Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

    The Demographics of the US is changing with an increasing youth vote, more non-white voters and more non-Christians. The Republican policy of an over-reliance on white Christians voters will need to change if they hope to enter the white house. Their conservatism will need to be more moderate. I think social policy was the difference in this election.

    ?


    • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

      I'm so tired of hearing about this being "a deeply divided country".... it isn't. The people who voted for the other side live next door, you work with them, your kids go to school with their kids. We're all going to have to lean forward against the chilly breeze and hope the change in our pockets can pay the bills.

      ?


      • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

        Originally posted by Maddox View Post
        And here I though America celebrated its past as a country of immigrants.

        You know, that whole "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"... unless Latino, it seems.
        Perhaps that wasn't a comment about race, but rather about dysfunctional government?

        ?


        • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

          Interestingly enough the popular vote spread is almost exactly 2%.

          Right where the last few polls said they would be, within the margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 % (Range of major polls was 1% for Romney to 3% for Obama, the actual number is right on the average)

          WH2012: General

          So much for the often heard cry that polling was not accurate.

          ?


          • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

            Originally posted by RDK View Post
            Interestingly enough the popular vote spread is almost exactly 2%.

            Right where the last few polls said they would be, within the margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 % (Range of major polls was 1% for Romney to 3% for Obama, the actual number is right on the average)

            WH2012: General

            So much for the often heard cry that polling was not accurate.
            The polls far out from the election are meant to sway opinion, not measure it. Once the election nears, they start to get more accurate because the pollsters get paid based on how accurate their final guesses are.

            ?


            • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

              Originally posted by thanatos144 View Post
              If is shocking people voted in a man who let men die so he wouldn't look bad.... This country is fucked. At least the paulbots got what they wanted.
              Correction:

              "Paulbots" didn't want Obama's fascist ass to win tonight...on the contrary most of us can't stand his ass. I mean if you are a liberty voter, how the hell do you like Obama? You don't. Romney on the other hand is just as fascist as Obama. At least this way:

              1. the "free market" and "conservatism" will not be blamed for what is coming economically; socialism will, just as it should be blamed, under Romney "conservatism" would have been blamed

              2. Romney and the GOP get to learn a valuable lesson: embrace the liberty movement within the GOP or keep losing elections. I told you so. You guys said get out of the party, we don't need you guys. Well you lost AGAIN. In the future, stick to true conservative principles, the Constitution, and fiscal responsibility instead of nominating a Statist with an "R" next to his name, and you might just win.

              No, "Paulbots" did not get what we wanted. We wanted Ron Paul in office. We didn't get that.

              And by the way, what happened to that "truce" you asked for. Calling people "Paulbots" isn't exactly honoring a truce, nor is it doing what you need to be doing: embracing the core part of the GOP you told to go away that cemented your loss last night.

              You guys are not off to a good start for 2016. The "Paulbots" are, as we got at least 3 new Ron Paul Republicans got elected to the House.

              ?


              • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                The polls far out from the election are meant to sway opinion, not measure it. Once the election nears, they start to get more accurate because the pollsters get paid based on how accurate their final guesses are.
                Not wanting to add fire to fire but Silver's "forecast" got more accurate by climbing straight up for Obama in the last days of the election, to the point I thought of a technical bias. Just, just sayin'.

                ?


                • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                  Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
                  ahoy Ericsams2786,

                  imma thinkin' that the lesson conservatives take from this, regrettably, would be "why didn't we nominate Santorum?".

                  - MeadHallPirate
                  If they are dumb enough to think that and to ignore the hard demographic data and polling data right in front of them, they can lose in 2016 as well and not one liberty voter is going to give a shit.

                  ?


                  • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                    Well, this is where I get to eat crow so lets get it out of the way. I predicted a Romney win and I was wrong.

                    I was listening to OReilly last night [who is typically a blow hard I dont pay much attention to] and I think he made a good point; basically, he said the demographics have changed in this country over the last decade. And increasingly, there are more voters who vote according to what they can get out of the government. I think that explains why the polls were right all along.

                    It also vindicates Romneys 47% gaffe.

                    Obama hands out phones in OH and folks here in WV are worried about their jobs.

                    ?


                    • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                      I think the Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. The Old Guard Republicans are big government big spending bureaucrats just like the Democrats. The Conservative and Tea Party Republicans are trying to take power from them. Libs love to say that the Republicans need to become more liberal to win elections, thus McCain and Romney. Many Conservatives (ericams)would rather stay home or vote third party than vote for a liberal lite. I see this as a big problem for Republicans, especially as a bigger percentage of the citizenry gets on the dole or dependent on government for health care. Republicans can't win without the Religious Right and fiscal conservatives.

                      The Democrats strategy of wealth envy and keeping people on the dole has been very successful. People love to vote for their self interests and not in the best interests of the country in the long term. Paying for it will be a problem. The wealthy have a whole world to invest in now and investing here is getting less and less attractive by the hour. Taking everything from the wealthy will never cover the costs of all of the wants of those who expect to be provide for in exchange for their vote.

                      ?


                      • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                        Originally posted by darth omar View Post
                        Well, this is where I get to eat crow so let’s get it out of the way. I predicted a Romney win and I was wrong.

                        I was listening to O’Reilly last night [who is typically a blow hard I don’t pay much attention to] and I think he made a good point; basically, he said the demographics have changed in this country over the last decade. And increasingly, there are more voters who vote according to what they can get out of the government. I think that explains why the polls were right all along.

                        It also vindicates Romney’s 47% ‘gaffe’.

