Posted on 07/14/2012 1:29:52 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
This week in the presidential campaign was driven by several stories, primarily Mitt Romney’s speech to the NAACP convention; the likely bogus rumor that Romney was considering Condoleeza Rice as his vice-presidential pick; and the hysterical, bogus claim that Romney may be a felon based on decade-old SEC filings. Let’s look at the common thread running through them.
Partisans on both sides of the aisle questioned Romney’s decision to appear at the NAACP convention, given that African-Americans have been a solidly reliable Democratic voting bloc for decades. However, a Romney campaign adviser told BuzzFeed that Romney’s attendance at the convention wasn’t primarily intended to break off a portion of the black vote, but to make clear to moderates that he intends to be an inclusive president. (I would suggest this was also part of the motivation for the Condi VP leak, if it came from the campaign.) It is really polite code for saying Romney was going after the votes of white college graduates, particularly women. Recall how the Emerging Democratic Majority theorists see this campaign:
[Ruy] Teixeira, writing with John Halpin, argues in “The Path to 270: Demographics versus Economics in the 2012 Presidential Election,” that in order to be re-elected, President Obama must keep his losses among white college graduates to the 4-point margin of 2008 (47-51). Why? Otherwise he will not be able to survive a repetition of 2010, when white working-class voters supported Republican House candidates by a record-setting margin of 63-33.
Obama’s alternative path to victory, according to Teixeira and Halpin, would be to keep his losses among all white voters at the same level John Kerry did in 2004, when he lost them by 17 points, 58-41. This would be a step backwards for Obama, who lost among all whites in 2008 by only 12 points (55-43). Obama can afford to drop to Kerry’s white margins because, between 2008 and 2012, the pro-Democratic minority share of the electorate is expected to grow by two percentage points and the white share to decline by the same amount, reflecting the changing composition of the national electorate.
Recent polling suggests Obama’s current support among non-college whites remains mired about where is was for Democrats in 2010. However, Obama has largely maintained his support with white college grads, still within the margin of error of that 47% he won in 2008. If he erodes much further in that demographic, it is also unlikely that he would be able to achieve the alternate target for the overall white vote.
Obama’s precarious position in this regard explains the increasingly negative, hysterical and defamatory campaign being waged by Team Obama, promoted by various establishment media outlets at different times over the past few weeks, culminating in the full flowering of Romney Derangement Syndrome at this week’s end. Team Obama must increasingly rely on the “otherization” of Romney (and his church) of the sort the very same people roundly condemned and marginalized when attempted against Obama in 2008. Indeed, Obama started painting himself into his current corner during the 2008 primaries. Obama ran — and has largely governed — against the Clintonian version of the Democratic Party, now extending to Obama’s weakening of welfare reform. It is thus not terribly surprising that Obama’s tenuous grip on white college grads has become the flashpoint of the 2012 campaign.
Ok, let's assume that's right; let's also assume Obama is a zero.
1000 * 0 = .... 0!
So, yeah, now we have mathematical proof that electing Romney is the same as electing Obama.
That puts you far on the Left ~ the extreme left in fact ~
When it comes to slaughtering infants it's the killing, not the technique, that is the problem.
When you post something om a public forum, it becomes the business of anyone who reads it.
“A vote for any third party candidate is a vote for Obama.”
And I add yet another name to the list of morons who don’t understand how it works.
You can read post 98 and 103 if you like, either way I’m done wasting my time on this thread. It’s Saturday night and my keyboard commando time is over.
“Just remember who to blame if obozo gets another 4 (or more) years.”
I know exactly who to blame. The idiots who voted FOR Obama.
Also the idiots (Republicans) who pushed Romney into the Republican candidacy.
I totally agree with you. When I do take a peek at FR these days I just can't stay long. We are in very dark days for the salvation of our freedoms and our country as we know it and this site promotes NOT voting for Romney against Obama.
Obama has told Putin to just sit back and he'll hand us over to him after the election and still the "Not Romneys" are calling us sell outs!
Obama has made our allies enter the White House through the garbage entrance in the back, and still we are called sell outs!
Obama bows to the heads of state of other nations, but we are called sell outs!
I'm voting for Romney because I know damn well what we face in an Obama second term. If Obama wins, I don't think this site will be allowed to exist....
