|
|
| |
Topic: The story behind Mitt Romney’s loss in the presidential campaign to President Obama |
The story behind Mitt Romney’s loss in the presidential campaign to President Obama
Boston Globe, by Michael Kranish
|
|
Original Article
|
|
Posted By:Oblio, 12/23/2012 2:44:22 PM
|
| It was two weeks before Election Day when Mitt Romney’s political director signed a memo that all but ridiculed the notion that the Republican presidential nominee, with his “better ground game,” could lose the key state of Ohio or the election. The race is “unmistakably moving in Mitt Romney’s direction,” the memo said.But the claims proved wildly off the mark, a fact embarrassingly underscored when the high-tech voter turnout system that Romney himself called “state of the art” crashed at the worst moment, on Election Day. To this day, Romney’s aides wonder how it all went so wrong.
|
Reply 1 - Posted by:
saryden, 12/23/2012 2:54:33 PM (No. 9080897)
I don´t know about all that. What I think is that we have a dumbed-down citizenry, who believe the propaganda they hear from Democrats who are allowing a Muslim/socialist-pretender to take over America.. all so they can stay in power. Well, Dems, that is not going to last long for you. You are going to deserve the punishment you take.. but the rest of us don´t!
|
Reply 2 - Posted by:
SheikYerBooty, 12/23/2012 2:58:39 PM (No. 9080899)
The election was stolen by systemic systematic voter fraud.
|
| |
|
Reply 3 - Posted by:
sternben, 12/23/2012 3:03:59 PM (No. 9080903)
The democRATS control the election apparatus and everything else connected with an election. The only way to beat them is with a landslide and then it´s questionable.
|
Reply 4 - Posted by:
God of Irony, 12/23/2012 3:04:46 PM (No. 9080904)
The Christian Right stayed home once again because the candidate didn´t meet all of their criteria. Simple as that.
|
Reply 5 - Posted by:
fire_mission, 12/23/2012 3:24:54 PM (No. 9080921)
dittos #4...plus Libertarians voted for the third party candidate.
|
Reply 6 - Posted by:
dr.lakerman, 12/23/2012 3:35:16 PM (No. 9080930)
Is it possible that axelrod´s gang messed up the romney computer system?
|
Reply 7 - Posted by:
killerbee, 12/23/2012 3:36:17 PM (No. 9080931)
#2: Nailed it.
#4 & #5: Yep. If they hadn´t, it wouldn´t have been close enough for the Democrats to cheat.
So, along with the low-information Democrats, I blame them.
|
| |
|
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Grambo, 12/23/2012 3:42:46 PM (No. 9080935)
From the days of Daley’s theft of the election for JFK, the Democrats have been masters of voter fraud. That combined with the coalition of public dole voters and low information voters, and a Republican campaign that refused to go after the deeply flawed president directly, lost the election. Until the GOP is willing to get completely into the fight, and until they demand election reform and voter ID, they will never win another election.
|
Reply 9 - Posted by:
adguy47, 12/23/2012 3:46:31 PM (No. 9080938)
A candidate favored by the Christian Right is never, ever going to win a presidential election in this country.
|
Reply 10 - Posted by:
judy, 12/23/2012 3:52:14 PM (No. 9080944)
Boston Globe, how about investigating fraud....
|
Reply 11 - Posted by:
judy, 12/23/2012 3:54:53 PM (No. 9080946)
The Christian right did not stay home,I received at least 10 calls daily form pro life groups....the won won by 2% points ...Bush won by 6 ...something is very fishy about this election...
|
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Safari Man, 12/23/2012 4:00:34 PM (No. 9080957)
See #2 Rinse Repeat
|
| |
|
Reply 13 - Posted by:
smcchk, 12/23/2012 4:03:01 PM (No. 9080960)
I don´t know anybody who stayed home and pouted. I saw folks energized as never before. They were either outnumbered or there was massive fraud or both.
|
Reply 14 - Posted by:
John c, 12/23/2012 4:10:59 PM (No. 9080969)
I vote for fraud, Romney´s computer failed on the night of the election-fraud.
|
Reply 15 - Posted by:
rlwo, 12/23/2012 4:16:12 PM (No. 9080975)
What is the reference for President Bush winning by 6% in 2004? I doubt very much he won by that margin.
|
Reply 16 - Posted by:
bighambone, 12/23/2012 4:19:23 PM (No. 9080977)
How about enough narrow minded conservatives who would not vote for a Mormon staying home and causing Romney to loose the election.
|
Reply 17 - Posted by:
The Other Guy, 12/23/2012 4:29:08 PM (No. 9080985)
Every vote for Obama, legal or illegal, liberal, communist, uninformed or Obamaphone was a vote cast for him. Every Christian Right, Libertarian Paubot, anti Mormon bigot, send a message to the GOP, stay at home anti Romney third party vote or non-vote was an Obama vote not countered. I have more dislike for that group than I do for legal, rabid Obama voters. Both groups deserve all the suffering coming in the next four years. The rest of us don´t deserve it, but we´re along for the ride, like it or not.
|
| |
|
Reply 18 - Posted by:
youngtexan, 12/23/2012 4:34:20 PM (No. 9080994)
Don´t blame me, I voted for Mitt. He´s the lesser evil than Obama is.
|
Reply 19 - Posted by:
bassman, 12/23/2012 4:35:32 PM (No. 9080996)
Voters should have been energized like never before against Obama, yet there were fewer votes for Romney than for McCain? Maybe all of these people that are disapperaing from the work force are truly disappearing?
|
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Thos Weatherby, 12/23/2012 4:37:43 PM (No. 9080997)
We´re quick to find reasons against the other side. Romney just didn´t run a good campaign. If you read the article they summed it up in the last few sentences. Romney just didn´t have his heart into it. We can blame stupid people. We can blame free gifts to others. We can blame voter fraud. We can blame anything and everything else. In the end it´s the Republicans and their mentality in running a campaign. One question, did they learn anything. Do you love it, do you hate it, there it is, the way you made it.
|
Reply 21 - Posted by:
thelmalou, 12/23/2012 4:42:01 PM (No. 9081001)
Wow. Way long, but an EXCELLENT deconstruct of the campaign. Geez frickin´ Louise...if it could have been done wrong, it was. First, putting that nimrod Stevens in charge was just a horrible, horrible decision. Second, the mechanics of the ground game and that stupid RCA thing were just awful. I am ASTOUNDED that they didn´t test the ORCA system prior to election day. I had heard that before, but dang...I am thunderstruck that somebody thought that was a good idea. Ye gods. And what an election to screw everything up. Only the most important election ever...only the future of the country in the balance. :bleaksigh:
|
Reply 22 - Posted by:
thelmalou, 12/23/2012 4:43:21 PM (No. 9081005)
ORCA, not RCA. One other thought - I haven´t read this, but it seemed to me that Paul Ryan was muted greatly after the convention. Not cool.
|
| |
|
Reply 23 - Posted by:
smsnod, 12/23/2012 4:58:05 PM (No. 9081024)
Paul Ryan was muted, just as Palin was. What we need is to flip the ticket. I voted for McCain because of Palin, I voted for Romney because of Paul Ryan. Well, that & I didn´t want to live through what we´re fixin´ to live through.
|
Reply 24 - Posted by:
Rakasha, 12/23/2012 4:59:48 PM (No. 9081028)
I´m not an easily offended person but I´m pretty sick of the ´far right´, ´evengelical Christian´ scapegoating. As a far right evangelical Christian I am pretty active in that community. I don´t know anyone in my aquaintance - and they have not been reticent this election season - who was planning not to vote for Romney, and not a one of them ever even mentioned the fact that he was a Mormon.
