[News] 2012 Election Results Thread
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
- Status
With all the stupid and crazy the local media subjected us to in support of their owner and his teabagger masters as he ran for Senate yet again, I want to gloat, and gloat HARD. For all the fake "war on coal" the mine owners tried to pull on this state, and fooling their employees to go along with, I want to gloat, and gloat HARD.
For the failure of "legitimate rape".
For the failure of attacking a double amputee war veteran for being a double amputee war veteran.
Poop washes off.
According to the results, the urban SE and the college areas (AA, Kzoo) might've gone Obama, but pretty much the entire rest of the State went Romney, all the way up to something like a 75/25 split in the Holland area. If the election were decided based on area, Romney would've probably won this election with something like 80-90% of the vote.
--Patrick
Another of the Tea Party Crazies I was talking about the Republicans needing to drop:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/donald-trump-election-revolution_n_2085864.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/donald-trump-election-revolution_n_2085864.html
Not until you tell us if we're done with Bachmann!
More of the Crazy side I'm talking about:
https://twitter.com/vicjackshow
https://twitter.com/vicjackshow
Good job America.
By the way,why the hate on Florida?
By the way,why the hate on Florida?
Read up a bit on the 2000 election, and why it took almost three weeks to decide who won.
That's beyond crazy, that's totally unhinged.
The race is so close right now... It's down to less than 2,000 votes between them, but she's still ahead.
Zappit
Staff member
Well, one of two things will happen now with the GOP. Either they realize that the extremists cost them not only the presidency, but Senate seats and House seats, and work to distance themselves from those elements and remove the Tea Party from the national stage. Moderates make a comeback.I don't know if there's enough sanity left there for that to happen, but voters did reject Akin and Mourdock, so there may be some hope for moderates there. If Obama keeps posting gains, there won't be as much a reason to vote them in, though.
Or...
The extremists push even harder and force out moderates, attacking former favorites like Christie for "costing" Romney the election. Then we hear more about their philosophy on rape and insurance should cover Viagra but not birth control. They set themselves back for a decade. This is likely, and it would be good for the Dems.
Or...
The extremists push even harder and force out moderates, attacking former favorites like Christie for "costing" Romney the election. Then we hear more about their philosophy on rape and insurance should cover Viagra but not birth control. They set themselves back for a decade. This is likely, and it would be good for the Dems.
A little? Ha! 2000 called, and they want their "demise of the democratic party" wishful thinking back.
Romney lost decisively, but the fact that he still got 48% of the popular vote and a huge disparity between popular vote and electoral college shows this was more a failure of campaign strategy than a failure of party, platform, message, or candidate. I'm not going to rain on anyone's parade here, but those who believe the GOP will change significantly are probably a little election drunk right now and not thinking clearly.
I actually agree with you, as I've said, it was more about how poor Romney was as a candidate than the whole of the Republican party. The Tea Party caused too many rifts in the Republican party though and caused them those crucial points.
The problem is that Romney and the Tea Party couldn't show how they could fix the things that Obama did wrong in his first 4yrs and worse, they added problems that people didn't want to begin with (Rape issues, Fight against gay rights etc)
Why is the disparity between the popular vote and the electoral college not something totally expected, considering that a lot of states award all their electoral votes to the winner?
But really, the reason why the Reps lost wasnt that they put off conservative leaning people, is that they scared lazy liberal leaning people into voting...
Romney was totes the worst candidate, you know, except all those other people in the republican primary that kept overtaking him until they went full retard.
When did Ron Paul go full retard? I'd have given Ron Paul some serious consideration.
One of my favorite tweets of the night:
So far only listening to Walton & Johnson. GasBandit you should know all about them (Being a Texan yourself). They're nearly in tears. So far they've already called for a Civil War and for the Southern States to secede from the country. This is going to be a long day of radio.
GasBandit
Staff member
The Republicans lost this election in the primary. Having run Cain out on a rail, and then having to pick between Santorum, Gingrich and Romney... the writing was on the wall. The only hope they had after that, as I said, was to make the election about Obama. They didn't. Lots of pundits will complain today about the media covering for Obama (especially on Benghazi, or on 24/7 republican gaffe coverage) but what they really failed at was letting the narrative switch to who they were instead of focusing on Obama.
I knew they were in trouble when there wasn't even an option for Chris Christie or Marco Rubio. Hell, Joe Arpaio probably could have run a better campaign than Romney.[DOUBLEPOST=1352298551][/DOUBLEPOST]
Yeah, I know who they are, but they're the evil empire of radio.
