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 shouldn’t 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

    Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
    All we know now is who is going to be at the helm when the fall comes.
    It's almost as if a large portion of republicans are standing round with cheeseboards claiming the end of the world is nigh.
    Whatever happened to the fabled American optimism?

    You guys lost but it's hardly the end of the world so suck it up and get a grip.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

      Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
      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.
      See, what most people don't seem to get is this: you don't have to forsake principle to get the black or Hispanic or female vote or to strip Democrats of their demographic advantage. On the contrary you need ACTUAL PRINCIPLES which you then stick to and IF they are the correct principles, you WILL pull Hispanics, blacks, women, youth, etc. in enough numbers to win a general election. It comes down to one thing: LIBERTY. If you understand and use this word correctly, you can get the black, Hispanic, female, Martian, feral dog, etc vote. It's simple: most of the issues that "divide" America along partisan lines (abortion, gay marriage, drug war, etc.) are those things which the Federal government SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN, but the States, per the 10th Amendment and the People have the ultimate authority on. Now, which candidate stuck to the Constitution, this PRINCIPLE and thus in the primaries consistently got Hispanic, Black, and youth votes in the highest proportion in the GOP field, while head to head polls showed him dipping into Obama's advantage in within these groups?

      Oh yeah, the guy the GOP said "go fuck yourself" to.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

        Originally posted by Danny View Post
        Why don't conservative partisans ever get tired of being wrong in their predictions of doom and gloom? What are you going to say in 4 years when the country is hummin along with less unemployment, lower healthcare costs and generally in a much much better position. AND you still have your gunz!!!!
        If that happens, I'll be quite pleased.

        And the "gunz" thing is juvenile and beneath you, Danny. Or, at least it once was.....

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

          Originally posted by Danny View Post
          Where is tsquare? He was adamant in predicting a Romney landslide and I would like to get his take on the country's rebuke of his positions.
          Really? The country rebuked him? Over 56 million Americans did no such thing.

          (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

          Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
          It's almost as if a large portion of republicans are standing round with cheeseboards claiming the end of the world is nigh.
          Whatever happened to the fabled American optimism?

          You guys lost but it's hardly the end of the world so suck it up and get a grip.
          I am not a Republican.

          America, I believe, has reached the limit of what a democratic republic can handle. We are simply too large, too diverse, to work as was originally intended.

          The fall is coming, and it would still come if Romney had won.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

            Originally posted by Danny View Post
            Where is tsquare? He was adamant in predicting a Romney landslide and I would like to get his take on the country's rebuke of his positions.
            Interestingly enough, the country actually refuted the very policies they actually voted for with Obama, since the two are philosophically the same and at any given point, Romney has agreed with Obama on every issue of substance.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

              So, the guy saying: "gimme ALL your money and MAYBE I'll let you have some back, even though the reason we're in trouble now is that I've stubbornly done the exact opposite even when it hurts ME as well, and provided that we can loot enough from other countries even though that's not been working and really never did" is beaten by the guy saying "I'll let you have some money, so we can both make do, but we both have to be responsible about it"

              Whoda thunk

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                Really? The country rebuked him? Over 56 million Americans did no such thing.

                (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ



                I am not a Republican.

                America, I believe, has reached the limit of what a democratic republic can handle. We are simply too large, too diverse, to work as was originally intended.

                The fall is coming, and it would still come if Romney had won.
                I disagree with your assertion: we are not too big to work the way we were intended, we just simly DO NOT work the way we were intended; i.e. the Federal government is TOO strong and attempts to control such a dynamic group of people rather than leaving everyday governance and issues to the STATES and the PEOPLE as intended and outlined in the Constitution. It is exactly because we became in many ways a "democracy" that this happened. We of course are not and should not be a "democracy". We are in fact a Federal REPUBLIC and if we functioned as such, with each State being a soveriegn nation as was the original function of federalism, we would not be too big to function as originally intended.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                  Originally posted by John Drake View Post
                  So, the guy saying: "gimme ALL your money and MAYBE I'll let you have some back, even though the reason we're in trouble now is that I've stubbornly done the exact opposite even when it hurts ME as well, and provided that we can loot enough from other countries even though that's not been working and really never did" is beaten by the guy saying "I'll let you have some money, so we can both make do, but we both have to be responsible about it"

                  Whoda thunk
                  I suppose that is one partisan way to look at it. Either way, both were asking you to give government more power and sacrifice more of your free will.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                    Originally posted by Danny View Post
                    Why don't conservative partisans ever get tired of being wrong in their predictions of doom and gloom? What are you going to say in 4 years when the country is hummin along with less unemployment, lower healthcare costs and generally in a much much better position. AND you still have your gunz!!!!
                    Being in a better position and condition remains to be seen. Somehow I kinda of doubt it.
                    What we've seen for the last 4 years will probably continue. Like it? You voted for it.

