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

Skip to comments.

Why It's Not Romney's Inauguration
Barron's (sub) ^ | January 12, 2013 | J.T. Young

Posted on 01/28/2013 4:07:57 AM PST by CutePuppy

How the Republican candidate lost the presidential election.

< snip > ..... [Republicans] are concocting explanations and excuses for what they see as Mitt Romney's snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

They should realize that it was economics that sank Romney. His crucial problem was his campaign's failure to make a sufficiently convincing case on the money issues.

Most postmortems have focused on the demographics of the defeat. ..... < snip >

But none of Romney's demographic defeats are as significant as the electoral potential Romney missed on money issues.

Election Day exit polling by Edison Media Research/Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool included three questions that explain a significant part of Romney's weakness.

The first question was on the state of the economy. Amazingly, 23% of voters rated the economy "excellent" or "good." Of these, 90% voted for Obama. Of the 77% of voters rating the economy "not so good" or "poor," 38% supported Obama.

The second question was, "Who would better handle the economy?" The answers amounted to a virtual tie. To the question, 48% said Obama was more capable, and 98% of that group voted for the president. On the other side, 49% chose Romney as more capable, and 94% of these voted for Romney.

The final important money question was, "Who would better handle the federal budget deficit?" Again, it was almost a tie, with 47% choosing Obama to handle the deficit, and 98% of that group voting for him. Of the 49% who chose Romney for deficit management, 95% gave him their votes.

Considering the weak economy, the exploding spending, and huge deficits of the past four years, it's amazing that Romney could not make a better case for managing the economy and the deficit .....

(Excerpt) Read more at online.barrons.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012issues; bho2012; demographics; economy; election; election2012; elections; immigration; immigrationreform; romney; romney2012
This pretty much tracks with my conclusions at (Hill Poll: Gloomy voters say US on wrong track, kids will be poorer - FR / TH, by Sheldon Alberts, 2012 December 17)

The author (J.T. Young served in the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget in the Bush administration from 2001 to 2004, and as a congressional staff member for various Republicans from 1987 to 2000) makes several crucial points in this article:
1. It was politically important for Republicans to build their campaign around emphasizing the economic issues à la "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" and "It's the economy, stupid."

2. The 23% of the electorate who thought that the economy was excellent is a "minority" group that is about the size of Hispanics and blacks combined but delivered significantly more votes to Obama than Hispanics and blacks combined. The shift to Romney of a small percentage (about 5%) in that group by convincing them that the economy is hardly "excellent" or "good" would require the equivalent of 20% voting shift from Hispanics and blacks - much harder, if not impossible effort.

3. Similar calculations apply to the respondents to the other two questions in the exit poll - the minor shift would give Romney and the GOP massive dividends in the electoral victory.

As usual, the GOP and its band of political and media consultants are drawing the wrong conclusions from the defeat in the elections in which they fielded one of the weakest and least electable candidate in a long time - Mitt Romney had no record of leadership, activism and/or achievement in politics, or as a Republican, outside of succeeding once in buying a governorship in a decidedly liberal state and running it in a decidedly liberal fashion, which made him far less successful than, for example, his fellow plenus-ergo-politico (rich-turned-politician) Jon Corzine or John F. Kerry.

Almost every demographic group - or in a broader sense, special interest groups which involve micro-issues / micro-communities, as Newt Gingrich aptly described them in his analysis (Gingrich: The challenge confronting Republicans - FR / HE, 2012 December 24) - has an economic interest that seeks more than an unsustainable permanent government welfare handouts.

That economic self-interest, as the author shows, is an overarching and an overriding principle that has been and can be very successful in attracting members of almost any micro-community to conservative-libertarian side, if this message is well articulated - both independently of the micro-issue and specifically tailored to the micro-community like particular "demographic" (age, gender, religion, education, ethnicity, preference in food/clothes/music/entertainment etc., etc.) group.

The inspiration of better economic opportunity rather than the goal of "bringing everyone down to the lowest common denominator of dependency" on the government should permeate the message of GOP and they need messengers who believe in that message and can sincerely and convincingly deliver it - this beats "You didn't build that!" and resonates with the majority of every "demographic" group every time it's actually tried!

Romney was particularly unsuitable candidate for this role because he was not any more credible than Obama when they sporadically mouthed off generic slogans about economic "opportunity." Pandering to Democrats on the "comprehensive immigration reform with path to citizenship" for illegals, based on Romney's predictable failure, instead of taking the "right turn" with the proper economic message, will doom the GOP to a minority status for generations, and the U.S. to a hybrid of southern Europe and banana republic.

