Posted on 11/06/2012 10:04:30 PM PST by JediJones
Allow me to paraphrase Dana Carvey playing George H. W. Bush in a 1990s Iraq War SNL skit, in which he said, "This will not be another Vietnam. We have learned the lesson of Vietnam. Stay out of Vietnam."
We have learned the lesson of Obama. Don't run against Obama.
Obama is the Republicans' Vietnam. We can do everything right, dominate the territory, win every battle, but it doesn't matter, he'll still win the war.
This election wasn't lost on the issues. It was lost because Obama is a clean, articulate, light-skinned person of color. That is pretty much all that matters to enough voters to win a presidential election.
Yes, there are changing demographics in the country. Yes, there is a decline in religion and an uptick in government dependency. Yes, the most popular forms of media are heavily biased to the Democrat party. Yes, there are voters that are ignorant on just about every issue. Yes, Mitt Romney played it safe too often on the issues that could have hurt Obama and helped him the most. Yes, the Dems ran a sharp, micro-targetted campaign that utilized top-of-the-line, state-of-the-art marketing principles (while smartly conceding the popular vote from the beginning). But no other known politician could've overcome blatant, in-your-face issues like high gas prices, declining incomes and the unemployment rate.
Obama is the first American Idol president, the biggest natural celebrity ever to hold the office. As with Vietnam, it is unlikely we'll find ourselves fighting this kind of uniquely unbeatable opponent again. The final lesson is, thank the 22nd amendment for being the only thing that can stop Barack Obama from being president for life.
“This election wasn’t lost on the issues.”
I’d have to agree with you. The issues broke so heavily in Romney’s favor. The critical thinking skills of our electorate have diminished and been dumbed down to the point that the majority of Americans vote for eye appeal and not the issues.
Win the argument, lose the election it makes no sense!
How else can you explain this defeat?
> It was lost because Obama is a clean, articulate, light-skinned person of color.
The problem with this analysis is that it does not explain the results in the losing Senate races.
Agreed. This is a cult of personality. Democrats are going to read way to much into it, and over reach. A lot of people just like the guy, and were waiting for the tiniest reason to vote for him, and Sandra gave it to them.
I guarantee you that just about everyone is going to read this result wrong.
> It was lost because Obama is a clean, articulate, light-skinned person of color.
The problem with this analysis is that it does not explain the results in the losing Senate races.
I am sure there is a spiritual demision to all this. It is the whole world and bringing down the US is a necessary part of it.
Conservatives just need to be tight and loyal with one another and ride it out. We need to become more insular - more of who we are and protective and cooperative with one another - and less a part of “the world.” It’s going to get wierder and uglier. We will be watching it unfold and we can’t stop it. Obammy is going to really come of age in his second term.
That's explained by simple coattails. Obama's cult of personality drove his voters to the polls and they voted straight D ticket. Because they are driven solely by their emotion for Obama, there was nothing else there to push them in one direction or another. They identify as Democrats because of their love for Obama. If they would have had to, say, come back on the next day to vote for non-presidential races, they wouldn't have shown up (just as they didn't show up in 2010). But it's just natural to vote straight-party for the party of the guy they adore.
In states where there was a party mismatch between the presidential winner and the Senate winner, there were probably other issues in play, as in Missouri and Indiana and those Senate candidates' gaffes.
Pretty much agreed. I think it was for more fundamental reasons than the hurricane though. I think most of Obama's voters were disinterested in the campaign, and in politics in general. I'm thinking of people who ethnically identify with him or women who see him as "boyfriend material" who probably did not follow the campaign or even watch the debates. But when they heard, perhaps through word-of-mouth, that the election was this week, they were ready to march to the polls and express their love for Obama.
I think one important read is how many voters Obama lost between 2008 and 2012. He doesn't have much if any increased mandate here than he did after the 2010 mid-term election by any measure. So far Romney has 7 million less votes than McCain got and Obama 17 million less than he got last time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.