Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

About Tuesday’s Loss: If The Archangel Michael Were On The Ballot, Beelzebub Would Still Have Won
RedState ^ | November 7, 2012

Posted on 11/08/2012 9:39:23 AM PST by NCjim

For a few brief moments over these last few weeks, I almost let wishful thinking overcome common sense and reason and almost believed right would overcome wrong, good overcome evil, and liberty overcome statism. In hindsight, however, it truly was wishful thinking and it was brief, that momentary lapse of reason, that fool’s folly of letting myself even ponder for a minute that Mitt Romney had a snowball’s chance in hell to actually pull it off.

Last night’s loss was destined to happen regardless whether Mitt Romney or the Archangel Michael were on the ballot. Beelzebub would still have still won.

Perhaps, at some point, after all the finger pointing and circular firing squads have stopped pointing fingers and shooting at each other, and after the talking heads have stopped hypothesizing about why Mitt Romney is not the 45th President of the United States, someone will dig a little deeper and realize that, what the Left accomplished on Tuesday was not an accident. Barack Obama’s victory certainly wasn’t based on merit, nor was it based on a lack of enthusiasm for Mitt Romney, or his being a bad candidate (though there is an argument to be had there).

Tuesday’s loss boiled down to two simple things that the Right still doesn’t quite get:

It came down to boots on the ground, and leaving egos at the door.

(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

1 posted on 11/08/2012 9:39:29 AM PST by NCjim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NCjim

If it was “boots” on the ground that won this for obama, why did he get 9,000,000 less votes than he got in 2008? No, it wasn’t “boots” on the ground. It was “thugs and cheats” on the ground. And if the republicans, or any other party, doesn’t figure this out the democrats will be in control until this country ends up in the history books.


2 posted on 11/08/2012 9:46:32 AM PST by Terry Mross (Once again I wasted my vote. But I have learned my lesson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
In hindsight, however, it truly was wishful thinking and it was brief, that momentary lapse of reason, that fool’s folly of letting myself even ponder for a minute that Mitt Romney had a snowball’s chance in hell to actually pull it off. ,

False premise. Obama got 10 million less votes than in 2008. The enthusiasm was not there and yet a RINO, once again, stole defeat from the jaws of victory.

3 posted on 11/08/2012 9:47:55 AM PST by frogjerk (Obama Claus is coming to town!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
And paper-trail free electronic voting bolstered by Spain based, Soros owned Scytl counting the votes, and massive repeat voting by democrat operatives.

Most people know the Stalin quote:

The people who cast the votes decide nothing.
The people who count the votes decide everything.
Most people have never heard the first line of that quote, the line that defines this election:
It is enough that the people know there was an election.

4 posted on 11/08/2012 9:50:26 AM PST by null and void (Day 1388 of the Obama hostage crisis - Barack Hussein Obama an enemy BOTH foreign AND domestic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Absolute truth posted there.

It is enough that Americans knew there was an election.

Americans who cast the votes decide nothing.

Marxists who count the votes, decided everything.


5 posted on 11/08/2012 9:55:13 AM PST by INVAR ("Fart for liberty, fart for freedom and fart proudly!" - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
nor was it based on a lack of enthusiasm for Mitt Romney

Spare me. Mitt couldn't even match McCain's vote totals from 2008. Ten million voters did not pull the lever for Obama this time. Romney failed to win just about all of them to his side, they just didn't vote.

6 posted on 11/08/2012 9:59:03 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
If it was “boots” on the ground that won this for obama, why did he get 9,000,000 less votes than he got in 2008?

When the final results are all in, that 9mm gap will close to something more like a 6mm gap.

That gap represents lots of non-machine voters who went to the polls out of excitement in 2008.

Those votes were hard to recapture. But the Democrats did get every voter known to the machine out to vote.

They were extremely well-organized in real time.

Every time someone they had on their list voted early, they removed the name and focused more closely on the remaining ones who had not voted yet.

They were ruthlessly efficient.

And, of course, there was plenty of fraud as well.

7 posted on 11/08/2012 9:59:14 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

I thought it was Beelzebub vs Beelzebub. If the Archangel was represented, he was on a third party ticket.


8 posted on 11/08/2012 10:01:16 AM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
If it was “boots” on the ground that won this for obama, why did he get 9,000,000 less votes than he got in 2008? No, it wasn’t “boots” on the ground. It was “thugs and cheats” on the ground.