Immigration reform could add millions of people under Obama health law - The Hill, by Elise Viebeck, 2013 January 26

1 posted on 01/28/2013 4:08:09 AM PST by CutePuppy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Mr. RomneyCARE would NEVER attack Obama as he had
Gov. Palin and any GOP conservative. Never. Ever.


2 posted on 01/28/2013 4:14:33 AM PST by Diogenesis (Vi veri veniversum vivus vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

If you’re on 199 weeks of unemployment insurance, food stamps, section eight, government cheese, welfare, SSDI, worker’s comp., under-the-table cash and more it doesn’t seem like things are so bad, especially if you have 5 or 6 adults in a household all doing the same thing. Fire up the grill and break open the 12 pack, there’s a game on the big screen TV!!


3 posted on 01/28/2013 4:26:41 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's presidential run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; NFHale; ...
RE :”The second question was, “Who would better handle the economy?” The answers amounted to a virtual tie. To the question, 48% said Obama was more capable, and 98% of that group voted for the president. On the other side, 49% chose Romney as more capable, and 94% of these voted for Romney.
The final important money question was, “Who would better handle the federal budget deficit?” Again, it was almost a tie, with 47% choosing Obama to handle the deficit, and 98% of that group voting for him. Of the 49% who chose Romney for deficit management, 95% gave him their votes.
Considering the weak economy, the exploding spending, and huge deficits of the past four years, it's amazing that Romney could not make a better case for managing the economy and the deficit—almost as amazing as the ability of 23% of those polled to perceive a healthy economy in 2012. “

Republicans were not trusted on the economy since 2008 to begin with so why was it supposed to be an easy issue for Romney to win? What did he pitch as different? All the samebbuzz phrases were repeated. "If any taxes go up on 'job creators' (aka 'the rich') the economy will tank"

And what in his background made him look like the economy doctor?

The one common theme I see in most flavors of the Republicans was that last year would be an easy win for any R candidate, a fatally flawed assumption.

4 posted on 01/28/2013 4:36:07 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to Dems and Obama is not a principle! Its just losing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

The Left likes their dog whistles. They missed one.

When Romney described himself as a “severe conservative,” it was another certainty he was nothing of the sort.


5 posted on 01/28/2013 4:36:34 AM PST by Jacquerie ("How few were left who had seen the republic!" - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Crappy product period.


6 posted on 01/28/2013 4:41:03 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
The biggest inroad the Left had made is the 'silly young women' and the 'young-ish women' block. For a long time. I don't know how you reach them for the 'are you better off' and 'it's the economy, stupid' message.

We laughed at the stupid creepy 'life of julia' and other 'feminism issues'.

But Republicans can not shake the 'old rich whitey' image from their public school indoctrination, and college-level brainwashing. They were told and believe we became the 'old rich whitey' through ill gotten gains from stepping on top of the weak/minorities. Evil "Corporate Amerikkkkaa".

And our side did not do (have not done) a good job reaching out to them and break the bondage of 'their reality' in social circles (the media they are more susceptible to suggestions and peer pressure). Granted we have an uphill battle against the school system plus the mass media mis-information.

Look at today's young women, they see nothing wrong using sex or sex appeal for sugar daddy's, they see tv/movie showing sex/ambition/backstabbing/all the 'successful' young women moving up coporate ladders are ambitious baitches that won't stopped by any moral qualms ..... all kinds of wrong things I've encountered RARELY in entire my work life.

Their idols are not good role models. If one of them come along, media had to shred her to pieces ..... (anyway, I could go on and on. soorry for the long rant.)

7 posted on 01/28/2013 4:57:07 AM PST by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

rich MASS liberals may buy nominations, but they DON’T win elections!

regardless of party!


8 posted on 01/28/2013 5:03:55 AM PST by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Romney and the GOP never connected to the working class citizens who desperately wanted a leader that could fight for their cause....freedom and liberty from the government gestapo.

Romney kept talking about matters that only the rich could understand and profit from. The average “joe” was not concerned with the stock market or high finance.

Another thing that disconnected Romney from the average citizen was the fact that he had never lived in the “real world” and learned to actually fight. He actually fought in strict compliance with Queensberry rules while his adversaries fought by street thug rules.

I can remember how sick I felt when he was selected to run for office. I knew that Obama was a “shoe-in” the minute I heard the news.

The Democrat party fights with the propaganda designed to SCARE the stupid people who vote for them and also the “stick and carrot” approach to all “takers” in our society.

The Republican party NEVER uses the scare tactic nor will even dare to take things away from the “takers.”