But, hey, if it makes some of you feel better to do the same thing to us that you claim has been done to Romney, by all means, you just keep at it. I feel I should warn you though, we are the one group of voters who do have somewhere better to go.
|
Reply 25 - Posted by:
msjena, 12/23/2012 5:09:51 PM (No. 9081041)
This is all Monday morning quarterbacking, but I do have to agree with some of the comments. I also do not understand why Ryan was apparently muzzled. If they were not going to use Ryan to get the youth vote or whatever, why did they pick him? He didn´t/couldn´t bring in his home state and so apparently had no purpose. I also do not understand why R/R didn´t just devote 90% of their resources to Florida and Ohio and the other 10% to Virginia or Nevada. Why were they wasting time and money in Pennsylvania and Michigan? Romney also needed to do a more aggessive outreach to the Christian right. Maybe he should have picked Huckabee as his VP--I´m serious! He certainly should have spent more time meeting with Christian leaders and also should have gotten Santorum on board earlier. Billy Graham´s apparent endorsement was too little, too late.
|
Reply 26 - Posted by:
anonymous, 12/23/2012 5:24:47 PM (No. 9081054)
Saying that the election was stolen makes us lazy. People need to realize that elections are there to be won but they can only be won through hard work and savvy politics.
I think there were several factors that swung the election in Obama´s favour, including factors that were beyond human control, such as Hurricane Sandy. If I were Romney, I probably would have gone for the jugular a bit more, especially on issues such as the fake "war-on-women" charges that the Democrats like to throw around. Romney is a very decent person - perhaps too decent.
Keep in mind that winning an election is a mega-operation. There are many levels. Each level needs to have its t´s crossed and its i´s dotted. There were some gaps in the Republican strategy in addition to the natural unavoidable weather event that dominated the media in the last week of the campaign.
|
Reply 27 - Posted by:
john56, 12/23/2012 5:24:57 PM (No. 9081055)
If the Romney campaign was going to muzzle Ryan, they should have just gone ahead and picked Rubio.
At least it would have given the campaign a better chance to carry Florida, while Ryan couldn´t even deliver Wisconsin.
For all the hullabaloo of picking a VP capable of being President (obviously, only a requirement when it come to Republicans; Exhibit 1: Joe Biden), it comes down to delivering votes.
What troubles me is Romney´s son saying that his dad really didn´t want to be President. Folks, if you are going to run for the job, for gosh sakes, want the stinkin´ thing.
Maybe the campaign was lost when Romney decided to run in 2012.
|
Reply 28 - Posted by:
preciosodrogas, 12/23/2012 5:31:23 PM (No. 9081060)
BHO was a candidate that could not win - economy, ObamaCare, debt, spending binge, unemployment, scandal after scandal. BHO was on the wrong side of every issue. It was a race that BHO could not win, it was Romney´s to lose and he did. Stole the race. We knew he would and Romney failed to counter it. He needed to have built an organization of lawyers ready to take on that problem in only a few swing states. Romney failed to counter the BHO PR battle. BHO beat him so far into the ground that by the time he dug himself out it was too late. Same for the primary battle. He failed to counter it in time to gain positive traction. It was a hare and tortoise race. Romney was the hare. He just waited too long. BHO threw everything had into it and more. He borrowed heavily. Romney tried to wait until the end to come out swinging and it was too little too late. And he pulled too many punches. It was the pulling of the punches that finally sank him.
|
Reply 29 - Posted by:
gem1400, 12/23/2012 5:41:31 PM (No. 9081074)
It was as easy as pie for them run against Romney - as an out-of-touch millionaire who couldn´t care lees about "the people" while he exported jobs to China. People BELIEVE this stuff, don´t the Republicans get it?
Look, the view from someone on the ground in NH is that the Romney team simply couldn´t get the job done. We were screaming at the National office about the message 0bama was putting on the street - and how it went un-answered by the campaign. The Dems were far better organized AND motivated.
Our ´pub office in the state doesn´t even have a paid professional director. The Dems have two.
And now it´s too late to wake up and put things straight - it´s all over. The country is all done. Sit back and enjoy the socialist ride, while it lasts.
|
Reply 30 - Posted by:
jalo1951, 12/23/2012 5:47:42 PM (No. 9081078)
All I know is Mitt would have worked his butt off to take back America. obama has never worked much in his life but he has the people in place who will destroy our country. How anyone could have voted for obama is beyond my comprehension.
|
Reply 31 - Posted by:
Bobn.T, 12/23/2012 5:49:38 PM (No. 9081081)
It´s quite simple, 95% of the blacks voted for 0bama because he´s black (racism), 51% of the whites voted for him because he´s black (racism), 70% of the Hispanics voted for him because he´s black (racism).
So you see, 0bama is in office because he´s black. Nothing more.
And he certainly is not qualified, not presidential, not respected throughout the world, and is chronically narcissistic.
|
Reply 32 - Posted by:
pmarc078, 12/23/2012 6:04:36 PM (No. 9081092)
maybe it wasnt such a good idea to say "let detroit go bankrupt" in the middle of the rust belt. it may just be as simple as that....
|
Reply 33 - Posted by:
bighambone, 12/23/2012 6:11:36 PM (No. 9081097)
Maybe it was just a classic case of a nice guy finishing last; or just maybe the Obama crew had Romney kicked so far in the dirt with the masses of low information voters before Romney even got out of his chair at his lakeside mansion in New Hampshire to hit the campaign trail, that it was impossible for Romney to recover, especially after the liberals dug up and publicized Romney´s 47% comments, proof in enough people´s mind that Romney "is not like us".
Then of course, maybe it was the other failing Republican candidates themselves who did a lot of damage to Romney, by stomping Romney into the dirt to begin with, during their long and out of control primary campaign.
|
Reply 34 - Posted by:
TXknitter, 12/23/2012 6:17:46 PM (No. 9081105)
Thank you #24. The GOP blamed us when McCain lost (the only one who could win, remember?) and now right on schedule, they blame us for Romney´s loss (the only one who could win, remember?) Our family sounds much like yours. We and all our friends joined behind Mitt once he became the nominee. I have yet to meet the "purist Christians" who supposedly stayed home and did not vote. There was massive voter fraud. Ever since 2000, Pubbies have refused to address it, much less make it an issue, hold hearings, propose legislation, etc. So, they share much of the blame.
|
Reply 35 - Posted by:
CDR, 12/23/2012 6:42:00 PM (No. 9081134)
maybe the BG should research rampant voter fraud in florida, ohio, just to name a couple easy ones to start with...
don´t want to tax there group think mentality to much
|
Reply 36 - Posted by:
ocjim, 12/23/2012 6:54:56 PM (No. 9081146)
The $200M or so that Obama spent early on in the battleground states had two purposes: - characterize Romney as Gordon Gekko, rich, mean and out of touch. - so muddy up the campaign as to have people throw up their hands in disgust and just stay home. This was the real vote suppression. He succeeded on both accounts.
