Also, how utterly useless was Paul Ryan to that campaign? Schooled in the debate by Biden, barely seen throughout the past couple of weeks and they ended up losing Wisconsin by only slightly less than they lost Minnesota.
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
Glenn Beck said everyone should start buying up guns, ammunition and precious metals.
This is doing the rounds on FB righties pages... clutching at straws comes to mind...
Caption: Look at all of the red. Guess its the city people in blue who love all this free stuff.
(Americans Against Barack Obama)
The republicans seem to win where no one lives.
Where is the Beckster these days? I'd really, really like to know what he thinks today.
Or has he locked himself in the Brain room with all his gold and is steadily bomb proofing the walls?
Or has he locked himself in the Brain room with all his gold and is steadily bomb proofing the walls?
He's surely devastated that his fellow Mormon didn't win.
You've put a stray M in there Saliph.
They do some silver ads too and catheters.
The Maroon 5 thing with the annoying song really gets on my tits though.
Fair & balanced.
Scott Brown's concession speech was pretty gracious. Though tbf I wasn't really listening, as the girl standing next to him would get it.
I read that a republican senate candidate named Linda Mcmahon spent around 100 mil $ from her own pocket in her attempt to get elected into the senate and failed.
crazy money
crazy money
I was thinking earlier how completely insignificant he was in these closing weeks.
I haven't seen Beck for a while, but from the last few years of his insane ramblings on Obama and the left, he must be in a very dark place right now.
The Fox Brain room?
What the living feck. Why do these rightwingers have such a 'doom and gloom' forecast for every thing?
Darryl **** You are right about De-Ja-Vu, Gas prices going up, Another Solyndra because the administration is so transparent, permitting U.S. Citizens to die while being Ambassadors, start of new unnecessary programs, and many more repeats. A society passes slowly while collapsing in on itself not all at once.....a very real picture currently. Can't wait for sequestration and we lose our Armed Forces, that will impress our enemies.
Darryl **** You are right about De-Ja-Vu, Gas prices going up, Another Solyndra because the administration is so transparent, permitting U.S. Citizens to die while being Ambassadors, start of new unnecessary programs, and many more repeats. A society passes slowly while collapsing in on itself not all at once.....a very real picture currently. Can't wait for sequestration and we lose our Armed Forces, that will impress our enemies.
Alan Coombs hair!...and what the feck is up with his left eyebrow!
He's a weird fecker. He'll be in Dr. Kraut-Hammer & the Nazi gorillas from space too.
Shut up Lou...she isn't going to suck you off no matter how much you compliment her.
Yeah, those blue parts? That's where the PEOPLE are...
This is doing the rounds on FB righties pages... clutching at straws comes to mind...
Caption: Look at all of the red. Guess its the city people in blue who love all this free stuff.
(Americans Against Barack Obama)
What's that little oasis in TX?
No, it's Austin.
Austin, Massachusetts?
No, Austin Powers.
what is Glen Beck saying.
he did that 912 crap...
bet he cries a lot no matter what he does.
he did that 912 crap...
bet he cries a lot no matter what he does.
Pol Pot...?
Yeah, University of Austin in Boston.
House speaker babbling on about how they've been given a mandate to not raise taxes, blah blah blah.
He looks like he should be on a Daytime soap opera.
He looks like he should be on a Daytime soap opera.
what do all those unemployed neo-cons do now?
Where do Fox keep getting all these Village of the Damned aryan playboy women from? Do they have a "room" for that too?
I've Americanised his name, duh.
Shepard Smith giving one of the Dolls of the Damned a hard time over campaign rhetoric and blabbing on about taxes.
I quite like Smith, he seems like a normal person. Even if he doesn't look even remotely like one.
I quite like Smith, he seems like a normal person. Even if he doesn't look even remotely like one.
Four more years. Four more years. Four more years … of what?
That’s pretty much the way the political conversation went Tuesday night, at least based on what I saw on television. Just minutes after the networks declared President Obama the winner, and while Karl Rove was still ranting to Fox colleagues about Mitt Romney's Ohio numbers, pundits were already starting a debate over whether the election gave Obama a mandate—and, if so, what that mandate entailed.
It’s a reasonable and important question. But before we get to it, let’s not forget that the significance of this election is as much about the past as the future. And that shouldn't diminish it.
Romney and the Republicans had turned the election into a referendum on liberalism—not just the liberalism of Obama, but also the liberalism of Johnson and Kennedy, of Truman and Roosevelt. They proposed massive, fundamental changes to the welfare state and wholesale rollbacks of women’s rights, and challenged the philosophy behind such policies—the whole idea that governments should act to protect vulnerable groups and to guarantee economic security.
It was a huge gambit. And it failed. But conservatives aren’t going to drop their agenda. Come January, Paul Ryan will be back in the House of Representatives, running the budget committee, and he’ll find plenty of allies on and off Capitol Hill. But proposals to make Medicare a voucher program, to decimate Medicaid and food stamps, to reduce federal spending by unprecedented increments—those proposals have almost no chance of becoming law, at least in the forseeable future.