Nothing will ever change until we become the TAKERS and take back our liberty and freedoms granted under the Constitution.


9 posted on 01/28/2013 5:07:21 AM PST by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

The only logical explanation is that Obama stole the election. Maybe it’s Karma that he has cleanup his own pile of stinkin...


10 posted on 01/28/2013 5:10:27 AM PST by McGruff (What difference does it make? - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Republicans were not trusted on the economy since 2008 to begin with so why was it supposed to be an easy issue for Romney to win?

You have the right answers by asking your own right questions.

When this, as well as Romney's preposterous claim of "creating 100,000 jobs," was pointed out during the primaries by some candidates and outsiders, they were angrily accused by the GOP-e and the "conservative media" of "attacking Romney from the left"** as if essentially equating Romney or Bain with the "capitalism"?

By the same token, would the same people come to the defence of, let's say, Jon Corzine or his ilk, since he was a self-made multi-millionaire and far more successful in both accumulating more wealth (without Romney's initial political name recognition and privileged "community" ties and Harvard education, and having served in the Marine Corps) and using it in politics, successfully buying a Senate seat and the Governorship.

_____________________________________________
** I still don't quite understand what in bloody hell this phrase is supposed to mean, as if the real facts don't matter to the "right" anymore than they do to the loony left and can't be aired or spoken, if one is being deified as the "epitome of capitalism"?

11 posted on 01/28/2013 5:24:05 AM PST by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

In my opinion, the Washington Establishment of the republican party could have lived with Romney being a moderate, it was the fact that a Conservative was his running mate.

The spineless republican party didn’t throw whatever power they had behind Romney because it would upset their ‘don’t make waves’ existence.

Ryan represented that threat.


12 posted on 01/28/2013 5:25:22 AM PST by RetSignman ("A Republic if you can keep it"....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot; DH
But Republicans can not shake the 'old rich whitey' image from their public school indoctrination, and college-level brainwashing. They were told and believe we became the 'old rich whitey' through ill gotten gains from stepping on top of the weak/minorities. Evil "Corporate Amerikkkkaa".

Well, it doesn't help to nominate a 'rich old whitey' simply to cement that image in the hearts and minds of voter and then try to redefine him during the election campaign ("reintroduce" him as Ann Romney and his staff put it during the convention, just few weeks before the election). Romney was, from the beginning, the caricature of the "privileged rich white Republican" that is being painted in the media and the "entertainment" industry.

Whoever at GOP-e thought that would have no effect on electorate and pronounced him "electable," nay, the "only electable candidate" should have their brains examined. His son lying about Romney "not wanting to run unless another suitable candidate" emerges just proves how phony, weak and ineffectual his entire campaign was (including primaries).

Romney kept talking about matters that only the rich could understand and profit from. The average "joe" was not concerned with the stock market or high finance.

True. See above.

The Republican party NEVER uses the scare tactic ...

Oh, they do. It's just they've been using it to scare people to vote AGAINST somebody (ABx strategy) but it's usually not enough, and will become even more difficult, to win if you you don't have someone [or something] to vote FOR...

Can you name one "exciting" Republican presidential nominee since Reagan transferred the Oval Office to the "kinder and gentler," "compassionate conservatives"?

13 posted on 01/28/2013 5:51:30 AM PST by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All

He was cooked when he didn’t go after Benghazi. He looked spineless and overly deferential imho.


14 posted on 01/28/2013 6:28:51 AM PST by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mmichaels1970

Yet the media jumped all over Romney when he did comment on Benghazi. They accused him of ‘jumping the gun’ and ‘playing politics.’


15 posted on 01/28/2013 6:31:38 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

How the Republican candidate lost the presidential election:

F. R. A. U. D.


16 posted on 01/28/2013 6:34:29 AM PST by Iron Munro (I Miss America, don't you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

In the end, though he gave lip service to Country Class, Romney was seen as part of the Ruling Class. People who might otherwise have left home to vote if he had somehow included Ron Paul or Sarah Palin, simply stayed home. Any future candidate who thinks he can win without a visceral connection to majority Country Class, is deluding himself.


17 posted on 01/28/2013 6:38:38 AM PST by AdaGray (squi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Yet the media ...

And there's the other reason Romney lost.

Until a candidate figures out how to successfully go to war with the media, the march to communism will continue.
18 posted on 01/28/2013 6:51:43 AM PST by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
Did anyone, anyone, actually vote FOR Romney? I voted against Obama. I didn't expect much from Romney other than that he would be less bad than Obama. I expected Obamacare to continue with a few tweaks rather than being ripped out by its roots. I expected the crony capitalism of Obama's energy policy to continue with a rotation of who the cronies were. I expected Souteresque Supreme Court nominees meant to not rock the boat.