And the Obama GOTV campaign was successful. They lost a lot of enthusiastic 2008 voters but they turned out the Black vote and through organization, created voters out of uninterested, low information voters and got them to the polls. Meanwhile Romney turned out less voters than McCain. In spite of the horrific specter of Obama serving another four years, many incredibly just stayed home showing that we, as a nation, are now just too stupid to save ourselves.
|
Reply 37 - Posted by:
Dixie, 12/23/2012 6:55:47 PM (No. 9081147)
I think a number of Republicans were apprehensive about what a rich man and a policy wonk would do to fix the economy. We ALL know it will be painful, but I think a good percentage of Republican voters were worried about the pain and decided it would be easier to kick the can down the road one more time.
These people didn´t vote for Obama, but they stayed home. They may have responded to offers for a ride to the polls by a neighbor on Election Day, or they may have used Romney´s religion to do what they wanted to do anyway...NOT buy into 4 painful years fixing the economy, bury head in the sand instead.
|
Reply 38 - Posted by:
IdahoSky, 12/23/2012 7:00:19 PM (No. 9081153)
I am still stunned that so many Americans preferred Obama to Romney. I guess class warfare finally won out. When even Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry deride "vulture capitalism", maybe we have reached the tipping point and the takers really do outnumber the makers. Any time I read a post that speaks of "country club Republicans", I know class envy is alive and well. It certainly works to the benefit of the Democrats.
|
Reply 39 - Posted by:
trackman999, 12/23/2012 7:05:30 PM (No. 9081160)
No, Americans did not prefer obama, the voting machines did.
|
Reply 40 - Posted by:
gem1400, 12/23/2012 8:03:10 PM (No. 9081207)
Again, speaking from a position on the ground, the Romney campaign failed because it had incompetent leadership. People who isolated themselves from the troops and refused to listen to us. From our position, the battle was over at the end of September. Then, D1 showed everybody what an empty suit 0bama really is. But Romney was "coached" not to go for the throat in D2 and didn´t even mention Benghazi in D3(!). Meanwhile, 0bama made all the liberal TV talk shows (like the "spew") which is where people really get their information, it seems.
In short, folks, we did it to ourselves. Everyone says Romney is a gifted manager. We didn´t see it, I can assure you!
|
Reply 41 - Posted by:
3XALADY, 12/23/2012 8:04:39 PM (No. 9081209)
#´s 11, 13, 24 and 34 - I like your posts. I belonged to a 1,000 person church at the time and have conservative friends outside of church. I belong to a tea party organization. I live in a mostly conservative neighborhood. Not once did I hear anyone say they wouldn´t vote for Romney. That election was stolen as sure as I´m sitting at this computer. Too many stories in the press told the tale.
|
Reply 42 - Posted by:
Heraclitus, 12/23/2012 8:16:25 PM (No. 9081219)
Many great points, here, as usual.
#38, i´m with you.
Romney lacked a unified Party and, even more significant, he lacked a unified media --both entertainment & "news"-- on his side, or at the very least, to give him a FAIR shot.
Remember when Letterman was mocking him for not coming on his show? Well, late-night comedy shows and day-time harridan fests are where the mal-informed and uniformed go for their political (social, moral, spiritual/religious, and everything else) insights.
This failure to educate and inform the voters --surely a huge task (i hope not insurmountable, but may be)-- AND the failure to go around or above or even below the media, are two of the main reasons Repubs or Conservatives are not drawing more voters to their side.
The uneducated voter is apathetic toward the most critical issues. They are shallow; they´re persuaded by the superficial. They do not think deeply; they are incurious.
And, i have heard that here in southern NH, people were arriving in buses from MA, same-day-registering, stating that they had "just moved" or were "planning to move" to NH. All fraud must be exposed and expurgated.
|
Reply 43 - Posted by:
Teleologicus, 12/23/2012 8:17:58 PM (No. 9081221)
Romney ran a lousy campaign. Many people here and elsewhere realized this and saw the defeat coming. We tried to raise the alarm. He refused to fight back as Obama Inc. smeared, slimed and slandered him. He declined to attack a single one of Obama´s multiple vulnerabilities. He called him a nice guy. All the while, the Obama machine -which includes the mainstream media- was pounding him every which way but loose. Only at the very end did he seem to wake up and start throwing a few punches himself. Too little, too late. The strategy of acting presidential and above it all while being mugged and trashed by the thugs running the Obama campaign was a formula for failure. He should have rolled up his sleeves, overcome his scruples, and gotten down in the gutter to mud wrestle with president nice guy. Republicans sometimes seem clueless about politics. Maybe they are in denial and don´t want to admit that the majority of the electorate today consists of dopes with short attention spans, little information, and less desire to exercise their wits. Candidates who want to win elections must talk the language the dopes understand. The Obama team knew this, and won.
Romney ran a crummy campaign. Blaming the predictable loss on everything but that only distracts attention and makes a repeat performance more likely next time. Democrats understand and know how to communicate with the dopes. Republicans, if they hope to win or even survive as a party, had better start learning - fast.
|
Reply 44 - Posted by:
Wetlandz, 12/23/2012 8:32:13 PM (No. 9081226)
Moochelle said get those "knuckleheads" to the polls, they did and they knew which states to maximize fraud. Romney´s campaign spun their wheels often, he did connect but not with those in the mushy middle. The media destroyed a good man and starved him of fair press. This isn´t my country anymore.
|
Reply 45 - Posted by:
Urgent Fury, 12/23/2012 8:47:38 PM (No. 9081235)
From the article it sounds like the GOPs fielded yet another guy who had no intention of winning.
|
Reply 46 - Posted by:
hamrman, 12/23/2012 9:23:01 PM (No. 9081262)
Massive Voter Fraud...nuff said!
|
Reply 47 - Posted by:
JoElla Bee, 12/23/2012 9:33:25 PM (No. 9081273)
Two things that make me question whether some in the Republican Party were, and are, more concerned with defeating conservatives within the Republican Party than winning the presidency. Of course, they would like to do both, but they have shown they will not support the candidacy of a conservative period. Then, they ironically attack conservatives - accusing them of losing the election by not being supportive of their own chosen candidate. Like many others here, I don´t know one conservative who didn´t vote for Romney, although many of them said it was a vote against Obama rather than for Romney.
FTA: (1) More than being reticent, Romney was at first far from sold on a second presidential run. Haunted by his 2008 loss, he initially told his family he would not do it. While candidates often try to portray themselves as reluctant, Tagg insisted his father’s stance was genuine.
“He wanted to be president less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire to . . . run,” said Tagg, who worked with his mother, Ann, to persuade his father to seek the presidency. “If he could have found someone else to take his place . . . he would have been ecstatic to step aside.