Support thought-provoking, quality journalism. Join The New Republic for $3.99/month.
And the most recent addition to the welfare state, the signature accomplishment of Obama’s term, isn’t going anywhere, either. I’ve waited more than two years to write this sentence: The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. It survived the Supreme Court and now it has survived the threat of a unified Republican government determined to repeal it. Implementation of the law will present huge challenges, but, for the first time in a long while, the administration and its allies can focus on those challenges rather than on rearguard political fights to keep the program alive.
The political focus on these programs over the last few months led many observers to say the campaign was “small.” I think these observers have forgotten how much these programs have meant—and will mean—to most Americans. For those who get sick, or lose their jobs, or use public schools, or have disabilities, or need college loans—for all of them, Obama’s victory means peace of mind.
The election also sent a big, powerful message about what it means to be an American. The election of an African-American to the nation’s highest office is old news by now, but it remains remarkable, particularly given the feverish, relentless efforts by conservatives to paint Obama as un-American. And the same goes for Obama’s political coalition. Lazy pundits have fallen into the habit of dismissing Obama’s constituency because it cedes white voters, particularly white men, to Republicans. But Obama’s disproportionately female, disproportionately minority coalition happens to be majority. And it's getting better. They are no longer the "other." They are the authentic face of America.
But what about the next four years? Doesn’t Obama still need a governing plan? Sure. And if Obama has been relatively silent lately on some urgent issues—chief among them, climate change—he’s been quite clear when it comes to economic policy. He’s produced plans for strengthening the recovery. He’s laid out principles for reducing the deficit: Relatively modest reductions in spending coupled with higher taxes on the wealthy. And with the coming debate over the spending sequester and expiration of the Bush tax cuts, both set for January 2013, Obama will get a chance to apply those principles.
The stakes in this fight are large: Depending on the terms, they will define the scope of the federal government for at least a generation to come. And, unlike in recent fiscal debates, Obama should have leverage—more, perhaps, than at any time since the earliest days of his presidency. He can hold out in the debate over the sequester and Bush tax cuts, because the default action—doing nothing—is far worse for Republicans than it is for him. And with the newly elected Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren joining the reelected Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse in the Senate, Obama should have a more unified and incrementally more liberal congressional party behind him. (Hopefully they will push Obama, even as they get his back.)
How this plays out depends a great deal on the Republicans, of course. At least since early 2010, after the bruising fight over health care, Obama has been predicting that the Republicans would not become a responsible governing party until they experienced the consequences of extremism. Now that has happened. Republicans effectively ceded winnable Senate seats by nominating far-right candidates. And they lost a potentially winnable presidential election by nominating a candidate who ran on the Paul Ryan budget and even named Ryan as his running mate.
Maybe some moderates will react to Tuesday’s GOP debacle by breaking with the Tea Party, and reaching out to Obama. Or maybe they will be too scared of reprisals from the right wing, as they have ever since Obama took office. I have no idea. But, whatever happens over the next four years, Obama’s reelection guarantees that the laws passed during his first term stay on the books. That instantly makes him one of the most accomplished presidents of modern times. Already Obama and his allies have shaped this country in ways that will last for generations—making life more secure, and creating new opportunities, for tens of millions of Americans.
good article from the New Republic.
That’s pretty much the way the political conversation went Tuesday night, at least based on what I saw on television. Just minutes after the networks declared President Obama the winner, and while Karl Rove was still ranting to Fox colleagues about Mitt Romney's Ohio numbers, pundits were already starting a debate over whether the election gave Obama a mandate—and, if so, what that mandate entailed.
It’s a reasonable and important question. But before we get to it, let’s not forget that the significance of this election is as much about the past as the future. And that shouldn't diminish it.
Romney and the Republicans had turned the election into a referendum on liberalism—not just the liberalism of Obama, but also the liberalism of Johnson and Kennedy, of Truman and Roosevelt. They proposed massive, fundamental changes to the welfare state and wholesale rollbacks of women’s rights, and challenged the philosophy behind such policies—the whole idea that governments should act to protect vulnerable groups and to guarantee economic security.
It was a huge gambit. And it failed. But conservatives aren’t going to drop their agenda. Come January, Paul Ryan will be back in the House of Representatives, running the budget committee, and he’ll find plenty of allies on and off Capitol Hill. But proposals to make Medicare a voucher program, to decimate Medicaid and food stamps, to reduce federal spending by unprecedented increments—those proposals have almost no chance of becoming law, at least in the forseeable future.
Support thought-provoking, quality journalism. Join The New Republic for $3.99/month.
And the most recent addition to the welfare state, the signature accomplishment of Obama’s term, isn’t going anywhere, either. I’ve waited more than two years to write this sentence: The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. It survived the Supreme Court and now it has survived the threat of a unified Republican government determined to repeal it. Implementation of the law will present huge challenges, but, for the first time in a long while, the administration and its allies can focus on those challenges rather than on rearguard political fights to keep the program alive.