And if I had thought that Romney either didn't have a chance in Ohio or nationally (which have been basically synonymous in recent elections), or if I thought he was a sure winner, I would have jumped to a third party candidate.

19 posted on 01/28/2013 7:13:23 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Choose one: the yellow and black flag of the Tea Party or the white flag of the Republican Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mmichaels1970
Until a candidate figures out how to successfully go to war with the media, the march to communism will continue.

True dat.....Reagan was the master of it...sadly nobody since then can even come close. It's not enough to be right on the issues, it takes political savvy, and it is sorely lacking in today's GOP.

20 posted on 01/28/2013 7:31:41 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Republicans since Reagan have run on “We Suck Less”, and that will not work.


21 posted on 01/28/2013 7:33:02 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Well S Palin understood the economic issue early on and told everybody what it was: CRONY CAPITALISM !!!!!!!!!!!!

But the elites and pundits look down their noses at Palin and the establishment went down again.


22 posted on 01/28/2013 7:35:03 AM PST by Leto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

How the Republican candidate lost the presidential election:

When we run a Republican who loses, let us know. 2008 and 2012, we ran a Democratic lite candidate at best. Romney was the worst possible person to run in 2012. He is vile and liberal as anyone we could have chosen. He easily lost the election because he does NOT have a core.


23 posted on 01/28/2013 7:41:52 AM PST by napscoordinator (GOP Candidate 2020 - "Bloomberg 2020 - We vote for whatever crap the GOP puts in front of us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Leto
Well S Palin understood the economic issue early on and told everybody what it was: CRONY CAPITALISM !!!!!!!!!!!!

But the elites and pundits look down their noses at Palin and the establishment went down again.

You're darned right they did. Cronyism is how they make their money and Sarah became an existential threat when she correctly dropped that hammer on the head of that nail.

24 posted on 01/28/2013 7:47:46 AM PST by Sirius Lee (All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Leto
Well S Palin understood the economic issue early on and told everybody what it was: CRONY CAPITALISM !!!!!!!!!!!!

But the elites and pundits look down their noses at Palin and the establishment went down again.

You're darned right they did. Cronyism is how they make their money and Sarah became an existential threat when she correctly dropped that hammer on the head of that nail.

25 posted on 01/28/2013 7:47:49 AM PST by Sirius Lee (All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Leto
Well S Palin understood the economic issue early on and told everybody what it was: CRONY CAPITALISM !!!!!!!!!!!!

That says to me she understands nothing. At least you could look at Mitt Romney's personal record and show success. It should have been obvious that this guy, as far as generating financial success, knew what he was doing.

Shouting "CRONY CAPITALISM" is just meaningless ad hominem.

If you're going to blame someone for Romney's loss, blame all the registered Republicans that stayed home and didn't vote. Or the ones that voted for 3rd party candidates. Or write-ins.

Palin excites the far right and that's it. The vast majority of people in this country are not far right and quite honestly don't like Palin as a political figure. There's no way she could win a general election.

If Romney would have chosen Rubio as VP... That might have made a difference.

Either way... it comes down to the fault of the American voter.
26 posted on 01/28/2013 8:04:52 AM PST by MeOnTheBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

I never once heard Romney talk about the economy! Its like it wasn’t on his political radar.

No wonder he lost!


27 posted on 01/28/2013 10:30:12 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Well, I might disagree very slightly.

I often heard Romney say that he had a plan and that he knew how to create jobs (he had done it before). He said that repeatedly.

But, with no follow-through at all, I think his pablum was not sufficient to close a sale. In the general election, I don't think he campaigned like he wanted the office. Maybe he just thought it was his for the taking, because Obama was such a failure. Doesn't matter. Romney didn't do what he needed to do, and he lost.
NOTE: I didn't stay home. I voted for him. But I never liked him at all.

28 posted on 01/28/2013 10:41:24 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
When we run a Republican who loses, let us know.

I didn't say "Republican" I said "Republican candidate".
There is no disputing Romney was that.

29 posted on 01/28/2013 10:55:28 AM PST by Iron Munro (I Miss America, don't you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MeOnTheBeach

Romney couldn’t have won with God as his VP he is part of the problem not the solution.

As to Crony Capitalism, when one looks at the relationship between many large Corps and Government, then indeed it is the enemy of free markets, entrepreneurship and free enterprise.


