Romney Blames Loss on Obama’s ‘Gifts’ to Minorities and Young Voters

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by UberL33t
 


So...Romney only lost because of...

Hispanics....
African Americans...
Hispanic Americans
Asian Americans...
Single Women...
Voters 18-45....
Etc..
Etc...

At what point do we simply call them AMERICANS???

Romney lost because AMERICANS chose President Obama...

LITERALLY...the politics of division.




posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by UberL33t
 


So...Romney only lost because of...

Hispanics....
African Americans...
Hispanic Americans
Asian Americans...
Single Women...
Voters 18-45....
Etc..
Etc...

At what point do we simply call them AMERICANS???

Romney lost because AMERICANS chose President Obama...

LITERALLY...the politics of division.



We could always repeal the 19th Amendment and put this country back on the right track.

Definitely not a bad idea.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAngryFarm
 


You think the elimination of women's suffrage is "the right track?"



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by 0zzymand0s
 


Given the current trajectory of the nation and the recent voting habits of women over the past few decades, yes.

I think it would definitely put us back on the right track in terms of being able to get rid of the unconstitutional entitlements that eat up so much of the budget.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAngryFarm
reply to post by 0zzymand0s
 


Given the current trajectory of the nation and the recent voting habits of women over the past few decades, yes.

I think it would definitely put us back on the right track in terms of being able to get rid of the unconstitutional entitlements that eat up so much of the budget.


Why just 19 and not 19 and 14? I mean, those folks voted "wrong" too, didn't they?



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAngryFarm

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by UberL33t
 


So...Romney only lost because of...

Hispanics....
African Americans...
Hispanic Americans
Asian Americans...
Single Women...
Voters 18-45....
Etc..
Etc...

At what point do we simply call them AMERICANS???

Romney lost because AMERICANS chose President Obama...

LITERALLY...the politics of division.



We could always repeal the 19th Amendment and put this country back on the right track.

Definitely not a bad idea.


Yes...that is the ticket! Repeal womens right to vote! Why pussy foot around with half-ass voter suppression!!

If only we could deny the vote to women, people of color...asians...hispanics...plus anyone under the age of 45 etc. This election would have been a slam dunk for Romney and REAL Americans!!!



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by narwahl
 


This isnt about voting right or "wrong", this is about continually voting for people who implement policies that are detrimental to the future of the nation. I do not believe Romney wouldve been much better but at least he understands the concept of debt vs income and knows what takes to run a business, albeit a gigantic business named the United States.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAngryFarm
reply to post by narwahl
 


This isnt about voting right or "wrong", this is about continually voting for people who implement policies that are detrimental to the future of the nation. I do not believe Romney wouldve been much better but at least he understands the concept of debt vs income and knows what takes to run a business, albeit a gigantic business named the United States.


Romney understood income and expenses? So thats why he promised tax rate cuts and higher military spending?
Face it: as spinalremains said: Romney lost because not enough people were voting for free stuff.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by narwahl
 


When one segment of society, in this case the wealthy, pay the overwhelming share of the taxes (something like top 10% of earners pay 50% of the taxes), they should be the first recipients of any tax cuts.

Giving more money to a government that has continually proven they cannot spend responsibly or intelligently, let alone in adherence of the Constitutional limitations, is not the right course of action.

Massive cuts and eliminations of unconstitutional programs needs to be the first thing done, long before even thinking about demanding more money from people.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAngryFarm
reply to post by narwahl
 


When one segment of society, in this case the wealthy, pay the overwhelming share of the taxes (something like top 10% of earners pay 50% of the taxes), they should be the first recipients of any tax cuts.

Giving more money to a government that has continually proven they cannot spend responsibly or intelligently, let alone in adherence of the Constitutional limitations, is not the right course of action.

Massive cuts and eliminations of unconstitutional programs needs to be the first thing done, long before even thinking about demanding more money from people.


Ok, I'll try to make this simple: Lower taxes -> Less money coming in
Higher military spending -> More money going out
This means the hole in the budget gets bigger.
More stuff, being paid for with less income -> more free stuff.

(Of course then you can use the deficit as an excuse to gut social programs, who are unfairly cutting into the potential markets of insurance companies, who, being private, could run those much better and more efficiently, yet somehow are unable to seriously compete.)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by narwahl
 


Cutting ridiculous programs and entitlements that do not pass Constitutional muster would free up billions of dollars, thereby negating the need for higher taxes.