                        Obama hands out phones in OH and folks here in WV are worried about their jobs.
                        And that is the crux of the election. Those in big cities want their handouts at the expense of jobs in West Virginia. They don't care as long as they get theirs now.

                        ?


                        • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                          Originally posted by darth omar View Post
                          Well, this is where I get to eat crow so lets get it out of the way. I predicted a Romney win and I was wrong.

                          I was listening to OReilly last night [who is typically a blow hard I dont pay much attention to] and I think he made a good point; basically, he said the demographics have changed in this country over the last decade. And increasingly, there are more voters who vote according to what they can get out of the government. I think that explains why the polls were right all along.

                          It also vindicates Romneys 47% gaffe.

                          Obama hands out phones in OH and folks here in WV are worried about their jobs.
                          OReilly got it somewhat right. The Republicans will need to expand their base, as the demographics are changing. They cannot hope to win, if all theyre counting on is the vote of middle-aged, white men.

                          I dont agree, however, with it being due to new voters voting based on what they can get out of government. The deciding factor seems to be women and Latinos. As long as the Republicans continue to talk to either group like they have no rights and no say, then they wont get the majority of the votes from those two groups. Simple math, really... so a call to move further to the right would be wrong, in my opinion. God, abortion and immigration debate solely based on Latinos is the exact wrong way to go.

                          They need to nominate a guy like Christie next time. A guy who isnt afraid to speak his mind and go up against his own also. If they instead chose another "Santorum", then its goodbye 2016 also.

                          (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                          Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                          And that is the crux of the election. Those in big cities want their handouts at the expense of jobs in West Virginia. They don't care as long as they get theirs now.
                          Or maybe the social politics of the Democrats are more in line with the bigger population centers? Higher income, higher education, more international outlook, stuff like that? And yes, that a generalization, I know... just like your post.

                          ?


                          • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                            Originally posted by Maddox View Post
                            OReilly got it somewhat right. The Republicans will need to expand their base, as the demographics are changing. They cannot hope to win, if all theyre counting on is the vote of middle-aged, white men.

                            I dont agree, however, with it being due to new voters voting based on what they can get out of government. The deciding factor seems to be women and Latinos. As long as the Republicans continue to talk to either group like they have no rights and no say, then they wont get the majority of the votes from those two groups. Simple math, really... so a call to move further to the right would be wrong, in my opinion. God, abortion and immigration debate solely based on Latinos is the exact wrong way to go.

                            They need to nominate a guy like Christie next time. A guy who isnt afraid to speak his mind and go up against his own also. If they instead chose another "Santorum", then its goodbye 2016 also.

                            (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ



                            Or maybe the social politics of the Democrats are more in line with the bigger population centers? Higher income, higher education, more international outlook, stuff like that? And yes, that a generalization, I know... just like your post.
                            I guess the Repubs could hand out cell phones in a battle ground state next time.

                            ?


                            • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                              Originally posted by darth omar View Post
                              Well, this is where I get to eat crow so lets get it out of the way. I predicted a Romney win and I was wrong.

                              I was listening to OReilly last night [who is typically a blow hard I dont pay much attention to] and I think he made a good point; basically, he said the demographics have changed in this country over the last decade. And increasingly, there are more voters who vote according to what they can get out of the government. I think that explains why the polls were right all along.

                              It also vindicates Romneys 47% gaffe.

                              Obama hands out phones in OH and folks here in WV are worried about their jobs.
                              I still contend that goes both ways. It is not just voting themselves more from the treasury one way or another but also the promise of less contribution to one way or another. In some cases some horrible combination of the two. Republicans since Reagan really have been pushing for lower taxes on the highest earners, and in some cases lower for everyone. In each case spending was not kept in check, which is why it is easy for our left leaning friends to argue well lowering taxes really resulted in little other than new debt. That could be looked at as a promise in exchange for votes of less contribution to the treasury regardless of the condition of the treasury. Romney, and a few Republicans in the Senate races, lost for a host of reasons and you have to include in this thinking in the mix. In the end Obama sold to the voter a better deal among those likely to vote for him outside of party loyalty, and treasury motivations are only one of many reasons why. I still personally think Republicans got baited into talking about things they could not appeal to the majority on and at the wrong times. Obama did what he needed to do, instead of running on his questionalble results from a 1st term he sold why Romney and Republicans were a group to run from. It is the only way to explain how an incumbent can win with the economic conditions we have today.

                              ?


                              • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                                Originally posted by Maddox View Post
                                OReilly got it somewhat right. The Republicans will need to expand their base, as the demographics are changing. They cannot hope to win, if all theyre counting on is the vote of middle-aged, white men.

                                I dont agree, however, with it being due to new voters voting based on what they can get out of government. The deciding factor seems to be women and Latinos. As long as the Republicans continue to talk to either group like they have no rights and no say, then they wont get the majority of the votes from those two groups. Simple math, really... so a call to move further to the right would be wrong, in my opinion. God, abortion and immigration debate solely based on Latinos is the exact wrong way to go.

                                They need to nominate a guy like Christie next time. A guy who isnt afraid to speak his mind and go up against his own also. If they instead chose another "Santorum", then its goodbye 2016 also.

                                (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ



                                Or maybe the social politics of the Democrats are more in line with the bigger population centers? Higher income, higher education, more international outlook, stuff like that? And yes, that a generalization, I know... just like your post.
                                So they need to become more like Democrats, providing a sugar daddy to women and latinos. Why would anyone vote for a Democrat lite when they can vote for a real Democrat. That has now been proven in the last two elections.

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X