1-22--2013 is a sad day for Whirlway, Joe Bloe COG and the rest of the Repugs.

Whirley, Joe, COG and the rest had better get use to a Democratic President. The way the population is changing there is little hope that a Republican will ever be elected President again. Did you know that if Reagan had run against Carter and got the same percentages of the various ethnic groups that the election would have been a virtual tie. Their second problem is that their primary road takes them through states that are full of angry conservative whites so the candidate that comes out of this process is ok with angry white they do not appeal to the vast minority population that elected Obama. And please save me the insults and try to address or refute what I have posted.

That's the spirit! StupiOldLyinFart doesn't vote for anyone who has a snowball's chance in hell on winning. That way he can bitch and moan about anybody and everybody. After all, bitching and moaning is the only thing he specializes in.

What a fraud! Originally Posted by bigtex

Not sure which one is COG

So refusing to choose between despotism and tyranny makes me a fraud. Interesting.

You people are so brainwashed by the system. Sad.

Big Louie; congratulations on posting an original piece and asking a legitimate question................

Obama's margin of victory was thin, especially in the swing states......Romney ran a poor campaign and was a weak candidate from the get go..........had Romney ran more to the right of center he would have energized the evangelicals and constitutional conservatives who didn't turn out...a mistake. Romney overwhelmingly won the independent vote in the swing states, they would have stayed with him, even if he was a more forceful conservative candidate.

I think Romney's Mormonism was a disadvantage that people want to ignore. Many evangelicals couldn't support him.

Going forward, no doubt the GOP needs to recruit better candidates; but they also will win more elections by running more conservatives and staying true to conservatism. The last 2 presidential candidates abandoned the conservative wing and lost......the TP platform wins in local and state elections; the right candidate can make it a national agenda. It just takes a better messenger.

States like Florida prove that the Hispanic demographic trend isn't necessarily a Democratic lock........Rubio is an up and comer and can bridge conservative principles with a successful campaign.

In the end, Romney had his wind knocked out by a combination of blows; weak 3rd debate performance (he didn't take it to Obama on Benghazi), a very skilled opposition, Hurricane Sandy, and Christi (who kneecapped Romney imo).

If ever there was an election that the GOP should have won, it was 2012. All the stars were aligned; the GOP got beat for a number of reasons, demographic trends playing a small but important part.

Whirley, Joe, COG and the rest had better get use to a Democratic President. The way the population is changing there is little hope that a Republican will ever be elected President again. Did you know that if Reagan had run against Carter and got the same percentages of the various ethnic groups that the election would have been a virtual tie. Their second problem is that their primary road takes them through states that are full of angry conservative whites so the candidate that comes out of this process is ok with angry white they do not appeal to the vast minority population that elected Obama. And please save me the insults and try to address or refute what I have posted. Originally Posted by BigLouie

. And please save me the insults and try to address or refute what I have posted. Originally Posted by BigLouie

We'll see in 2016 now won't we. If your man, Obaminable, performs like he did this past four years, during the next four years, those minority voters the Democracts take for granted may decide they are "independents" this time.

We'll see in 2016 now won't we. If your man, Obaminable, performs like he did this past four years, during the next four years, those minority voters the Democracts take for granted may decide they are "independents" this time. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Isn't that exactly what the Independent voters who voted for GW in 2000 and 2004 did? It is quite apparent they voted for Obama in larger numbers than they voted for Bush.

It remains to be seen what the Independent's will do in 2016 and beyond! I suspect the Indy's will be enthusiastic Hillary supporters, should she decide to throw her hat in the 2016 ring. Most especially the female Indy's.

Actually, whiny,more fusing to choose between anything makes you a fraud. The rest makes you an asshat.

Big Louie; congratulations on posting an original piece and asking a legitimate question................

If ever there was an election that the GOP should have won, it was 2012. All the stars were aligned; the GOP got beat for a number of reasons, demographic trends playing a small but important part. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Trends didnt mean nearly what you seem to think they meant, DOTY, voters really didn't have a decent choice.

At the end of the day it was piss poor platform and a weaker ticket that kept the GOP from winning. They lost the White house. They lost the senate. And yes, more votes were cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans. Without geerymandering, theyd have lost the House too.

That's what I call a TREND.