30 posted on 01/28/2013 1:23:28 PM PST by Leto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
Moody's 50 state economic model predicted Obama as a narrow winner all along, predicting the right winner in every state but Florida. I don't get it either, but that's the way it was. It's hard to argue with the numbers.

Romney had image problems. So did the Republican party. It's possible that a different campaign strategy could have made the election closer, but the odds were against a Republican victory. The old hard to break Republican "lock" on the electoral college has been replaced by a hard to break Democrat lock.

Maybe another Republican could have won, but the candidate who could have done better than Romney did wasn't in the race. If that nonexistent ideal candidate existed and ran or if the Romney campaign were more aggressive, it might have made the election closer, and stopped a lot of the "mandate" talk short, though.

31 posted on 01/28/2013 1:52:00 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; ...

” The one common theme I see in most flavors of the Republicans was that last year would be an easy win for any R candidate, a fatally flawed assumption. “

Romney: “ Vote for me,because I’m a rich banker. Don’t hate me because you are out of work! 47% of you are just mooches anyway......”

Uh.....never mind

: )


32 posted on 01/31/2013 10:34:27 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; sickoflibs; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy

My wife, who sees things very simply put it this way:

“Romney never fought back!! He just let Obama make him look like a wimp.”

I concur.

Even during the debates, where Obama looked like a deer in the headlights, and actually called on Candy Crowly for help; Romney just backed off.

Hell, he should have handed Jughead his balls on a platter, several times.

But no. We have to be “polite” for some reason.

Well, I don’t believe in being polite to people who are ruining my country, and trying to take away my rights.

Maybe we should demand that OUR candidates start adopting that same attitude - or they don’t become our candidates.

The ONLY time I saw him fight back was against our other candidates.


33 posted on 01/31/2013 10:55:35 AM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NFHale; sickoflibs; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy

” Even during the debates, where Obama looked like a deer in the headlights, and actually called on Candy Crowly for help; Romney just backed off.”

Any decent candidate would have knocked Obama out right away.
Obama was an even easier target than Carter....which shows how incompetent Romney was. And also how cowardly he was.


34 posted on 01/31/2013 11:11:41 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; sickoflibs; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy

“...And also how cowardly he was....”

Afraid of going after him too hard, being accused of being “RAYYYYYCIST!!!”

Yeah, I kinda got that impression, actually.

Grown men, afraid of word that’s overused by perpetually outraged immature fools. It’s pathetic.

I seriously miss the WWII generation...


35 posted on 01/31/2013 11:49:00 AM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: NFHale

” I seriously miss the WWII generation...”

Like my dad, long gone


36 posted on 01/31/2013 1:29:03 PM PST by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; NFHale
RE :”Romney: “ Vote for me,because I’m a rich banker. Don’t hate me because you are out of work! 47% of you are just mooches anyway......”
Uh.....never mind”

HA, that was pretty much my take.

Hey you loser, us rich bankers F..ed-up the economy with bad loans so only we know how to fix it (more bad loans+ cut my taxes). Trust me. I am just like you , except very rich, mormon and liberal, but everything else is the same.
This message was paid for by Mitt$$$Romneyfor POTUS

What could go wrong?

37 posted on 01/31/2013 1:49:36 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to Dems and Obama is not a principle! Its just losing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NFHale; stephenjohnbanker; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy
RE :”The ONLY time I saw him fight back was against our other candidates.”

He was like a lion against Newt and Perry, but when O rubbed his belly he purred like a kitten.

38 posted on 01/31/2013 1:53:16 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to Dems and Obama is not a principle! Its just losing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Disgusting imagery, SOL... but accurate


39 posted on 01/31/2013 3:40:34 PM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: NFHale; stephenjohnbanker; CutePuppy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; Gilbo_3; Impy
RE :”The ONLY time I saw him fight back was against our other candidates.”
......
He was like a lion against Newt and Perry, but when O rubbed his belly he purred like a kitten.
....
Disgusting imagery, SOL... but accurate”

Great example, Romney beat the crap out of the others over immigration, then he gets into a debate with Obama flips and says he'd consider amnesty in some circumstances.

O promises Hispanics amnesty and Romney has his head up his butt.

Hispanics tuned out that part about Mitt flipping to a 'compassionate conservative' and Dems made sure they kept hearing what he said in the primaries.

A disaster, But we kept reading here that he was winning.

40 posted on 02/02/2013 7:40:34 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to Dems and Obama is not a principle! Its just losing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Only and act of God, working overtime, can save America. We are truly at Idiocracy.


41 posted on 02/03/2013 10:03:17 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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