                    Does anyone seriously believe that this president and this administration will moderate more their policies and positions because of this? I don't believe it. Moderation would lead to compromises to resolve conflicts, and I don't see that likely either.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                      Originally posted by ericams2786 View Post
                      Well thank you for eating crow. I just wanted to point out that back several months ago when we were arguing about this issue, I told you that Romney could not demographically beat Obama. As I repeated over and over during the primary, poll after poll showed only one guy could do that....
                      I guess we'll never know about that. You should be thankful. Crow meat sucks.
                      Last edited by Darth Hussein Omar; 11-07-2012, 06:16 AM.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                        Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                        Being in a better position and condition remains to be seen. Somehow I kinda of doubt it.
                        What we've seen for the last 4 years will probably continue. Like it? You voted for it.

                        Does anyone seriously believe that this president and this administration will moderate more their policies and positions because of this? I don't believe it. Moderation would lead to compromises to resolve conflicts, and I don't see that likely either.
                        Point of order: He didn't vote for it. Danny isn't one of us.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                          Originally posted by darth omar View Post
                          I guess we'll never know about that. You be thankful. Crow meat sucks.
                          Trust me, I know, I had to eat it plenty during the primary season.

                          (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                          Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                          Point of order: He didn't vote for it. Danny isn't one of us.
                          Points of Order don't exist anymore. Remember? Telemprompter: "THE AYES HAVE IT IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR" - RNC 2012

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                            Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                            Point of order: He didn't vote for it. Danny isn't one of us.
                            Acknowledged.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                              Originally posted by ericams2786 View Post
                              I disagree with your assertion: we are not too big to work the way we were intended, we just simly DO NOT work the way we were intended; i.e. the Federal government is TOO strong and attempts to control such a dynamic group of people rather than leaving everyday governance and issues to the STATES and the PEOPLE as intended and outlined in the Constitution. It is exactly because we became in many ways a "democracy" that this happened. We of course are not and should not be a "democracy". We are in fact a Federal REPUBLIC and if we functioned as such, with each State being a soveriegn nation as was the original function of federalism, we would not be too big to function as originally intended.
                              That's one interpretation, I suppose. However, it's been something of a minority opinion since the Civil War, and we've become the most powerful and prosperous nation to ever exist largely while not following it. My opinion of it is that you are confusing a Confedaration, which is actually an oligarchy where the components are nation-states, with a Nation. A Nation has a dominant ethnicity which all the citizens identify with. I dunno about you but I couldn't give a flying fandango about being a loyal Marylander or Massachutsean (well, what DO they call them?), while I AM a proud citizen of the USA.

                              We are a democratically BASED republic in any case, which will seem one then the other as times and circumstance warrant.

                              Mind, even the business of being a Republic isn't strictly true. You don't (or at least aren't supposed to) just elect a guy and then never think of him until the next election. You can still write letters, organise others, etc etc. Those all sound like democratic functions to me. (Then again, conservatives seem to think Republics are all oligarchies, and isn't it strange how they're always themselves in one or another of the ruling cliques.)

                              And PLEASE try some other argument than saying "it shouldn't be interpreted, it should be seen as is" because that itself, that is "seeing it as it is" is the very DEFINITION of interpretation.

                              Finally, just so I shouldn't be seen as derailing the thread. I contend that there IS no arbitrary or point at which a nation becomes 'too big'. We are "one nation" not many, just so long as all the people in it see the President as being THEIR President, no matter how divisive the campaign may have been. We were DESIGNED to be "scalable" as the saying goes, and I think that applies even if we expand to other planets.
                              Last edited by John Drake; 11-07-2012, 07:16 AM.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • Re: Election Day 2012 - Results Discussion Thread

                                When I was canvassing in a battleground state, I saw no equivalent effort from Romney or the GOP.
                                I'm sure there was an effort, but it was considerably smaller and not as well organized.
                                I think this was probably true in every battleground state, Romney depended on enthusiasm, Obama depended on organization.
                                And that tells a bigger story, Romney's economic plan depended on enthusiasm to move the economy, Obama depends on an organized effort to recover the economy.
                                An organized effort is slow and cumbersome, but enthusiasm is vaporware, it just doesn't do the job.
                                Romney depended on enthusiasm in New Hampshire, Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Ohio, Obama depended on people going door to door, leaving door hangers, talking to voters, identifying Obama voters, making sure Obama voters had rides to the polls, making sure Obama voters understood that the country was depending on them to do their part. If you look at the numbers, you will see that there were large numbers of people who didn't vote, in those numbers there were enough Romney voters to give him every swing state, but it was the Obama people, visiting the sometime voters, that got the vote out, we visited people who would most likely vote for Obama, but there was a real question about whether they would vote, so we reached out and touched them, because that increases the number that votes.
                                That same grass roots outreach delivered Senate seats and house seats, not enough to reclaim the House, but the effort was concentrated in swing states, and Democrats did very well in Swing states, because we got Democrats to the polls.
                                This is two elections that the Democrats have taken with a superior ground game, prior to that Bush took two elections with a superior ground game.
                                The big lesson is that the electorate is split evenly, and the best ground game has won 3 of the last 4 elections, 2008 wasn't close enough for ground game to matter, but it made slight Obama advantage into a huge advantage in 2008.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X