And --- (2)
In the coming months, Romney, ever the data-driven analyst, plans to contemplate how his political life came to an end, and what the party should do next, according to his son Tagg. The fight for the ideological soul of the party will play out for months.
|
Reply 48 - Posted by:
BarryNo, 12/23/2012 10:48:57 PM (No. 9081323)
Voter Fraud. That is the Dem Game Plan from here to eternity. They would not trust their lousy stooges to show up for an election so they have them stay home, get as many names listed for ´Early Voting´ that their Acorn-Friends can handle, then send in ringers for the rest on the public´s dime.
Voter Fraud. Blatant illegal disenfranchisement of you and me.
And our Founders went to war over tea-taxes.
|
Reply 49 - Posted by:
absalom, 12/24/2012 1:44:18 AM (No. 9081419)
Germany could neither understand nor accept its defeat in the Great War so it consoled itself w/the "stab in the back" nonsense. W/an effective unemployment rate > 16%, Romney managed to lose an unloseable election. And what do the paranoids insist? Why it´s because of Libertarians, dumb voters, Evangelicals, voter fraud, etc. TOTAL AND COMPLETE BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Romney lost because this is what feckless, hapless and inept nominees do. They lose.
|
Reply 50 - Posted by:
floridagator, 12/24/2012 8:02:37 AM (No. 9081576)
I don´t believe any of this. Zero. Romney had a helluva lot of fight in him during the primary. He had no qualms in fighting dirty against Republicans. If you actually think the Christian Right stayed home, you are an unmitigated fool. Do Republicans receive more political contributions ($$$) while in the minority? Hmmm... Is it easier to sit back and talk about what you´re going to do instead of defending a President who´s actually doing it? Hmmm... Remember all of those Republicans who rushed out to defend Bush/Cheney as they were vilified daily as Hitler/Darth Vader? Yeah, me neither. Maybe we should celebrate the death of the Republican Party along with the Democrats. They certainly deserve it, as evidenced by what I saw on the ground during the last election cycle. (Tks #29 - I saw similar here in FL) While the Democrats laugh at our inability to deliver a power punch, we should sweep their knees with a leg kick. I meet many conservative, wonderful, attractive women who have the courage to articulate all that is good in America, but I don´t think they´ll ever be able to make it past the Republican good-ole-boys. Sorry, but that´s just what I see. Please start emasculating these wimps at every opportunity. I´m certain that if a Republican woman was to say on national TV, "If John Boehner was a real man, he´d be able to defend our values against the President." He´d never be able to recover, and don´t get me started on our little princess from SC, Lindsey Graham.
|
Reply 51 - Posted by:
chillijilli, 12/24/2012 8:05:38 AM (No. 9081582)
Too many voters like their 2 years of unemployment and their free stuff. Promising jobs and an economic turnaround didn´t appeal to almost 50% of voters.
|
Reply 52 - Posted by:
Envirodude, 12/24/2012 8:05:40 AM (No. 9081583)
Rush Limbaugh cost Romney the election when he doubled down on Sandra Fluke. It gave the dems the wedge issue to keep moderate republican women from pulling the lever for any rep. Add in the rape-rape comments from various senate candidates and women were done.
Stupid people voted for stupid people for stupid reasons.
|
Reply 53 - Posted by:
cobieone, 12/24/2012 8:09:12 AM (No. 9081592)
Fellow LDotters, Zero received around 8 million less votes in 2012 than in 2008. Romney barely won as many votes in 2012 as McCain in 2008. Romney should have won big. It was reported that many evangelical Christians didn´t show up for McCain, so it doesn´t look like they showed for Romney either. Whatever is the truth, it is obvious that MANY conservatives, like in 2008, again stayed home and didn´t vote for Romney. I don´t care how bad a campaign the Romney team ran, there is NO excuse for not showing up and ridding this country of this anti-American administration. Conservatives are going to have to learn to unite to defeat the enemy of Leftism if we are ever going to take back our nation. My biggest fear was that we wouldn´t unite behind our nominee and the exit polling results show that is exactly why we lost. I hear it all the time, conservatives protesting the GOP for giving us moderates, RINOS, etc, and how they will not support the GOP nominee. We are playing right into the Left´s hands.
|
Reply 54 - Posted by:
Fiesta del sol, 12/24/2012 8:10:00 AM (No. 9081595)
Mitt Romney didn´t even want the job? So we had another candidate like McCain who couldn´t stand the grass roots? Romney sure spent N awful lot of money trashing Newt and Rick Perry, yet didn´t do the same to Obama during the general election. Thanks GOP establishment, thanks a lot.
Romney never went on Rush´s show, neither did McCain. At least McCain had Palin call into El Rushbo, but Romney didn´t have Ryan call in.
|
Reply 55 - Posted by:
vesicant, 12/24/2012 8:10:29 AM (No. 9081600)
What difference does it make if Romney did or did not run a bad campaign or did or did not muzzle Ryan or the Christian Right did or did not stay home or there was or was not anti-Mormon bias or ORCA did or did not crash or whatever your favorite hobby horse is? It doesn´t matter why Romney voters did or did not stay home. The only thing that matters is that there were enough stupid people to vote for scumbama twice. Romney was right about the half of America that is dependent on the government, and they didn´t like having it pointed out. Voting for scumbama made them feel it was OK to be a loser. That is scumabama´s America -- it´s not just OK to be a narcissistic loser, it´s de rigueur.
|
Reply 56 - Posted by:
bmw50, 12/24/2012 8:11:29 AM (No. 9081603)
What to start pointing fingers???
You´ll have to use both hands...
|
Reply 57 - Posted by:
owl, 12/24/2012 8:12:23 AM (No. 9081605)
BG , owned by NYT . # 1 has it correct Blaming voter fraud is silly . The American voter has been bought , lock and stock . Zero´s plan of ruining the economy and then turning the unemployed into beggars is working great . Now that he has four more years to continue his destruction , watch busniness attacked by government on a nuclear scale . The deciding factor tho , was too many just stayed home . Which leads us to wonder why they didn´t see Zero as more of a threat than they did , rather than MR as a less than great candidate .
|
Reply 58 - Posted by:
TigerLilly, 12/24/2012 8:16:31 AM (No. 9081611)
Romney is a good man, I liked him. Obama is at best a socialist, most likely a communist. He cares nothing for individuals, see his speech for Sen. Inoyue, it is all about him. Romney did not take advantage of "free" press, i.e., call Rush, talk to O´Reilly, or the faux news comedy shows. The convention was about "I love women" but the first Republican woman candidate for VP was not invited. I love Sarah and the Tea Party, both were both ignored. Ryan had so much appeal but we saw little of him. Wasted, wasted at the worst time in our history.