Cut spending = no need for higher taxes.
Cut spending= no continually growing debt

The democrats in the Senate havent passed a budget in what, 3 years? That speaks volumes about the irresponsibility of those people to work with constraint and limitations. I am not a fan of increasing spending on anything, including the military, but wasting billions upon billions of dollars every year providing a "safety net" for people is not constitutional, and the very idea of wealth redistribution (to individuals and corporations alike) is a smack in the face to the very idea of freedom and liberty.

The jackasses in DC like to proclaim that they have cut programs when they choose to increase it to only 6% instead of 8%. That is not a cut.

What we need is less government, less spending, and more money in the hands of the people who earn it.
edit on 15-11-2012 by TheAngryFarm because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I am sorry my friend I didn't read all the posts the thread is too gone ahead for me to do that, so I agree with you then its about who said the best convincing Crap and Obama wound with his

Is not respect in Americas politics anymore.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Yes, I know, its dailykos.... but
www.dailykos.com...
Looks like reps don't think too much of that leak either (Though I can understand that he would say stuff like that talking to dissapointed donors)
edit on 15-11-2012 by narwahl because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
So Americans voted for you, Romney, but women and blacks and hispanics voted for Obama?

Just come out and say it, Mitt. You believe that only white land owning men are Americans.
Imagine all the profit increases if we put Africans in chains again and made them work for nothing. That'll show the unions!

Now we all officially know and understand exactly what "Taking America Back" means. Back to 1838, I get it.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
So Americans voted for you, Romney, but women and blacks and hispanics voted for Obama?

Just come out and say it, Mitt. You believe that only white land owning men are Americans.
Imagine all the profit increases if we put Africans in chains again and made them work for nothing. That'll show the unions!

Now we all officially know and understand exactly what "Taking America Back" means. Back to 1838, I get it.


Uh! Uh! I got a great Idea! How about wie imprison people for smoking gras, and then use them as cheap labor? Will look better than actually enslaving people. What? We already do that? .... never mind...



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by narwahl
 


While you may not like the message, you cant argue with the truth contained in this Tshirt:



edit on 15-11-2012 by TheAngryFarm because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAngryFarm
reply to post by narwahl
 


While you may not like the message, you cant argue with the truth contained in this Tshirt:



edit on 15-11-2012 by TheAngryFarm because: (no reason given)


I prefer this one....




And I am a Libertarian. I left the Republicans years ago because they were beginning to lose their damn mind....and apparently they have completed that journey.

If you really believe in all the types of suppression and subjugation you are speaking about...you have some company...Al Queada, the Taliban....or to make you feel better...the Puritans...from about 300 years ago.

Shiz happens....things change...me? I just want to be free...me and my children...who happen to be young women of now voting age...just try to take their voting rights away...I dare you.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAngryFarm
 


Wow.

So you are anti-suffrage and pro-slavery? In the same day? Awesome.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by kozmo
 


You know why we used to be first, right?

Part of the reason was because the rest of the world was busy rebuilding their sewers, roads and bridges after WW2. We were one of the only counties in the first world whose manufacturing base wasn't spread all over the ground in tiny little pieces. But lets not let "history" stand in the way of a good rant.

I did notice that you couldn't explain how people who are compelled to vote by law, and who operate under a "socialist" safety-net (OMG -- Market socialism!) are somehow more FREE and attractive to business people than we are. Do you believe American entrepreneurs are frustrated by their inability to create better roadside bombs? Is that why the patriot act is so scary to them?

Or could it be that a consumer and worker base of free people aren't worried that cancer will eat up their life savings and cost them their home are somehow better employees and partners in creating actual wealth and progress?


Bullocks, Rubbish and Nonsense!!! I can't even begin to address any of the crap your spewing because it is based on non-sequiturs and red herrings. Your post has ZERO substance to even respond to!


Time for you to get a better grasp of "history"... a few books on Micro and Macro economics would also prove to be useful. While you're at it - why not read the Federalist Papers as well. It may give youa sense of what this country was REALLY founded upon.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Actually more deportations have occurred under Obama then any other president. He is one of the stricter ones regarding immigration.





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join