Most of those 9,000,000 voters were still around come 2012. Mitt failed to draw the vast majority of them in, they just didn't vote. I agree there was more than usual Dem cheating, but that doesn't explain the failure of Mitt to even reach the level that McCain reached in a bad year for Republicans. And after the banner year for the GOP in 2010.

The answer is clear as day. The GOP-e would rather lose than embrace that answer (hint - hot beverage popular over in Britain). As they showed in losing a very winnable election.

9 posted on 11/08/2012 10:02:40 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

Michael would have been portrayed as a hateful warmonger by the media.


10 posted on 11/08/2012 10:05:42 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

So I’m guessing you didn’t vote for Romney?


11 posted on 11/08/2012 10:07:17 AM PST by MeOnTheBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MeOnTheBeach

I voted third party for Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party. And feel pretty good about that vote.


12 posted on 11/08/2012 10:15:15 AM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
Well, I'll tell you what. I figure Barry has some assistance from Beelzebub whether he's aware of it or not because I don't see how millions of conservatives stayed home unless they were spiritually encouraged to give in to their pride and selfishness the same way the greedy were spiritually encouraged to give in to their greed and selfishness.

If that's not enough, then when you get right down to it, you have to figure that the good Lord has had it with us. Sixty million dead infants murdered by abortion and at a bare minimum that many more murdered in the womb by contraceptives has to be a stench the Lord can't ignore. He may not yet have decided to punish us but it's a sure thing He won't be saving us from ourselves as I feel He has in the past. I also don't expect any special blessings or protections from the Lord that history shows we've had in the past.

People who think their personal purity is based on how they vote but ignore a chance to at the very least slow down the mass murder of infants are either blind or delusional.

JMHO

13 posted on 11/08/2012 10:19:26 AM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Mitt was correct when he spoke of the 47% on entitlement programs who wouldn’t vote for him. Add in the remainder of blacks (not on welfare) and die-hard liberals who will always vote for the democrat, and there’s no way any republican will get elected again. Wonder how the # of people in entitlement programs has changed since Bush was elected in 2004.


14 posted on 11/08/2012 10:20:36 AM PST by DallasDeb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb
Mitt was correct when he spoke of the 47% on entitlement programs who wouldn’t vote for him. Add in the remainder of blacks (not on welfare) and die-hard liberals who will always vote for the democrat, and there’s no way any republican will get elected again. Wonder how the # of people in entitlement programs has changed since Bush was elected in 2004.

That still fails to explain how Romney, in a bad year for Democrats, failed to reach the number of votes McCain got in 2008, a very bad year for Republicans.

I think Mitt and the GOP-E need to look in the mirror for that one.

15 posted on 11/08/2012 10:28:26 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
I voted third party for Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party. And feel pretty good about that vote.


Barack Obama thanks you for your support.
16 posted on 11/08/2012 10:28:46 AM PST by MeOnTheBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
The election is a direct sign of the soon coming of our Lord Jesus. The election of a baby killing, communist, dictorial president along with states approving homosexual marriages and recreational drug use all point to end of the age. Three of the things God hates most have become law of the land. God will not be mocked forever and I believe we are already feeling the judgement of God.

I don't anticipate things to ever improve politically or economically. Jesus told us that before His return it would be like the days of Noah and we are there. Come quickly Lord Jesus!

17 posted on 11/08/2012 10:33:56 AM PST by Smittie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCjim
I will say it again, it was all about who was willing to give away more “freebies”.
This is a freebie nation and that is not going to change with the demographics the way it is. Free phones, free housing, free transportation, free food, free healthcare, etc.
The Hispanic population isn't growing over here because we have lots of work, it is growing because they get lots of freebies. They are also increasing their citizenship ratings because they get more freebies that is not available to us who “make too much money”. They work under the table to make sure they don't show too much income.
A lot of blacks already accomplished the goals of the freebie nation and now the Hispanic population is catching on fast.
Single female moms are also jumping a ride on the gravy train. They stay unmarried and keep the sidekick dads off the rolls and all for that cushy single mommy cash.
18 posted on 11/08/2012 10:49:10 AM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

Which is why I think the dumping of blame on Chris Christie is a bit over the top. Look at the internals and our problems run way, way deeper than an ill-advised photo op.


19 posted on 11/08/2012 10:57:51 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

“Give us Barabas!” (”Barack”?)


20 posted on 11/08/2012 11:01:56 AM PST by BwanaNdege (Man has often lost his way, but modern man has lost his address - Gilbert K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson