These results don't support massive voter fraud. If there had been, then Obama could argue he had a mandate. He can't.
Posted on 11/23/2012 10:27:43 AM PST by neverdem
Edited on 11/23/2012 2:58:30 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
I should clarify. I think it is not in the best interests of the Republican Party to run Mormons for president.
The point I feel most missed was the point to be made about “The 1%” and the global population. Obama thinks the US owes the rest of the world for “exploiting" it. The reality is not that America is so rich, but that so much of the rest of the world operates on more socialist principles than we do - and, in the process, impoverishes itself.We should point out that if we were to wish Barak Obama, or any other liberal, to have only as much money when he is 70 years old as, say, 95% of the people of the world of all ages, that would be a curse. Because there are so many people who have very little - even children have little, of course, even in America - that to have less than the top 5% of the world’s population do, when you are old , would be a sad state of affairs for an American.
Perot is (indirectly) the reason we have 0bama. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR A DEMOCRAT FOR THE NEXT FIFTY YEARS AFTER JIMMY CARTER - BUT - Perot siphoned off enough votes from Bush in 1992 that Clinton won, and won again against a weak candidate, Bob Dole.
Clinton's amazing luck, a media phalanx that protected him nearly as well as they protect 0bama today, the "left over" prosperity of the Reagan years, as well as the American people saddling Clinton with a restraining order in the form of a Republican Congress, all came together to enable a credible narrative that Clinton, and hence other Democrats, weren't all a bunch of goofy, inept, economy destroying leftist morons. Unfortunately for all of us today.
Fast forward to 2008, throw in another weak candidate against a charismatic man with "black" ancestry (although not "genuinely black" if you think like liberals do), mix in an ignorant, idealistic American voting population eager to prove that we're cool, hip, with it and "over" racism, and you end up with President 0bama. Ugh.
Romney was an attempt to win the Presidency by running an empty suit. The guy is the worst sort of retail politician, no principles, cannot connect, richy rich style....and HE EVEN managed to LOSE EVERY election but 1! There’s a clue for the clueless & stoopid Repubs. IMHO Romney may have well been a false flag operation in the re-election of Obama, nothing else makes sense.
Shi happens... :)
Having known and work around a number of Mormons, I like proposing a ‘test” for those that would never vote of any Mormon candidate, even in the face of giving America a second dose of bamaClaus suicide.
My test is to ask yourself, would you rather your new neighbor be a Mormon or any ComeYet dolt that voted for bamaClaus.
Obviously Romney nor anyone around him was a worthwhile marketer.
Mitt’s “marketing” was focussed on identifying good company buys and selling them to other investers, not the public.
Much to our collective loss, he was probably one of the best managers to ever run for President, just not the best campaigner.
The point about too much Primary campaigns is right. How anyone can get past that gauntlet and win the General Election is most improbable. Somehow the GOP better find a way to sift out wannabes that really never have half a chance instead of having 25 on the debate stage on 25 debates between March and June.
Throw in far Right’s fear of Mormom and add just enough vote fraud in the very right places (Ohio and Floridah) and waalah, the USA starts to insert the proverbial pistol into her mouth
I think this was a bigger hurt than most realize. We've seen lots of reports that voters were only beginning to see Romney as a viable candidate during the debates. WAY TOO LATE. We have to get this primary process under control much earlier. The candidate simply doesn't have enough time to take their message to the American public, or to throughly engage their opponent.
These results don't support massive voter fraud. If there had been, then Obama could argue he had a mandate. He can't.
Haven't we all...
It's good to see the fighting spirit rising in our folks again.
[ These results don’t support massive voter fraud. If there had been, then Obama could argue he had a mandate. He can’t. ]
SOo you believe Obama forces are not “GOOD ENOUGH” to vary the results just so he wins in the proper places and with the right amount(s) to “LOOK” legitimate..
AND....... you don’t see “the possibilities” for voter fraud in States with no voter ID..
WHY do you bend over backward to legitimatize this election?..
Whats in it for you?.. what is your payoff?...
Then theres the thing about voting machine programming attended by Union representatives..
You know with Viruses, Trojans, Worms and all that kind of stuff.. i.e. techno ballot box stuffing(morphing)..
On the otherhand you may be scared spitless about whats needed to correct the situation if voting became rididulous.. CIVIL WAR... Where you and your relatives might be killed.. by either of the many factions..
Would you give you and maybe your familys lives to restore FREEDOM?..
A question we all may faced with soon.. “We” may not be “Wolverines” but ferrets.. in this country..
Obama is hoping for ferrets..
You are spot on. To have a candidate who can connect those issues to the welfare of the little guy requires a candidate who gives a rip about the little guy to begin with. I’m actually glad Romney lost. The repubs need to decide if they stand for the little guy.
Perhaps you did not understand what I wrote. I harbor no prejudice against Mormons. And as regards my “new neighbor” I would prefer a Mormon as opposed to a dolt who voted for Obama. I do not like liberals. That is plainly stated, sir. Read what I wrote again.
I simply commented that you were correct in that it appears that a significant number of Americans (likely evangelicals) do harbor a prejudice against Mormons and exhibited that prejudice as such in the Nov. 6 election.
BTW, I voted for Romney, as did Mrs. OP.
AND....... you don’t see “the possibilities” for voter fraud in States with no voter ID.. WHY do you bend over backward to legitimatize this election?.. Whats in it for you?.. what is your payoff?...
Don't be absurd. How did the GOP do so well in 2010? Why didn't they take back the House and get 60 Senate seats this time? You're talking about a very big conspiracy and sounding like a truther. Meanwhile Romney got more votes than McCain and virtually all of the GOP nominees for the Senate.
[ Don’t be absurd. How did the GOP do so well in 2010? ]
Exactly my point.. and a complete disaffection in 2012?..
Not likely.. 2010 is the main proof of voter fraud..
Romney did nothing to cause mutiny on that level..
I’ll go further.. the primarys were another strange happening..
Adding to “the Mystery”.. is a strange republican primary..
Extremely strange.. could be voter fraud there as well..
Less “proof” of that(primary fraud) not that anyone even cared or questioned it..
I propose there is voter fraud NO ONE is aware of yet..
On many levels.. Its true could very hard to “hide”..
Too many must surely be involved.. could be a lot of “suicides” and “accidents”..
And “offers” that cannot be refused..
You know.... like when the CLintoon’s were in charge..
**NOte; Obama OWNS the FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service, BATF, Justice Department.. and other “security” mechinery.. not to speak of “Echelon” or whatever it has evolved into..
How do you explain the obvious (to some) voter fraud in many places like Ohio and Florida? Two very key States in 2012.
The point of voter fraud was not to enable showing a mandate, rather to have more votes counted in key States and it was a success.
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.