|
Reply 59 - Posted by:
kahunavol, 12/24/2012 8:16:34 AM (No. 9081612)
|
Reply 60 - Posted by:
Hobbiest, 12/24/2012 8:17:38 AM (No. 9081614)
The problem was not the Christian right. The problem was people like the knuckleheaded repairman I had to deal with the other day. 50 something. High school education, and not a very good high shool at that. The only thing he hates more than relgious people telling him what to do is rich people, most of whom he is convinced are Republicans. He dimissesd the Democrat leaders of companies like Goldman Sachs, Google, GE, the entertainment industry, etc. because he knows in his heart corporate America consists of evil Republicans. Oh, he hates the Tea Party, too. He ate up Obama´s negative ads with a spoon.
|
Reply 61 - Posted by:
kahunavol, 12/24/2012 8:18:51 AM (No. 9081618)
Apparently many on here, particularly those of a libertarian bent, are intellectually lazy and come to conclusions that satisfy them even when they are unsupported by evidence. For the past six weeks I continue to read that it was conservative Christians who cost Mittens the election when the truth is: 79 percent of white evangelicals voted for Romney on Tuesday. That´s the same percentage that Bush received in 2004, and more than Sen. John McCain received in 2008. The evangelical vote was 27 percent of the overall electorate -- the highest it´s ever been for an election.
|
Reply 62 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy, 12/24/2012 8:19:04 AM (No. 9081619)
We didn´t get out the vote...pure and simple. We let the msm define Romney before Romney could define Obie and expose him for the fraud he is. You don´t have to look far to understand. The evangelicals didn´t get their man nominated in August and weren´t about to vote for a mormon. Single women wanted the freebees that Obie was showering them with. Hispanics getting their citizenship freebees from Obie. The inner city blacks.., well you get the idea.
Now we will pay the price of not waking up. The election was ours to lose and too many decided that they would be ok with Obie rather than have to vote against their "principles" by voting for Romney.
|
Reply 63 - Posted by:
Doodah, 12/24/2012 8:22:51 AM (No. 9081625)
Please stop blaming conservative Christians on Romney loss. I believe it was massive VOTER FRAUD and/or Ron Paul supporters!
|
Reply 64 - Posted by:
StormCnter, 12/24/2012 8:26:22 AM (No. 9081634)
#15, in 2004, GW Bush won the electoral vote by six percent, the popular vote by 2 1/2 percent.
|
Reply 65 - Posted by:
leopardtwo, 12/24/2012 8:38:06 AM (No. 9081653)
Kranish completely leaves out any mention of the massive support given to Zero and the radical leftists by the news and entertainment media. When the prospective Dem voters turned to television, what did they see? 24/7 bashing of Romney and Ryan..... That sealed the deal for Zero more than anything else, Mr. Kranish.
|
Reply 66 - Posted by:
vesicant, 12/24/2012 8:50:07 AM (No. 9081673)
Let me simplify my argument. scumbama should not have gotten one vote. Not one. It should have taken just one person to vote for Romney. You all remind me of that joke about the guy who gets run over by a greyhound, except the greyhound is a bus. You´re all arguing about what kind of dog it was and ignoring the bus parked on top of you. It´s obvious that the left half of America deserves scumbama. Maybe the right half does, too.
|
Reply 67 - Posted by:
cgood, 12/24/2012 8:50:40 AM (No. 9081674)
Occam´s razor. It was historically impossible for Obama to win re-election based upon the terrible economy, high unemployment, and the diminished stature of America in the world and yet he did. We can internalize and believe that America lost her collective mind, or we can open our eyes to the obvious. A president backed by the notorious Chicago machine defies logic and history to achieve re-election. It is not silly to blame voter fraud. What is silly is to deny it occurred and, therefore, do nothing to prevent it from happening again.
|
Reply 68 - Posted by:
saucy, 12/24/2012 9:15:34 AM (No. 9081707)
Romney treated us as intelligent adults.
PINO treated us as shallow, self-interested teenagers who couldn´t sustain a cogent thought-only looking for freebies.
|
Reply 69 - Posted by:
Janjan, 12/24/2012 9:31:50 AM (No. 9081737)
If Republicans ever want to win another election they are going to have to get their hands dirty and tackle the voter fraud issue. Start by challenging in court every single district where there is even a hint of fraud. Change the law so that the military votes count no matter when the ballots get mailed. What Democrat will vote against it? It should take days to announce a winner of a national election in this country -not two hours after the first polls close.
|
Reply 70 - Posted by:
Bad Dog, 12/24/2012 9:32:35 AM (No. 9081739)
Gov. Romney wasted no amount of money or tactics to vilify and eliminate his primary opponents, many of whom would have been more acceptable to many of us. He spared no ridicule or attack ad. In the primaries.
I said here, often, during that time that if I could be confident he´d go after Obama the same way in the general, I´d be 110% behind him - with enthusiasm, money and time.
But he got the prize and then let it fall away. He appeared in my area four times, Paul Ryan twice, and I went to every appearance.
And each appearance was a carbon copy of each other appearance. There was no difference in the speeches from one to the next - all canned-sounding, the same five points, over and over. And yet, each crowd got bigger, and the cheering got louder.´
(cont´d....)
|
Reply 71 - Posted by:
Bad Dog, 12/24/2012 9:34:57 AM (No. 9081746)
(cont´d from #71...)
Ryan lost his jazz between his first and last appearance here, and it seemed obvious why ... he was muzzled into the canned speech too.
I asked his local campaign offices several times why there were NEVER any campaign signs to be held up for the national cameras we knew would be there? Never a response, never a sign. Recall that Obama´s campaign speeches were wall-papered behind him with his support signs. NEVER ONCE did we get signs prior to Romney´s or Ryan´s speeches, and we were forbidden from bringing our own. There was even one speech where the crowd was entirely in front of Romney - his biggest appearance in this area. And NOT ONE SINGLE person, with or without a sign, appeared behind him, cheering him on. Oh, but there were campaign signs on a table outside the arena, AFTER the event, as we left.
What drove all this ineffectiveness? What is really behind his historic and unnecessary loss? I have an idea.... total and complete mismanagement by his handlers. That´s what. The optics, at least here, were terrible and loser-like.
But WE TRIED.
|
Reply 72 - Posted by:
EnsignO´Toole, 12/24/2012 9:50:14 AM (No. 9081768)
IMO both #2 and #39 are right and nothing is ever going to change my mind.
#2 "The election was stolen by systemic systematic voter fraud." #39 "No, Americans did not prefer obama, the voting machines did."
#68 hits the nail on the head: "It is not silly to blame voter fraud. What is silly is to deny it occurred and, therefore, do nothing to prevent it from happening again."
|
Reply 73 - Posted by:
Avogadra, 12/24/2012 9:56:32 AM (No. 9081779)
I, too, am tired of having blame cast on evangelicals and libertarians. We knew what was at stake. And we got our butts out and voted for Romney.
What we did not do was take busload after busload of people into states that didn´t require picture ID and have them vote multiple times. We did not keep track of which voters hadn´t voted yet and cast ballots for them, because we "knew" they´d want to vote for Romney. We didn´t program the electronic voting machines to switch votes from Obama to Romney. And then self-erase the programing instructions once the polls closed.
