Posted on 11/23/2012 2:11:34 PM PST by SeekAndFind
What if we told you that the election was decided by a phrase?
You might not believe it, but assume we’re right for a minute. What word would you guess decided the election? Hurricane Sandy?
The answer lies in perhaps the single most illustrative exit poll question conducted, where CNN asked “What is the most important candidate quality to your vote?”
The response options were “Strong Leader,” “Shares Your Values,” “Has a Vision for the Future,” and “Cares about People.” Among folks that chose one of the first three responses, Mitt Romney won between 54-61% of their vote. But, among folks who chose “Cares About People,” Romney lost dramatically – 81-18%.
“Cares about you” is the single phrase that lost Romney the election. Those for whom empathy was the most important candidate quality clearly did not get a sense that he cared about people and worse, many eventhought he was antagonistic towards many Americans. Why was this so?
Romney’s business career, which was the central argument for his candidacy in an election dominated by the economy, was turned into a weakness by the left and the Obama campaign early on, with them portraying his experience leading Bain Capital as one of the opposite of care: harm. Laying people off, taking away their pensions, and destroying communities, Mitt Romney allegedly brought all of these across America.
The Bain attacks were less about vilifying Wall Street (though that too) and more about conveying the message “he’s not like us, he doesn’t care about us.”
Many voters bought into this early portrayal of Romney as one who does not care for people. Others, who did not quite buy into it, still held it as a potential lens through which to consider his future actions and statements.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Anyone that believes any government agent or any politician ‘cares about you’ is too stupid to live, much less vote.
The “47%” remark made me feel more confidant in him.
RE: The “47%” remark made me feel more confidant in him
Unfortunately, there aren’t enough people who think like this. In fact, it’s the OPPOSITE.
RE: Anyone that believes any government agent or any politician ‘cares about you’ is too stupid to live, much less vote.
Wow, that’s most Americans right there...
Live. Vote.
Worst part is that they ***breed*** and make more stupid copies, too.
Persona Definition: The aspect of someone’s character that is presented to or perceived by others.
I understand the gist of the article. When this guy was pushed in front of us as the only alternative to obama, there was something about him I just did not like (asside from the fact Romney is a RINO), and I realized it was his persona.
So I agree many viewed his persona as uncaring.
But I see persona as more emotional than logical and got over it, realized of the two choices, Romney would be the better of the two for the country.
Libs allow emotion to trump logic, so of course they would not vote for him.
1) I do not want my government to take care of me. It bothers me that 47% of the people want to mooch off of 53% of the people. Romney was correct when he tried to explain that a workable society creates conditions where people can successfully take care of themselves.
2) In terms of personality, I think Romney really does care about people. His personal history has genuine examples of this. He is a caring man -- which is part of the reason why he wants government to back off. On the other hand, I sincerely believe that Obama has a damaged soul and does not care about anyone but himself. But he seems able to hide this from weak-minded fools pretty well.
The premier phrases would have been "liar" and "tell us what really happened in Ben Ghazi"
There are a thousand others, but I don't want to use up bandwidth. The majority of thinking people know.
I’m very mildly religious, I just don’t have the gene or brain wiring or whatever to be entralled by things. However, I know most people do and if they don’t have religion they will need something else to believe in to fill the void. They’ll go to idealogy and become true believers.
It's a religion with these people. It's why they never quit and persevere in the face of obvious fallacies and even what would normally be devasting defeats. They are mentally ill and have a long-term view of what the world should look like.
They will pursue it until the last one of them is dead.
Mitt Romney is a good man. I never questioned that he ‘cared for people’ However, I also realized that he didn’t assume that the government was the only viable way of ‘caring’. Unfortunately, as usual, the leftmedia was able to portray Romney as an uncaring plutocrat that was ‘insensitive’ to the ‘needs’ of people. With our society collectively becoming more and more dependent on government handouts and essentially feminized with ‘feelings’ being one of the predominate motivators of whom one votes for, even a ‘moderate’ Republican such as Mitt Romney was doomed to lose to the lying fraud, Obama. Now, we’ll reap what the majority have sowed with their votes - and it won’t be pretty.
That this is a quality that so many people think is an important qualification for office is a sign of how infantile and neurotic our society has become.
Yep, the words "plastic" and "phoney" come to mind.
What if we told you that the election was decided by a phrase?
“Even if they catch us, the Republicans are too damned spineless to do anything about our election fraud.”
There are those of us who view empathy and more importantly sympathy as a vice...not a virtue.
from http://patriotaction.net/profiles/blogs/the-indolent-class-a
The Indolent class relies upon assistance from many sources for all their needs. Government, private sector, friends, and relatives may all contribute. The Indolent conducts their life with assistance from others factored in to all they do.
The Indolent is additionally freed from the outcomes of their choices and behaviors. Somebody else will fix what they break. Somebody else will feed the mouths they create.
