The day the earth stood still and America died.

[hornadylnl]

I have argued against the Libertarians in this election because I thought that they would take away votes from Romney and let Obama win. Unfortunately people are even more stupid and self-interested than even I thought. Voting for Johnson didn't matter in the long run. The Republicans blew it by having a another moderate politician run against Obama. Granted, Romney might have been slightly to the right of McCain and carried himself in a more presidential manner, but the Republican Party has no backbone and is continuing to play it safe with these people. So maybe the Libertarian Party might be the way to go. I'm still skeptical as to whether the Libertarians could pull off a win in the future but I'm fed up with spineless R party. I'm listening Libertarians and now I'm leaning your way. Unless the Republican Party can quickly become truly conservative and get a true conservative on the ticket I will be voting Libertarian next time...If there is a next time that is.

Many of us have been saying this for years but we were dismissed as kooks, our guy couldn't win, yada, yada. Guess what, their guy couldn't win either. The only political ideology the died in the wool republicans seemed to care about was that of their opposition. They hated Paul because he was "anti Israel", an isolationist, whatever. They hate Obama because he's a Muslim, socialist, apologist, whatever. Yet the ABO crowd couldn't give a single credible ****ing reason to vote for Romney. The only reasons they could give to vote for Romney was that he wasn't Obama or direct repeats of Romney's talking points on the days they happened to agree with him while totally ignoring all of his contradictory actions.

I'm not mad at you. I was in your shoes about 6 years ago. Welcome to the dark side.

 

[flightsimmer]

I and my wife took a political test to see where we stood on the political scene and we both came up strong Libertarians but I just didn't see the Libertarian Party as capable of winning, too bad, I would have liked to vote for them but after Ross Perot's little stunt I was convinced that all it would do is drain votes from the second worst candidate that could win, but my faith is not in any political party anyway so we went with Romney.

Well that's life.

 

[hornadylnl]

I and my wife took a political test to see where we stood on the political scene and we both came up strong Libertarians but I just didn't see the Libertarian Party as capable of winning, too bad, I would have liked to vote for them but after Ross Perot's little stunt I was convinced that all it would do is drain votes from the second worst candidate that could win, but my faith is not in any political party anyway so we went with Romney.

Well that's life.

Don't worry about voting your principles. Just keep perpetuating the the current scheme.

 

[Ted]

Don't worry about voting your principles. Just keep perpetuating the the current scheme.

Yeah. I suppose they think that actually voting this way is much more effective than voting in some sort of silent protest.

 

[hornadylnl]

Yeah. I suppose they think that actually voting this way is much more effective than voting in some sort of silent protest.

What did your second place candidate win?

 

[Ted]

What did your second place candidate win?

The same as your third party candidate.

Though the votes that could have made the winner of the election, a second place winner.

 

[hornadylnl]

The same as your third party candidate.

Though the votes that could have made the winner of the election, a second place winner.

From my understanding, there wasn't a single state where the 3rd party candidate's votes would have tipped the scales to Romney had they voted for him. Keep blaming the third party voters while ignoring all the real reasons your guy lost and you'll get to relive this same argument 4 years from now.

 

[Ted]

From my understanding, there wasn't a single state where the 3rd party candidate's votes would have tipped the scales to Romney had they voted for him. Keep blaming the third party voters while ignoring all the real reasons your guy lost and you'll get to relive this same argument 4 years from now.

Why again is the reason why the winner won?

 

[hornadylnl]

Why again is the reason why the winner won?

Because the other candidates didn't get enough votes? How many here said they preferred Paul or Johnson over Romney but refused to break away from the repub party? Obama received nearly 10 million fewer votes this year than he did in 08. For 4 years of terrible Obama, Romney couldn't muster enough votes to beat Obama? Romney only received 2.5 million fewer votes than McCain. Even with a hugely depressed Demo turnout, Romney couldn't energize enough voters to win.

If this election is nothing more than voting for free stuff, why did $12 million fewer people vote this year?

 

[Roadie]

It really cannot even be "blamed" on Bush, certainly not President Obama.

"SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with "tax payer money," as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companies such as "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers."

But I can see that it's more fun to blame Obama.

FactCheck.org : The Obama Phone?

More info from the FCC if anyone is interested. Lifeline Program for Low-Income Consumers | FCC.gov

May I suggest you read a thread before posting in it? I addressed this earlier, allow me to repost..

..and you are missing the point. It doesn't matter a hill of beans WHO started it, it matters who the population BELIEVES is giving them the freebies. The "Right" didn't start calling it an "ObamaPhone", a Liberal woman who was interviewed on video spread that word..

She is indicative of what was stated above. People are now voting for who they BELIEVE will give them "free stuff".

 

[Ted]

Because the other candidates didn't get enough votes? How many here said they preferred Paul or Johnson over Romney but refused to break away from the repub party? Obama received nearly 10 million fewer votes this year than he did in 08. For 4 years of terrible Obama, Romney couldn't muster enough votes to beat Obama? Romney only received 2.5 million fewer votes than McCain. Even with a hugely depressed Demo turnout, Romney couldn't energize enough voters to win.