When the Republicans care to address the real reasons Democrats can win any time they choose to, please let me know. In the meantime, my wallet is closed to them.
|
Reply 74 - Posted by:
bg38, 12/24/2012 10:06:21 AM (No. 9081797)
The attitude from my 3 adult children was: Class envy, we don´t want the rich guy, he doesn´t understand us. None of them are poor or disadvantaged. It worked very well.
|
Reply 75 - Posted by:
tatterdemalion, 12/24/2012 10:12:08 AM (No. 9081810)
Sorry for the confusion, but what difference could ORCA make on election day? I mean, how many people would truly change their plans about voting or not voting that day if they received a phone call on election day?
|
Reply 76 - Posted by:
RancherJack, 12/24/2012 10:14:05 AM (No. 9081817)
Boston Globe writer is chock full of undigested meals ... it´s exactly and only what #2 said.
To the tenth power.
|
Reply 77 - Posted by:
4Justice, 12/24/2012 10:15:04 AM (No. 9081818)
Come on folks...we have to be honest about it. It was a combination of several factors. Not a single one was solely responsible. If it could go bad, it did go bad. Massive election fraud is evident--no question about it. Too many low info voters is also a given. ORCA blew up...makes you wonder if that was an inside job (no testing beforehand???). The Dems defined who Romney was (as they have been doing to the entire GOP for 50 years!!) and nobody spoke up or fought back (just like the stupid GOP thinking they are above addressing such "ridiculous charges"). People believe the Dem lies...as I say always...it is ALL about perception. The Dems are master manipulators--we aren´t. And yes, a lot of people did sit it out or vote 3rd party. I could list dozens more reasons, but why bother...it´s over. We need to change strategy or die.
|
Reply 78 - Posted by:
Cleanhousein2012, 12/24/2012 10:16:07 AM (No. 9081820)
It was the candidate, along with a dash of voter fraud.. Not the voters. However, at the rate things are going, the GOP will lose the House in 2014. I´ll never again vote for my RINO CongressCritter.
If you vote like a Democrat, we might as well vote for a Democrat.
|
Reply 79 - Posted by:
Packard 5682, 12/24/2012 10:26:26 AM (No. 9081846)
I agree that Romney failed to hit Øbama as hard and as relentlessly as he did Gingrich, Santorum et al in the primaries. It was obvious that the RINOs were running the campaign. However, almost everyone on our side is overlooking or ignoring the massive voter fraud that delivered the election to Øbama. The SEIU and other union groups were having "voter parties" in the early voting states. They collected hundreds of ballots from election offices, had "voter parties" where voters were given ballots and told how to vote. On election day, these ballots were delivered to the election offices. How about Philly where GOP poll watchers were forcibly removed from voting places? How about all those precincts in the battleground states, but particularly in OH, PA and FL where voter "turnout" was 140% of the number of registered voters. This fraud cost Lt. Col. Allen West his re-election in his district, St. Lucie County delivering the decisive blow with all the fraudulent turnout there. As other posters have commented, the Gutless Old Party is not going to win until it starts countering the massive and systematic voter fraud the put Øbama back in for a second term.
|
Reply 80 - Posted by:
forward, 12/24/2012 10:27:38 AM (No. 9081851)
This is a good article, worth reading closely for lessons learned and the way to turn it around in 2016. Barking "voter fraud!" won´t win it the next time. There is no evidence of widespread fraud. The polls everybody on our side yelled at and said were inaccurate? Those polls were accurate. To the decimal point in some cases. I am tired of some of us barking like hysterical dogs on the sidelines rather than dealing in facts and strategy. The sooner we get real about how Obama won and how Romney lost, and how to come back MUCH stronger in 2016, the better. The details are all right here in the post-mortem. Everyone should read this.
|
Reply 81 - Posted by:
Grambo, 12/24/2012 10:30:48 AM (No. 9081860)
We brought a knife to a gunfight. Romney followed the Marquess of Queensberry rules, while Obama followed street fighter rules. We needed Newt’s oratory and a go-for-the jugular attitude. We’ll never beat the Democrats by staying above the fray, or by letting them game the voting machines. Next time we either beat them at their own game, or just stay home. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
|
Reply 82 - Posted by:
Kaps5656, 12/24/2012 10:41:29 AM (No. 9081878)
#2 nailed it.
|
Reply 83 - Posted by:
Kate318, 12/24/2012 10:50:46 AM (No. 9081893)
Good Lord, people, when are we going to wake up and address the real problem? "Saying that the election was stolen makes us lazy"??? What makes us lazy is continuing to blame those evil Bible thumping Christians, or hurricanes or ground games. I have a lot of conservative Christians as clients, and to a person, they were all voting for Romney, including the Catholics! Of course the election was stolen. How many first hand stories have to be reported before we realize that their is a very large, dangerous animal in the room that needs to be dispatched? The democrats certainly don´t have every "i" dotted and "t" crossed, and they seem to do just fine in elections. Why is that? Mitt Romney might have been "too decent"?! You´re kidding me, right? If that´s true, we are in real trouble.
|
Reply 84 - Posted by:
Jebediah, 12/24/2012 10:55:35 AM (No. 9081908)
A point that is not mentioned: Obama more or less let the Presidency shift for itself while he campaigned personally 24/7 for at least 8 months: ethical, no; effective, yes. In the last months that smile was so wide that the gums were exposed, the eyes were closed........a man who has been described as remote, cold, poured it on like Morton´s salt. And it worked. (And of course, one can never discount the Press, who ignored Benghazi---still do---and anything else that might not show Obama as the sun shining on the earth. For them, I have a total contempt.)
|
Reply 85 - Posted by:
VAfreedomluver, 12/24/2012 10:59:13 AM (No. 9081916)
Romney ran a good campaign. Maybe not perfect, but it should have been good enough.
The simple fact is that a majority of the Americans who bothered to vote decided to vote for disaster, all in the hope of receiving a little more "free stuff."
How do we conservatives and libertarians overcome that next time? I´m not sure. And make no mistake about it, the coming economic implosion isn´t going to swing things our way. It´ll drive even more people into the mooch column.
|
Reply 86 - Posted by:
thelmalou, 12/24/2012 10:59:21 AM (No. 9081917)
Two more observations, if I may:
a) Voter fraud or not, the RNC is PROHIBITED from challenging votes based on voter fraud due to a consent decree from frickin´ 1981 or whatever. Find Christian Adams´s article on same at pjmedia and elsewhere.
2) Obama revamped and updated the 2004 Rover strategery to fantastic effect. Why would someone (Romney/RNC) attempt to fix something that was not broken? But hey - all those consultants (Stevens, et al) are doing just fine today, thankyouverymuch...it´s we regular Americans who are headed for disaster. :bleaksigh:
|
Reply 87 - Posted by:
thelmalou, 12/24/2012 11:00:17 AM (No. 9081920)
Dang it - ROVE, not Rover. And I´m not a fan of his, but he did know how to get GW elected twice in a hostile environment.
|
Reply 88 - Posted by:
RightShoe, 12/24/2012 11:00:26 AM (No. 9081923)
Son Tagg say of his father, Mitt . . .
“If he could have found someone else to take his place . . . he would have been ecstatic to step aside.
