FunkyTown Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 But that's not fair! I wasn't born yet when JFK was President! Of course you weren't. You're a 12 year old, pimply faced Latvian boy. Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I agree, but some voters in this country prefer to vote for candidates of their own clan. It has been going on for a long time, and members of every ethnic group do it. When I was a kid, I had relatives who voted for candidates with Swedish last names above anything else. They would have voted for Satan himself if his name had ended with -son, -strom, -holm, or -gren.Me thinks there is lots of this going on today as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarginOfError Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 There's this Congresswoman in Florida - I coulda sworn they drew her district in a zigzaggy way just so she'll have mostly blacks in her district... That's exactly what happened. Gerrymandering is something that really irritates me. It's also the biggest contributor to the Republican party taking over the House of Representatives and state legislatures*. What they've done is mangle the boundaries of congressional districts to pack as many 'likely Democratic voters" into as few districts as possible. Doing so creates more districts that are Republican strongholds, which results in more state legislators and US Representatives from the Republican party. The net effect is been that, in some states, Democratic candidates took between 40 and 50 percent of the total vote and one between 20 and 30 percent of the available seats. So it wasn't that the Floridian Congresswoman's district was drawn just to make her capable of winning. It was drawn just to make sure that only as few members of her party as possible could win. * I have no delusions that Democrats wouldn't do this given the chance. In fact, they have in Maryland and Illinois. The thing is, there is no need for this. We have the technology and processing power in a common laptop computer now to enter Census data and spit out congressional districts that satisfy the conditions of compact and of equal populations. This could easily be done blinded to political affiliation. in addition, we could easily define 'compact' by three or four different criteria, give the options to the state legislature, and let them vote on a map. But that will never happen because it takes control away from people who have it. I agree, but some voters in this country prefer to vote for candidates of their own clan. "I'd love to see a Mormon president." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Of course you weren't. You're a 12 year old, pimply faced Latvian boy. Need. Laugh. Button. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Me thinks there is lots of this going on today as well. It's what got Obama a landslide election in 2008... Well, ok, McCain was as exciting as playing tennis in pitch darkness, but still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerome1232 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 It's what got Obama a landslide election in 2008... Well, ok, McCain was as exciting as playing tennis in pitch darkness, but still.See, I think that sounds rather exciting. Just_A_Guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crypto Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) See, I think that sounds rather exciting.Maybe for awhile. It would get old really quick though Edited January 13, 2015 by Crypto jerome1232 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Okay, one of the main selling points of Romney for me is his Healthcare Solution. This is also one of the main ones that sells Ben Carson - although, I'm still trying to get a better picture of the details of Carson's plan. Here are some of Romney's driving principles for healthcare reform:1.) The Healthcare problem in the US is a very complex problem that cannot be solved by just policy solution. The Healthcare solution has to encompass policy solution, free market incentives, and cultural change. 2.) A Healthcare solution has to free an individual from his employer's healthcare benefits. This gives an individual freedom to leave/accept a job without having to consider the impacts to his healthcare. 3.) A Healthcare solution has to empower individuals to band together to form a group with cohesive health requirements that can have purchasing power for a specific set of healthcare coverage in the open market. 4.) A Healthcare solution needs to remove government regulations that impedes market solutions to healthcare. 5.) Reform Medical Malpractice to eliminate the culture of costly defensive medicine. 6.) Steer market incentives to discourage medical overuse and unnecessarily expensive treatments. Pattern health insurance products to Utah's IHC through market incentives including opening up competition nationwide instead of protected regions. 7.) Steer the American culture to a healthier lifestyle by giving individuals a stake in the cost of their care. Encourage the use of HSA and allow HSAs to pay for insurance premiums. 8.) Implement Electronic Health Records. I'm sure there are more that I forgot to mention. This is 5 million times better than the train wreck of ObamaCare. Edited January 13, 2015 by anatess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordorbund Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I liked Romney for the very reason he was lambasted early on: do you really want a vulture capitalist running the country? YES!! Hack the programs! Even the ones I like! Get us running in the black again! Make the unpopular decisions to instill some fiscal responsibility! Can't say that I cared for much else. Windseeker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I do know there were several things Romney said during the debates that was going to happen or to look out for and the current President laughed at him. The one thing I got angry about Romney was why he never pounded the Benghazi event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) I do know there were several things Romney said during the debates that was going to happen or to look out for and the current President laughed at him. The one thing I got angry about Romney was why he never pounded the Benghazi event. Because it was a no-win scenario. He tried to do it on the 2nd debate and got ganged up on. The problem with Benghazi is that because it was so new, Romney couldn't speak with conviction as the information he needed to support his statements were still under investigation and not definitive where the investigation is in the hands of the Democrat Executive and Democrat Congress. So, he was completely at the mercy of journalists most of which were lined up against him. And, if you remember, only that dude on Fox News was talking about Benghazi. What the Republicans wanted him to say was tantamount to conspiracy theory at that time. Now, if he was Biden, then that would have been just fine because Biden can say the most ridiculous things and everybody except Fox would call him out on it. He could even laughingly say it on his debates! Romney can say the sky is blue and if the CIA could not confirm, he's SNL fodder. So, I lay the election impact of Benghazi to Romney's electability squarely on the shoulders of I-want-John-Wayne onion-peel Republican voters who treat the Presidential election like a football game where the excitement of the play is how many people get bulldozed over as opposed to a soccer game where the beauty of the play is in the integrity of the vision that leads to that pinnacle moment of achieving the goal. Edited January 13, 2015 by anatess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I would have pounded it to the ground...Romney was too nice ....my opinion and I don't believe