Teddy Rosevelt and Ross Perot both did a fine job of electing conservatives (in your deluded mind).
And NOTHING is what you advocate doing in the Obama vs Romney choice for president.
Why do you say I am deluded?
Is it:
Because I won’t support Liberals of any stripe?
Because I refuse to assist in the downfall of the conservative movement?
Because I trust neither Obama OR Romney?
Or is it because I won’t come on America’s premiere Conservative forum and insult the Conservative members of said forum in an attempt to convince them to support a liberal just because he has an “(R)” after his name?
Yeah...I think it’s that last one.
If you really could think, it would be great, but clearly you can’t.
You probably have no kids, so nothing is going to ripple your consience.
We have numerous BETTER candidates ~
You probably have no kids, so nothing is going to ripple your consience."
Do you think you are going to convince people to vote for Romney by insulting them?
The best you fraidy cat Romney pushers can come up with is "vote for Romney because he isn't Obama and Obama makes me shake in my boots".
You really need to grow a set.
BTW: I don't insult people simply because they are voting for Romney, but I do swipe back at the jerks who insult and attack those of us who won't.
Indeed. It's amazing the sort of crap I get when I say I'm not voting for Romney. I try to explain that Romney presents me with nothing worth voting for, and that I cannot see any great difference between him and Obama. (I really don't believe that he doesn't hate the nation, as some say, nor do I believe that he will do any good for the country.)
I see this election as something of a Morton's Fork:
Obama Romney
| |
| |
| |
| |
Marxist Fabian
Socialist Socialist
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
IMPLEMENTS
SOCIALISM Since the result of voting for either is roughly the same, I can ditch the Republican party with no guilt... after all, if they wanted my vote they would run somebody that actually represented something different from the Democrats: Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Tom Hoefling, me! (Okay, I'm not old enough to be president this go-`round; but still, they picked a candidate that shouts "we're just like our opposition!")
Not that will beat Obama. Obama is the threat to our freedoms. No point in talking about it. You are perfectly content to let Obama shut down this site in the name of the government. Go for it
You guys gave it away with the weakest possible candidate. Obama should have had NO CHANCE yet he’s neck and neck with your clueless wonder who doesn’t even bother to campaign.
Remember, this site is the, what was it.....7th most conservative site on the internet? Grass won't grow under Obama's feet to shut it down.
Respectfully, Kazan, 0 & the democrats *are*- not will. Are. destroying America as we speak. If the mid terms in 06 emboldened them (which it certainly did), the election of 0 has brought them fully out of the closet. They don’t even pretend to hide their intentions anymore. (I simply can’t stomach Kos anymore, so I have no idea what’s being said there, but go look at DU if you don’t believe me. If you think they “can’t” or won’t, then I have to wonder where in the world you’ve been)
If 0 is re-elected, we aren’t looking at 4 years or 8 years. We’re very possibly looking at never. And how much damage will he have done in 6 months, let alone 4 years to indefinitely? Do you even fathom who this man is & what he is capable of?
Communism isn’t some abstract concept that doesn’t seem real to me. I stand by my statement, Kazan. I meant it 100%.
In your opinion, who should be the alternative to Romney? Who do you support as the republican candidate for president in this election?
And on what do you base these claims that he will destroy the republican majority in the House? How? Are you forgetting Jeb Bush (God Forbid!)?
Seriously. Where are you coming from? What’s the scenario?
How distinction-challenged can you sink to?
For you to try to compare the two, you'd have to have...
(a) the ENTIRE Catholic hierarchy (not just a few)
(b) OPENLY sanction child abuse (not just a few behind closed administrative doors)...
WITH (c) the ENTIRE Catholic grassroots givers giving financial consent to such practices!
(That didn't/hasn't happened)
In Mormonism...
(a) the ENTIRE General Authorities (not just a few)
(b) OPENLY embraced racism into 1978 (not just a few gen authorities behind closed administrative doors)...
with (c) the ENTIRE Lds grassroots givers giving financial consent to such practices!
Surely you can somehow put distinctives, for example, 'tween the way the Penn State admins handled that scandal vs. other campuses with similar issues. They also didn't do what they did openly.
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.