I don´t know what to do with this statement. I watched that bloody Republican primary. It was Romney´s biggest gift to Democrats. There were others who wanted the opportunity to take on Obama. Romney did his level best to destroy all of them, and he did.
We could have used their help in the campaign, too. We might have won with their help! But team Romney would have none of it.
This story leaves me flabbergasted.
|
Reply 89 - Posted by:
TheMotherCO, 12/24/2012 11:13:21 AM (No. 9081959)
A real lot of coulda, shoulda and wouldas on this thread. I do not care who runs for office I will vote straight Republican. I will not be picky and stay home because palin is not on the ticket, I will vote by a crawling over vomit to vote Republican. We see a Benghazi happening that would not have gone on if Mitt were prez. Too late
|
Reply 90 - Posted by:
dolphin, 12/24/2012 11:21:18 AM (No. 9081972)
Of course they cheat. Of course the press likes them better. Of course morons are going to fall for movie star endorsements and bumpersticker platitudes.
Of course the Republicans run the most naive campaign known to mankind.
I didn´t stay home this time, but if I don´t see somebody with some awareness of all this, I´m going to stay home next time. This is a promise.
|
Reply 91 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy, 12/24/2012 11:28:25 AM (No. 9081981)
It´s also interesting how Kranish ignored the msm´s role in infuencing the election outcome. No siree. The msm just reports the facts with no bias. sarc/off.
|
Reply 92 - Posted by:
Cleanhousein2012, 12/24/2012 11:32:02 AM (No. 9081986)
We need a third party. The People are done with the Republican Party. It´s evolved into the Center right Dems and a few conservatives who still believe they are repubs.
|
Reply 93 - Posted by:
whyyeseyec, 12/24/2012 11:44:21 AM (No. 9082001)
Who will be the next GOP nominee in 2016 who doesn`t want to be president?
|
Reply 94 - Posted by:
gpau, 12/24/2012 12:07:20 PM (No. 9082042)
The election was stolen...you want the specifics: "Master Plan to Steal an Election" at www.brushfires-of-freedom.com/steal-an-election.html
Americans´ trust in truth is being systematically undermined by Soros, Obama and this entire scheme.
Keep the faith. Keep trusting. The truth will out. This monumental fraud must and will be undone.
|
Reply 95 - Posted by:
Jechislo, 12/24/2012 12:25:53 PM (No. 9082070)
Then why didn´t we take back the Senate? A Republican Senate could have muted Obama. Do the same reasons stated in Globe article apply to us not now controlling the Senate?
|
Reply 96 - Posted by:
redwhite&blue2, 12/24/2012 1:10:15 PM (No. 9082147)
We wuz robbed! By thugs! Get it? FRAUD! I´ll bet you they cheated their arses off and who´s doing anything about it? Only Col. West did....not Romney´s bunch. There goes America, down the drain of Marxist lies and ass-press rump-swab lap dog b.s. God help us all this Christmas....
|
Reply 97 - Posted by:
ebuilder, 12/24/2012 1:21:36 PM (No. 9082171)
Ask yourself what the democrat message is. Isn´t it, "We´re transforming America to a place that is less greedy, and fairer for all, in spite of evil republicans?" And isn´t the republican message, "We understand the democrat message, but perhaps they are just wrong about all of us being evil. We can´t admit it, but we are the party of closeted homosexuals. So pull up your socks, forgive us our conservatives, broaden the economic base through lower tax rates and high employment, and come together for a shadowy New World Order, or maybe a national marijuana law that will send needed reparations to a world in ruins due to our pollution, religious wars, and xenophobia."
|
Reply 98 - Posted by:
tonyl, 12/24/2012 1:35:32 PM (No. 9082184)
Mitt´s loss hit me like a freight train. I never saw it coming. All the polls had him up. He had 20k at a rally in Ohio. obama had a hand full. This was supposed to be a slam dunk for Mitt. My take is that the dems are great at gaming and rigging the system. Whether it be cushy government jobs, securing welfare benefits, cronyism. They are now embedded in the vote counting process where once it was based on honesty and good will. You won´t find those two qualities in the demorats makeup.
|
Reply 99 - Posted by:
Nevadadad46, 12/24/2012 2:00:34 PM (No. 9082209)
I think the election was - for the most part- fair. I believe the election was stolen, starting back in 1963. Our school systmes were taken over, one by one, by the leftists- it was very insidious. But, now, with the idiots graduated and having grown kids themselves that vote, it´s too late. The two generations is all they needed. Now, what?
|
Reply 100 - Posted by:
larryp, 12/24/2012 2:29:04 PM (No. 9082242)
I knew it ws over when John and Ken on 50 Thousand Watt (practically Calif to the midwest)KFI referred to the Republican primary field as "mental patients". Why say anthing at all if they didn´t like them? But for a radio station that depends on people buuying cars and putting in new windows or getting private pay eye surgeries,it was crazy to think another 4 yrs of Obama is going to suppport their customer base. Also the mewling of the Roman Catholics over contraceptive and Abortion was an alert too. Never once did a Bp or a cardinal say vote for romney. Or ´Just this time vote GOP´. That is because Roman Catholics, vote Democrat. always. So the 30 million votes the GOP could have gotten to stay the horror of Abortion mandates, went to Obama and the RCs went "ehhh..."to matters of faith and doctrine. Good bye. Unless obama´s junta creates a work/reach around for you folks.
|
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Oblio"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Most Recent Articles posted by "Oblio"
|
|
The Secrets of Princeton
|
|
New York Times, by Ross Douthat
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/7/2013 8:08:09 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Susan Patton, the Princeton alumna who became famous for her letter urging Ivy League women to use their college years to find a mate, has been denounced as a traitor to feminism, to coeducation, to the university ideal. But really she’s something much more interesting: a traitor to her class. Her betrayal consists of being gauche enough to acknowledge publicly a truth that everyone who’s come up through Ivy League culture knows intuitively —
|
Piercing the secrecy of offshore tax havens
|
|
Washington Post, by Scott Higham, Michael Hudson*
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/7/2013 7:06:15 AM
Post Reply
|
|
A New York hedge fund manager allegedly swindles $12 million from a prominent Baltimore family. An Indiana couple is accused of bilking hundreds of customers by charging for free trials of cosmetic products. A financial manager in Texas promises 23-percent returns but absconds with $33.5 million of his investors’ money in a classic Ponzi scheme.All three cases have one thing in common: money that ended up in offshore accounts and trusts set up in tax havens around the world.
|
Former News Corp President Chernin bids $500 million for Hulu
|
|
Reuters, by Ronald Grover and Jennifer Saba
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/6/2013 8:49:03 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Former News Corp president Peter Chernin has bid around $500 million for Hulu, the online video streaming service he helped create in 2007, according to two sources with knowledge of Hulu´s sale process. The website, jointly controlled by News Corp and Walt Disney Co, reached out to potential buyers in March after initially contemplating a deal in which one would buy out the other. It is not clear whether that transaction is still being contemplated.