Indolents are never to blame for creating their misfortunes.
Indolents are freed from the Cause and Effect relationships of life.
The question becomes - How can anyone learn from experience when they are purposely excluded from responsibility? What motivation will curb their appetites when nothing stands to impede their appetites?
This is why most Indolents remain on public assistance from others all their lives. They learn from birth that others will care for them. Laws require the government intervene. Citizens and non-citizens who refuse to care for themselves, or are unable to negotiate life, receive subsidy. For some Indolents, the welfare level of income, a level classified by government as poverty, is sufficient and preferred to working. The Indolent prefers free time to do what they wish, over finding gainful employment that requires their time. Many adopt crime as a means of supplementing their incomes.
At some point the empathy/sympathy must be turned form virtue into vice. The lives of the poor are not sufficiently miserable. The poor in the USA live better than 90% of the rest of the world and yet they are somehow being oppressed by those who live middle income or wealthy lives.
The socialist public education brainwashing system has done its job very well.
Actually, the mantra of the left has been Republicans are heartless rich white guys for .... oh.... decades now ?
Republicans are heartless ! Everyone says so !
PR campaign on news, TV, radio, print, movies, schools, colleges...
Repub machine counters that with the “we’re kinder, gentler”, “compassionate” heartless rich white guys.
So... Repub politicians usually don’t even deny the accusation.
Romney campaign was continuation of the same strategy.
I's say you're full of crap........
I don’t want any political leader “caring about me”, especially a Democ***. I perceive a hefty cost to pay submitting to that kind of attitude.
The liberals are crowing about a great win, but this "win" started years ago...with the first issuance of a Federal government welfare check, whenever that was.
The hyphenated American class, Deadbeat-Americans was spawned on that day.
Everyone should have been able to see the handwriting on the wall when it was admitted by everybody that 47% of Americans pay NO income tax. You have to know that if the government admits to a number like that, the situation has to be much worse. And it was. We were all kind of "taken in" by the excitement of the polls and pundants like Dick Morris who was "absolutely sure" Romney would win, knowing all along that the 47% was hanging out there like a cold, wet pile of excrement.
There have been many pundants and economists throughout the last 2 or 3 hundred years that predicted essentially the same thing:
When people realize that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, they will, and freedom will start to slip away from that moment on.
That point has been reached IMO.
We will never be able to get our country back unless we find some way to tie a valid vote to a positive contribution to our Country.
WE SIMPLY HAVE BEEN OUT BRED AND INVADED BY TOO MANY DEADBEATS LOOKING FOR A HANDOUT. Their numbers will only increase exponentially from now on and take us to the scene of the crash.
I WANT SOMEONE HERE TO SHOW ME WHERE I AM WRONG. I want to be wrong, but I see no other PEACEFUL way out of this mess...
The 47% don't follow politics, don't follow the news, all they know is that the Republicans are evil........That's pretty simple really.
Yes...and Reagan spoke about hope for all!
Romney represented having to work and think for yourself.
Obama represented Santa Claus.
Santa Claus won.
I was 11 years old in 1956 when I first heard it. That and Eisenhower would take away old people's Social Security checks.
Agreed and well-put.
Voters want to feel that office-holders are conscientious about fulfilling their responsibilities to all citizens.
A candidate who appears to be drawing distinctions between classes of citizens based on some criterion of worth is going to lose votes.
Of course this, was a fake controversy. I don't believe Romney was any less conscientious or dutiful than other candidates or office-holders with respect to poorer or humbler citizens, but it's a matter of appearances, and Romney lost that battle.
47% of Americans who receive government assistance are a lost cause.
Romney lost by a total margin of ~340,000 in 4 states.
Voter fraud was rampant.
The pony tail guy at the town hall debate in 1992 was THE turning point of American politics...when government acting as our ‘parent’ became the focus of presidential elections.
I don’t think the “47%” remark hurt him as much as confirmed the beliefs and/or concerns of many.
When you can vote for benefiting ONLY YOURSELF and YOUR KIND, you vote DEMOCRAT.
When you want the Freedom to vote for the U.S. Constitution, and the RIGHT to Pursue Happiness, you DO NOT vote DEMOCRAT.
The 47%-Rule is in place now, and couple that with Blacks ALWAYS voting for a Black, you have no future in this country to look forward to, nor do your children and grandchildren....it's been stolen.