The political focus on these programs over the last few months led many observers to say the campaign was “small.” I think these observers have forgotten how much these programs have meant—and will mean—to most Americans. For those who get sick, or lose their jobs, or use public schools, or have disabilities, or need college loans—for all of them, Obama’s victory means peace of mind.
The election also sent a big, powerful message about what it means to be an American. The election of an African-American to the nation’s highest office is old news by now, but it remains remarkable, particularly given the feverish, relentless efforts by conservatives to paint Obama as un-American. And the same goes for Obama’s political coalition. Lazy pundits have fallen into the habit of dismissing Obama’s constituency because it cedes white voters, particularly white men, to Republicans. But Obama’s disproportionately female, disproportionately minority coalition happens to be majority. And it's getting better. They are no longer the "other." They are the authentic face of America.
But what about the next four years? Doesn’t Obama still need a governing plan? Sure. And if Obama has been relatively silent lately on some urgent issues—chief among them, climate change—he’s been quite clear when it comes to economic policy. He’s produced plans for strengthening the recovery. He’s laid out principles for reducing the deficit: Relatively modest reductions in spending coupled with higher taxes on the wealthy. And with the coming debate over the spending sequester and expiration of the Bush tax cuts, both set for January 2013, Obama will get a chance to apply those principles.
The stakes in this fight are large: Depending on the terms, they will define the scope of the federal government for at least a generation to come. And, unlike in recent fiscal debates, Obama should have leverage—more, perhaps, than at any time since the earliest days of his presidency. He can hold out in the debate over the sequester and Bush tax cuts, because the default action—doing nothing—is far worse for Republicans than it is for him. And with the newly elected Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren joining the reelected Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse in the Senate, Obama should have a more unified and incrementally more liberal congressional party behind him. (Hopefully they will push Obama, even as they get his back.)
How this plays out depends a great deal on the Republicans, of course. At least since early 2010, after the bruising fight over health care, Obama has been predicting that the Republicans would not become a responsible governing party until they experienced the consequences of extremism. Now that has happened. Republicans effectively ceded winnable Senate seats by nominating far-right candidates. And they lost a potentially winnable presidential election by nominating a candidate who ran on the Paul Ryan budget and even named Ryan as his running mate.
Maybe some moderates will react to Tuesday’s GOP debacle by breaking with the Tea Party, and reaching out to Obama. Or maybe they will be too scared of reprisals from the right wing, as they have ever since Obama took office. I have no idea. But, whatever happens over the next four years, Obama’s reelection guarantees that the laws passed during his first term stay on the books. That instantly makes him one of the most accomplished presidents of modern times. Already Obama and his allies have shaped this country in ways that will last for generations—making life more secure, and creating new opportunities, for tens of millions of Americans.
good article from the New Republic.
Yes, Obamacare is here to stay now.
"Mandates" don't mean much. Ryan and his cronies still control the House. They are not suddenly going to roll over.
"Mandates" don't mean much. Ryan and his cronies still control the House. They are not suddenly going to roll over.
I think everyone's missed the point about Dick Morris and his ilk. I doubt that at any point they thought it was going to be a Romney landslide. The point is that Rove and the GOP strategists are convinced that a) there's a bandwagon effect - base turns out when it's fired up by imminent victory; and b) undecided voters break for whoever they think is going to win.
These people are complete hacks. It's an obvious stitch-up - they simply take the reputational blow for the cause, safe in the knowledge that there's no accountability whatsoever and the Fox gigs will continue.
With Rasmussen it's a bit less cut-and-dried, I think he finds a balance between helping the cause and just about maintaining his reputation.
With Coulter, maybe she is an actual idiot. But the rest are just cynics and whores.
These people are complete hacks. It's an obvious stitch-up - they simply take the reputational blow for the cause, safe in the knowledge that there's no accountability whatsoever and the Fox gigs will continue.
With Rasmussen it's a bit less cut-and-dried, I think he finds a balance between helping the cause and just about maintaining his reputation.
With Coulter, maybe she is an actual idiot. But the rest are just cynics and whores.
Rasmussen did good job. Really picked up the trends in all the states. Needs to move to cell phones.
this theory about breaking for the percieved winner only works if they are the 'same type' of voter...meaning from the same demographic.
A lot of the so called independents were really former Republicans (those ashamed of calling themselves republicans...being associated with the 'rape' candidates.)
on another note a lot of Obama's votes came from minority voters responding to voter suppression tactics by the GOP...and voting in large numbers...not minding to wait on those long lines.
A lot of the so called independents were really former Republicans (those ashamed of calling themselves republicans...being associated with the 'rape' candidates.)
on another note a lot of Obama's votes came from minority voters responding to voter suppression tactics by the GOP...and voting in large numbers...not minding to wait on those long lines.
- Status