Exactly. I heard them every morning since they were the first GoP backing show to come on every morning. They try and pretend to be about comedy but they're very Tea Party Nutty. Listening to them this morning is just so vindicating.
GasBandit
Staff member
Oh but I do. Sadly I do.
Unless you think the people I've called out -Rush/Laura/Hannity/Levin/Walton&Johnson- aren't part of that group.
GasBandit
Staff member
I'd call them establishment republicans.
I don't know many sane republicans that think it's time for a Revolution/Civil War and it's time to secede.
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, I should clarify - Rush, Ingraham, Hannity and Levin are establishment, Walton and Johnson are just rednecks.
Maybe I'm just too hopeful that people are smarter than to follow them without being party of the insane side of the party.
Nailed it on W&J though.
GasBandit
Staff member
A lot of people forget that the Tea Party is primarily an economic/fiscal issues group. Mostly they were upset about taxes and spending. Yeah, they got a lot of clingers and hangers-on who were just mad about something else, but those were just other republicans trying to ride coattails. Leftists just tend to lump everything they hate and fear into the "Tea Party" label.
Hate and Fear? I hope you're being general and not speaking about anyone in particular.
If you're saying that Rush/Laura/Levin/Hannity represent what the Republican party is really about, then I guess I was wrong about the Republican party being relatable in the future.
Always use Bless your heart and yes I'm sadly always overly optimistic.
You are entirely too optimistic, bless your heart.
Did I do that right?
You're the one that keeps insisting that Rush et al are tea party. GB is just talking about what the tea party is, not necessarily about Rush et al.
Rush, etc, are not what the GOP is really about. The tea party is not what the GOP is really about. They are factions and pundits within the GOP which attempt to pull the GOP in a particular direction, but to claim that they are the core of the GOP, or even represent it faithfully is silly.
I never claimed Rush etc was part of the core of the GoP I said they were the core of the Tea Party. Gas said they were GoP core not Tea Party.
He said establishment, not sane...
But Gas is still deluding himself about the Tea party actually standing for what they originally said they did instead of just being, well, the tea party...
Silly rabbit, everyone knows Ron Paul doesn't count (i'll ignore the whole gold standard thing).
I suspect we're arguing semantics. Gas said they were establishment, not core.
Regardless, I don't personally believe that Rush and most other pundits and the tea party are the core of the republican party. They are extremists for some portions of typically republican principles, and they've latched onto the republican party as the only party with enough power and close enough to their desires as to be usable for their purposes, but they are not and do not define the party.
The democrats have done a fantastic job of showcasing them, however, and portraying them as the party faithful in order to dissuade independents and disaffected democrats.
Regardless, I don't personally believe that Rush and most other pundits and the tea party are the core of the republican party. They are extremists for some portions of typically republican principles, and they've latched onto the republican party as the only party with enough power and close enough to their desires as to be usable for their purposes, but they are not and do not define the party.
The democrats have done a fantastic job of showcasing them, however, and portraying them as the party faithful in order to dissuade independents and disaffected democrats.
I also don't believe the Tea Party is the core of the republican party. We're on the same page.
Honestly? Getting to know your views and talking with you over these past few months helped me see that even better.
GasBandit
Staff member
Like Steinman says... the GOP is actually a fractious bunch. In fact, I wouldn't even put all three of the big 3 R pundits in the same group - Ingraham is more of a shrill social conservative than the others, by far. She's one slip of the tongue/mask away from saying we need to round up and shoot all the gays.
Gil - just about everyone who most conservatives don't consider a windsock or RINO is who you push into a big bag labeled "tea party." But the tea party is actually a lot smaller and less inclusive than that. Like I said, it's more of a single issue group. Rush is not Tea Party (he often, in facts, gripes about them being a distraction and detriment to the furtherment of the party as a whole). Neither are the other two. They're a lot closer to what most label "Republican Elite" - the country club megacorp republicans. The Tea Party is inherently populist, which is antithetical to them.
Gil - just about everyone who most conservatives don't consider a windsock or RINO is who you push into a big bag labeled "tea party." But the tea party is actually a lot smaller and less inclusive than that. Like I said, it's more of a single issue group. Rush is not Tea Party (he often, in facts, gripes about them being a distraction and detriment to the furtherment of the party as a whole). Neither are the other two. They're a lot closer to what most label "Republican Elite" - the country club megacorp republicans. The Tea Party is inherently populist, which is antithetical to them.
- Status