This is one of the most interesting questions in public life. I spent my working life either in the military or working for it. A fair number of the AF and Army civilian employees really believed ‘government has the answers’ in spite of the day to day reality of what n administrative regime actually is like. Other persons i went to college with or knew through alumni associations believe the same. I came to the conclusion these are people who believe as did Woodrow Wilson that the industrial and post industrial state would become a Hobbesian hell for the average man through monied interests manipulation of politics and the economy unless government was there to minimally provide basic economic benefits to the masses and to control the predatory behavior of the classes. People don’t talk in these terms but their comments do infer that. The belief is ‘nobody can save enough, be clever enough in predicting market behaviors, or be have enough foresight to see concrete trends that will impact average people. If government does not protect them they will be destitute or considering how many people live off of Social Security be more destitute than they are. That is why ‘a union job’, a’government job’ or a job with a hospital or a school system are seen as so desirable. These folks believe no matter what they do they can’t compete effectively as the deck is stacked against ‘the average man’ from the start and they have to be protected from greedy and evil rich and powerful persons and corporations.
When is the last time that happened?
“It bothers me that 47% of the people want to mooch off of 53% of the people.”
It’s worse than that, because another 10% (or more) want to work running the looting and vote buying mechanisms.
Romney lacked the wit to attack the bureaucrat/foundation/academic iron triangle that is ruining the country.
Excuse me. “When WAS the last time that happened?”
“they don’t have religion they will need something else to believe in ...”
You got it, and these secularists feel that they can make a better world than God - of course at our expense and misery.
Drudge Report declared Singapore the least emotional city in the world. Maybe that is our last refuge.
Could the Alinskyites expose them to the PC crap and teach them how to feel?
Then again seems like the Chinese are even having their fill of communism with the nail houses over there.
This picture is amazing:
The Phrase That Lost Romney the Election:
Massive voter fraud
Romney lost because.... HE WAS ASHAMED OF BEING SUCCESSFUL..
Romney was brain washed into being ashamed.. so he LOST..
UNLESS he didn’t believe he was successful and was complicit in the lie..
He was not proud of living the american dream.. proud Capitialist..
He lost because he was CONFUSED.. most people noticed..
He was coy about being a powerful capitalist.. so he LOST..
He didn’t know whether he was a democrat or a republican.. so he LOST..
much like George Bush, Juan McLaim or Lindsey Graham..
People have had it with these guys..
Even democrats don’t want confused democrats they want actual democrats..
Republicans have MANY confused democrats as republican officials.. its not RARE..
Some republicans are even starting to ADMIT IT...
The third party could become a happening thing..
Because the republican party is totally FUBAR..
“That is why ‘a union job’, a’government job’ or a job with a hospital or a school system are seen as so desirable.”
All your points are well taken, but there is also the belief or need to FEEL that you are toiling in some humanistic avocation that benefits their secular society - such as the ones you just mentioned.
Amazingly, George Orwell was a socialist to his death despite his Animal Farm epic. Big Brother to him was a necessary evil.
Quite a good read on Orwell here -
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/orwells_struggle_may_be_over.html
At the first of 0bama’s SOU addresses, MO waved and smiled and I saw her persona: a real *itch, fake, phoney and all about herself.
0bama has shown a true desire for revenge. Rove pegged the guy years ago in saying that 0bama’s the guy at a cocktail party, in the corner, making crass and snide comments quietly about others in the room. The look that man can get in his eyes, and the snide remarks, tell you all you need to know.
We are given a persona of these two people that could not be farther from the truth.
Here is demonstrated a key and growing advantage of a Democrat incumbent candidate. Federal election law forbids a candidate who is in a contested election primary from spending segregated general election funds until after his party's convention. This meant that while Obama could spend freely and position advantageous campaign spots throughout the summer, Romney had to wait until September.
Add to this that only the direct campaign ads qualify for the lowest cost ad rates, none of the 'super PACs' could equal that ad buy. Add to this the undeniable liberal media bias and you end up with a legally entrenched DEMOCRAT Advantage. Note: This is why it is an inherit DEMOCRAT advantage, when the incumbent is Republican, the liberal media is in active media attack mode during this time frame.
This is a law that has no business being on the books, it promotes a tilted playing field.
How about it, President Obama, do you think that this is (your favorite word) FAIR?
Remember, Democrats when given the choice between a false Democrat and a real Democrat chose the real Democrat every time! Which is why you can't play namby-pamby mealy-mouthed tom fool and get Republicans to show up and Democrats not!
I do not care for the leeches in America either. And I will not pretend to. Romney lost because the leeches understand that they now have a coalition that enables them to vote themselves more of other peoples money. The really bad news is that this is self perpetuating and unless their coalition partners fear for their lives this is unlikely to change
I do not care for the leeches in America either. And I will not pretend to. Romney lost because the leeches understand that they now have a coalition that enables them to vote themselves more of other peoples money. The really bad news is that this is self perpetuating and unless their coalition partners fear for their lives this is unlikely to change
What a bizarre question!
I believe that there is a mountain of reasons why we lost. I also believe there is one reason above all others.... THE MSM.
I don’t believe we will ever win an election until or unless we are able to disarm our country’s worst and most destructive enemy, our own media.
I don’t believe that even Ronald Reagan, the greatest president in my lifetime, could have won against todays media.
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.