than the base, more than the practical aspects of electioneering. The largest fundamental differences in the choice of candidates through the Republican Party was, who is the least objectionable, not who was best qualified. Romney had to suck up to the far right, he had to say the 47% BS, he had to retract his stance on abortion that he had held while governor of Mass, he had to disagree with a program he, himself helped develop, he couldn't be a moderate or a centrist because of who made up the party he was representing. The largest differences in Mitt the Governor, and Mitt the Presidential candidate were the social issues.

The Republicans will not win a Presidential election on social issues, they need to move to the center....stay out of religion, stay out of the people's bedroom, don't tell us what to believe, or that the public's beliefs are somehow not as good as those of the Republican's candidates.

Yes, I am a Democrat, a liberal, a progressive....that makes me on par in most of my beliefs with such people as Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon....amazing stuff...

They have been trying to do it with everybody except nixon and reagan....and they have been defeated...Moderation in governing leads to democrat victory. By his governing record, romney was what every washington establishment, non tea party republican wanted. and he was blue dog democrat running as a conservative...LIKE MCCAIN, and they lose every time. Nixon didnt win because he ran on liberal ideas, he ran on conservative principles....which lead to two landslide victories.
Obama didnt run on his record this election. No mention of obama care. Certainly didnt run on his bipartisianship...He didnt run on one social issue that he was truthful about. War ON women? should post the J-Z about mitt? He didnt run tarp or the bail outs, He didnt run on job creation...He didnt say anything....zero nodda zip.
In the end their is very little difference, in actual governing between mitt and barack....and why change for that.......
it makes the road back to capitalism, freedom much more difficult, but electing in the end may have been like electing mccain.
Moderation doesnt win...Ask the democrats. The win because they want to destroy the republican, kill it, whatever, but they do not moderate at all, they do not talk about reaching across the aisle, None of the crap you hear from the republican party powers that be. NONE OF IT.
the dems will continue to win and win until the repubicans understand that.

Do live on the same planet as the rest of us?...

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

so let me get this straight? you dont like freedom to abstain or participate in religion? YOu dont want to own property? you want the right to speak against to be illegal?
the bear to bear to gone?
You dont even what far right....The republican est. certainly doesnt.

Would you mind translating that into fucking English?

so you want the constitution to be whatever somebody says it is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: flyhumbleguy

By a slight majority both electorally and popular vote wise, Americans prefer Obama to Romney. They also seem to prefer gridlock like we've had the past two years. America is still at a crossroads and doesn't have its bearing. There isn't much of a mandate coming out of this election and just continued fence-sitting, waiting to see what implodes next.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

so let me get this straight? you dont like freedom to abstain or participate in religion? YOu dont want to own property? you want the right to speak against to be illegal?
the bear to bear to gone?
You dont even what far right....The republican est. certainly doesnt.

Would you mind translating that into fucking English?

so you want the constitution to be whatever somebody says it is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Sorebutt McCain wasn't running as a left leaning pseudo-bluedog Conservative. That was how he got knocked out of the primaries against the chimp in 2000, wasn't it?
When he started campaigning in 2008, he went a lot further to the right to try to endear him to the wingnut neocons and Bible felchers, which turned off anybody who might have voted for a less rabid rightist, and many who wanted a right leaning wingnut as they worried that his wingnuttery and grovelling to the Religious right weren't sincere.

he was talking about his version of obama care in 2008....bush was the more conservative of the two.....and he set up the democrat for two landslides.
Compassionate conservatism....a.k.a spend like the democrats and hope nobody notices....let kennedy write the education bill...MODERATe as moderate gets.....You can call the people who believe in the right win, conservatives whatever you want, but trust me you, you will be the first to bitch about your rights taken away....and the first they dispose of.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

I screwed it up.
answer the following question:
do you want the constitution to be whatever somebody says it is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: chainedandgagged

so let me get this straight? you dont like freedom to abstain or participate in religion? YOu dont want to own property? you want the right to speak against to be illegal?
the bear to bear to gone?
You dont even what far right....The republican est. certainly doesnt.

Would you mind translating that into fucking English?

so you want the constitution to be whatever somebody says it is?

none of that inchoate incogency is in the constitution.  It certainly dont say that.