If this election is nothing more than voting for free stuff, why did $12 million fewer people vote this year?

You're presuming that there was no elections/voter fraud or outright governmental misconduct/incompetance.

You see what I did there? I'm becoming as pessimistic and outright asinine as your mirror image.

 

[Indy317]

This is a post, but does it mean anything or is it just another incomprehensible meltdown from a member of the religious ultraright? Please explain how America died.

I believe America, as it has been in historical terms, has died. The country today is based upon robbing Peter to pay Paul. Mega corporations use the courts to fight off competition, pro-sports use lawmakers to get taxpayers to build their facilities, welfare receivers use lawmakers to increase benefits, the list goes on and on. Everyone wants the fruits of their neighbor's labors, but they don't want to share their own fruits. This is how America now works, and whichever group has the most people voting wins. Big military isn't as popular as big EBT, big WIC, big Social Security, big government healthcare. Benefit: Obama, Democrats, the left. People want to be able to have unsafe sex, drink to excess, use drugs and have others pay for their mistakes. Benefit: Obama, Democrats, the left. They want you to pay for their abortions, to feed their kids they can't afford, to pay for palatial K-university educational facilities and their kid's education. Benefit: Obama, Democrats, the left. No surprise really why they won.

I see this country based on greed from the top down. The CEOs don't want to share...one needs $1,000,000/year to live in this country you know. Well, some claim they need ten times more than that. The middle class gets greedy because they demand the lifestyle of the CEOs, but many don't want to work for it the way some (not all) CEOs have. They are appalled at the idea they have to move to step up in life, or continue their education. Most are greedy for more money, bigger homes, fancy automobiles, costly vacations, the latest in high end fashion and electronics. They figure their willingness to work 40/hours a week, and not much more, means they should live like royalty. Whatever private enterprise can't give them, they want the government too. Then you have the welfare class. They want to live like the middle class, yet many use various excuses as to why they shouldn't have to work, why they should be allowed to produce more and more mouths to feed without anyway to pay to feed, cloth, house, and education their children.

Such an empire can't survive. It will always be a race down to the bottom once a person finds out they can't get what they want at the middle or top levels.

This seems to be what is happening right now in Greece. Rush had it right. You can't win against Santa Clause. Any talk of cutting government handouts and you are done for. People don't want cuts in benefits, they want more, so long as someone else is paying.

The US of A, in financial terms, is an invalid construct. If it was a computer program, it would eventually and constantly crash. Times Square within ten years, factoring out the 300,000,000 firearms in this country:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqowDRc8hC8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7hpwgVwueg

 

[spec4]

From my understanding, there wasn't a single state where the 3rd party candidate's votes would have tipped the scales to Romney had they voted for him. Keep blaming the third party voters while ignoring all the real reasons your guy lost and you'll get to relive this same argument 4 years from now.

Yet in our senate race, if Horning's votes had gone to Mourdock, he would have won by 9008 votes (The Times 11/7, pg 1) That would have helped when Obama starts nominating SCOTUS socialists.

 

[HollidaySlim]

Yet in our senate race, if Horning's votes had gone to Mourdock, he would have won by 9008 votes (The Times 11/7, pg 1) That would have helped when Obama starts nominating SCOTUS socialists.

That assuming all those votes went to Mourdock which they wouldn't have. Lets image Mourdock gets even half of the Horning votes (which by all estimates is a stretch) he still loses...No matter how you cut it Mourdock would not have won.

 

[mr hucky]

ask yourself " what more could i have done " there is more, take a short break, quite crying and then get busy for 16

 

[Hoosier8]

I still have a lot of faith in the American people but a century of movement towards an European style nation has taken it's effect. The young are coming up knowing no different and that is, and will, change the face of the Nation forever. I too feel the America I know took another step on the death walk yesterday. I have never felt this way before during my 59 years, afraid for America.

 

[printcraft]

Well, I guess we know what poles the voters of California were paying attention to....

LA County voters mandate condom use on porn sets | The Wire |

 

[Hoosier8]

Oh, and on a side note, a nurse where a friend of mine works overheard a couple of the cleaning crew commenting why they were happy Obama won, because now they could quit their jobs. This is the America people voted for yesterday.

 

[hornadylnl]

Yet in our senate race, if Horning's votes had gone to Mourdock, he would have won by 9008 votes (The Times 11/7, pg 1) That would have helped when Obama starts nominating SCOTUS socialists.

That assuming all those votes went to Mourdock which they wouldn't have. Lets image Mourdock gets even half of the Horning votes (which by all estimates is a stretch) he still loses...No matter how you cut it Mourdock would not have won.

My Horning vote would not have gone to Mourdock had Horning not been an option. I left several races on my ballot blank.

Spec4, Mourdock winning would not have given the repubs the majority in the senate. So how exactly is the minority party going to block Obama's scotus nominees? They could do what the dems do and filibuster but the repubs have proven time and again that they don't have the balls to do so. So what's your next option?

 

[HollidaySlim]

My Horning vote would not have gone to Mourdock had Horning not been an option.

Nor would mine have