|
After Pentagon investigations, three Army generals censured for misconduct
|
|
Washington Post, by Craig Whitlock
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/6/2013 8:08:11 AM
Post Reply
|
|
After lengthy investigations, the Pentagon has determined that three Army generals committed misconduct in separate incidents, adding to an unusually long list of senior military commanders who have been censured over the past year.On Friday, defense officials confirmed that Army Maj. Gen. Ralph O. Baker, the commander of a strategic counterterrorism force on the Horn of Africa, was fired March 28 on charges of sexual misconduct. Two officials familiar with the case said Baker was investigated for allegedly groping a female civilian employee after he had been drinking.
|
Diplomacy downplay: Obama administration minimizes latest North Korean nuke threat
|
|
Washington Times, by Guy Taylor and Shaun Waterman
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/6/2013 7:02:06 AM
Post Reply
|
|
The Obama administration appeared eager Thursday to downplay the North Korean military’s latest threat that it has the final authority to carry out “cutting-edge, smaller, lighter and diversified” nuclear strikes on the United States.“This is just the latest in a long line of aggressive statements,” (Snip)the recent tension between Washington and Pyongyang “does not need to get hotter.”The remarks were the first public reaction from the Obama administration since Wednesday’s claim by the North Korean military that the “moment of explosion is approaching fast” with the possibility of war breaking out “today or tomorrow.”
|
Why Obama´s ´Best-Looking Attorney General´ Comment Was a Gaffe
|
|
The Atlantic, by Garance Franke-Ruta
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 4/6/2013 6:51:15 AM
Post Reply
|
|
President Obama´s biggest gaffe yesterday when speaking of California Attorney General Kamala Harris was not in flirtatiously complimenting her as "the best-looking attorney general," but in introducing an observation from the system of beauty into a forum that was about the system of power.What´s that, you say? Irin Carmon does a great job in Salon in laying out the bounds of propriety for when it´s appropriate to talk about a woman´s looks as a general matter. But I´ve long felt we lack a solid theoretical underpinning for easily discussing these issues, and why precisely it is that
|
|
Charles Murray´s Gay-Marriage Surprise
|
|
New Yorker, by Jane Mayer
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Oblio- 3/17/2013 5:00:38 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Political scientist Charles Murray has never backed away from controversy, but usually his opponents have been liberals. Friday, however, he managed to upset conservatives at the annual conference known as CPAC, where thousands of bewildered Republicans gathered to figure out the way forward after their party’s 2012 electoral defeat. Murray ditched his prepared remarks on “America Coming Apart” in favor of an impromptu admonition to fellow conservatives to accept the legalization of both gay marriage and abortion.
|
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Raindrops wash away reeling O’s fake veneer
|
|
New York Post, by Michael Goodwin
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/17/2013 5:28:00 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Watching President Obama trying to dodge raindrops and responsibility yesterday reminded me of the moment when Dorothy pulls back the curtain and discovers that the Wizard of Oz is “just a man.” Stripped of his spell of mystery and power, the wizard is worse than mortal. He’s a fake. So it was with Obama in the Rose Garden. His performance was tired and trite, ordinary to the point of dull. His veneer of passion was so transparent that you could see him trying to summon his old-time magic by pushing the buttons
|
Obama a new Nixon? Oh, get serious.
|
|
Washington Post, by Editorial
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Dreadnought- 5/16/2013 10:54:51 PM
Post Reply
|
|
STANDING BEFORE reporters Thursday, President Obama declined an invitation to compare the recent scandals weighing down his administration with those that forced President Nixon to resign in 1974. So allow us to do the work for him: There is no comparison. Nixon, in a series of crimes that collectively came to be known as Watergate, directed from the White House and Justice Department a concerted campaign against those he perceived as political enemies, in the process subverting the FBI, the IRS, other government agencies and the electoral process to his nefarious purposes. Mr. Obama has done nothing of the kind.
|
Weiner’s Wife Didn’t Disclose Consulting Work She Did While Serving in State Dept.
|
|
New York Times, by Raymond Hernandez
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/17/2013 5:43:54 AM
Post Reply
|
|
The State Department, under Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, created an arrangement for her longtime aide and confidante Huma Abedin to work for private clients as a consultant while serving as a top adviser in the department. Ms. Abedin did not disclose the arrangement — or how much income she earned — on her financial report. It requires officials to make public any significant sources of income. An adviser to Mrs. Clinton, Philippe Reines, said that Ms. Abedin was not obligated to do so. The disclosure of the agreement that Ms. Abedin made with the State Department comes as her husband,
|
NBC´s Todd Warns: If GOP Investigates Obama Scandals, ´The Voters Will Punish Them´
|
|
Newsbusters, by Kyle Drennen
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Desert Fox- 5/16/2013 1:51:02 PM
Post Reply
|
|
On Thursday´s NBC Today, in a desperate attempt to deflect from the scandals engulfing the Obama administration, co-host Savannah Guthrie wondered: "I read a headline yesterday that said Republicans see blood in the water. That they see a president who´s very vulnerable politically. Is there a danger that they will overreach?" Chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd agreed with the slanted premise: "There is. I mean, that´s what happened to Republicans in 1998 with Bill Clinton.
|
When it rains, it pours: Ten press conference take aways
|
|
Washington Post, by Jennifer Rubin
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Pluperfect- 5/17/2013 4:52:42 AM
Post Reply
|
|
President Obama’s press conference in the rain was not a success, if by success, his supporters would mean an event which convinces anyone who doesn’t work for him that he’s getting ahead of the scandal deluge. The sight of a Marine holding an umbrella over his head only added to the weirdness of the event. So what did we learn? 1. He has full confidence in Attorney General Eric Holder, the man who purportedly recused himself (whenever) without putting it in writing (whatever). When asked about the untrammeled snooping on Associated Press reporters and editors,
|
Obama 47 minutes late for his press conference; leaves reporters in the rain
|
|
Washington Examiner, by Charlie Spiering
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: KarenJ1- 5/16/2013 1:20:06 PM
Post Reply
|
|
“I look forward to taking some questions at tomorrow’s press conference,” President Obama said last night, after announcing the resignation of the acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller. The president scheduled a noon press conference today with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in honor of his visit. Reporters, however, found themselves waiting outside in the rain for Obama, who was 47 minutes late. Only New York Times reporter Mark Landler had an umbrella.
|
Fox’s Brit Hume: ‘Stupid’ For GOP To Think Of Impeaching Obama Over Recent Scandals
|
|
Mediaite, by Andrew Kirell
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: KarenJ1- 5/17/2013 5:05:46 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Appearing on Laura Ingraham‘s radio show this afternoon, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume suggested some Republicans were “stupid” to consider impeachment of President Obama a viable response to the ongoing scandals regarding the Benghazi attacks, the IRS targeting of conservative groups, and the Justice Department secret seizure of AP phone records. Likely referring to some GOP lawmakers, including Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) who has put impeachment on the table as an option for handling the Benghazi fallout, Ingraham asked Hume to comment on how some Republican leaders have “ran to the microphone” to suggest removal
|
|
|

Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | Register | Rules & FAQs | Search | Post | Contact | RSS | Contribute | Logout | Forgot Password
© 2013 Lucianne.com Media Inc.
~~~c~~~
|