it was a no win situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I also feel there was plenty he could have spoken up about.....a debate is a debate....go after the President in attack mode put him on the defense....again that's just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I also feel there was plenty he could have spoken up about.....a debate is a debate....go after the President in attack mode put him on the defense....again that's just my opinion. Romney's performance in the debates wasn't the issue. He won those(One handily, one rather well), but it was the character assassination that really cost him the election.They turned a non-drinking, non-smoking, non-partying, competent administrator in to nature's greatest monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Romney's performance in the debates wasn't the issue. He won those(One handily, one rather well), but it was the character assassination that really cost him the election.They turned a non-drinking, non-smoking, non-partying, competent administrator in to nature's greatest monster.The last debate in my opinion cost him the election. By the third one he had the information on Benghazi and started to question Obama on the matter. He questioned why he waited 14 days to tell the people it was a terror attack. Obama denied doing so and Romney was moving in for the kill on this and then the host Candy Crowley spoke up and told Romney that Obama was correct. And because of that many feel that cost him the election especially with the Independents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I do also feel the character assassination did not help but the last debate hurt him. Again my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I also feel there was plenty he could have spoken up about.....a debate is a debate....go after the President in attack mode put him on the defense....again that's just my opinion. See... I don't agree with this. I may be wrong on this one but from what I understand of Americans, they like John Wayne-type duking out things. This same American quality is what got McCain elected - a big surprise for me when everybody knows how McCain barely manages to qualify as a conservative. But he has this war hero John Wayne-type persona. Same with Newt Gingrich... he can make the Democrat-leaning press squirm in their seats... which made him very likeable... until Romney put him in his place in his last debate. But pounding the other guy is not what a debate is for. This is not football. In all my political learning, it is always poor form to run on an anti-the-other-guy platform... it's very "ungentlemanly" (you know, the old tenet of a gentleman versus the commoner). A political debate is supposed to be an exchange of ideas - to show why your idea is better than the other guys'... not necessarily how the other guys' ideas are bad. This is the essence of the multi-party democratic process. And in all the 3 debates, Romney has shown, time and time again, how his ideas were better and how he has a good understanding of the political landscape. But no, what the Republicans wanted was a duke-out. Which is sad. And that is what sunk Romney. And now these same people has to live under 4 more years of the other guy. So, they basically lopped off their heads to spite their nose (okay, I can't remember how that idiom goes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlimac Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) It was the 49% remark that lost the election for him. And something about illegals self deporting. I have some Hispanic friends who were absolutely livid about it. I had a couple nasty facebook debates with them about it, then decided it was useless to persuade them to like Mitt. They were terribly offended, even though they themselves had jumped through all the legal hoops to get here legally. ...Whatever. I still don't get it. I'm not sure he can ever get past those remarks to win,even though they were both probably true and both taken out of context. Edited January 15, 2015 by carlimac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crypto Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think the 49% remark was a major factor against him.I have some Hispanic friends that are livid about illegals, since they came into the country legally, both residents and on visas. (so there are opinions contrary to what a lot of what the media portrays) Windseeker and carlimac 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiritDragon Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 It was the 49% remark that lost the election for him. And something about illegals self deporting. I have some Hispanic friends who were absolutely livid about it. I had a couple nasty facebook debates with them about it, then decided it was useless to persuade them to like Mitt. They were terribly offended, even though they themselves had jumped through all the legal hoops to get here legally. ...Whatever. I still don't get it. I'm not sure he can ever get past those remarks to win,even though they were both probably true and both taken out of context. I agree that remark was a devastating blow to his run. I believe it was actually 47% however :) Crypto 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 See... I don't agree with this. I may be wrong on this one but from what I understand of Americans, they like John Wayne-type duking out things. This same American quality is what got McCain elected - a big surprise for me when everybody knows how McCain barely manages to qualify as a conservative. But he has this war hero John Wayne-type persona. Same with Newt Gingrich... he can make the Democrat-leaning press squirm in their seats... which made him very likeable... until Romney put him in his place in his last debate. But pounding the other guy is not what a debate is for. This is not football. In all my political learning, it is always poor form to run on an anti-the-other-guy platform... it's very "ungentlemanly" (you know, the old tenet of a gentleman versus the commoner). A political debate is supposed to be an exchange of ideas - to show why your idea is better than the other guys'... not necessarily how the other guys' ideas are bad. This is the essence of the multi-party democratic process. And in all the 3 debates, Romney has shown, time and time again, how his ideas were better and how he has a good understanding of the political landscape. But no, what the Republicans wanted was a duke-out. Which is sad. And that is what sunk Romney. And now these same people has to live under 4 more years of the other guy. So, they basically lopped off their heads to spite their nose (okay, I can't remember how that idiom goes).We agree to disagree ....because from my reading I feel like he could have done more during the third debate but because he did not it cost him the election. My opinion. Windseeker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlimac Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I agree that remark was a devastating blow to his run. I believe it was actually 47% however :) Yah, that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlimac Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 Oh well. There goes that dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 We agree to disagree ....because from my reading I feel like he could have done more during the third debate but because he did not it cost him the election. My opinion. Yes, we agree to disagree. But this is not against Romney. This is against the American voters. I hope a politician will not sink to the level of gutter just to appeal to American voters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 Now it doesn't matter. He announced he's not running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.