Whirley, Joe, COG and the rest had better get use to a Democratic President. The way the population is changing there is little hope that a Republican will ever be elected President again. Did you know that if Reagan had run against Carter and got the same percentages of the various ethnic groups that the election would have been a virtual tie. Their second problem is that their primary road takes them through states that are full of angry conservative whites so the candidate that comes out of this process is ok with angry white they do not appeal to the vast minority population that elected Obama. And please save me the insults and try to address or refute what I have posted. Originally Posted by BigLouie

I wouldn't say that. I'd say there is little hope that a conservative Republican will ever be elected president again. The Republican party will probably morph into being a slightly less Marxist version of the Democratic Party, just to stay competitive. To some extent they already have.

The majority of the American people are stupid worthless parasites, i.e. liberals. So of course these are good times for the Democratic Party.

We may never see fifty one percent of the American people willing to vote for a decent presidential candidate again. Clinton was trash and won twice. Gore was trash and won the popular vote. Obama is evil incarnate and won twice. I think it's pretty clear that America has reached a point of no return in terms of culture rot.

Conservatism may well be dead in America because it requires that a majority of the people be essentially decent and honorable.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

Big Louie; congratulations on posting an original piece and asking a legitimate question................

Obama's margin of victory was thin, especially in the swing states......Romney ran a poor campaign and was a weak candidate from the get go..........had Romney ran more to the right of center he would have energized the evangelicals and constitutional conservatives who didn't turn out...a mistake. Romney overwhelmingly won the independent vote in the swing states, they would have stayed with him, even if he was a more forceful conservative candidate.

I think Romney's Mormonism was a disadvantage that people want to ignore. Many evangelicals couldn't support him.

Going forward, no doubt the GOP needs to recruit better candidates; but they also will win more elections by running more conservatives and staying true to conservatism. The last 2 presidential candidates abandoned the conservative wing and lost......the TP platform wins in local and state elections; the right candidate can make it a national agenda. It just takes a better messenger.

States like Florida prove that the Hispanic demographic trend isn't necessarily a Democratic lock........Rubio is an up and comer and can bridge conservative principles with a successful campaign.

In the end, Romney had his wind knocked out by a combination of blows; weak 3rd debate performance (he didn't take it to Obama on Benghazi), a very skilled opposition, Hurricane Sandy, and Christi (who kneecapped Romney imo).

If ever there was an election that the GOP should have won, it was 2012. All the stars were aligned; the GOP got beat for a number of reasons, demographic trends playing a small but important part. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

WW why haven't you addressed the question at hand? How do you feel about the fact that Rpmney's own son admits that Romney really didn't want to be POTUS? That is scary- that basically means Romney was a fraud and everything he said on the campaign trails and debates were lies. If Romney truly didn't want to be POTUS that means his interest were not for the good of America- someone would have been pulling his strings and he would have been a puppet President.

WW why haven't you addressed the question at hand? How do you feel about the fact that Rpmney's own son admits that Romney really didn't want to be POTUS? That is scary- that basically means Romney was a fraud and everything he said on the campaign trails and debates were lies. If Romney truly didn't want to be POTUS that means his interest were not for the good of America- someone would have been pulling his strings and he would have been a puppet President. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Romney fought like Hell to win. He came within 2.4% of unseating and encumbant that had unprecedented media support and used every dirty trick in the book to win.

Obviously if Romney was actually trying to lose he wouldn't have come so close to winning. Anyone who watched the first presidential debate and concluded that Romney wasn't trying to win is nuts.

Tagg Romney meant that his father had mixed feelings about being president but ran because of a sense of duty. Here's what Tagg Romney actually said:

" If he could have found someone else to take his place ... he would have been ecstatic to step aside.
"He is a very private person who loves his family deeply and wants to be with them," Tagg continued. "He has deep faith in God and he loves his country, but he doesn’t love the attention.”

Romney fought like Hell to win. He came within 2.4% of unseating and encumbant that had unprecedented media support and used every dirty trick in the book to win.

Obviously if Romney was actually trying to lose he wouldn't have come so close to winning. Anyone who watched the first presidential debate and concluded that Romney wasn't trying to win is nuts.

Tagg Romney meant that his father had mixed feelings about being president but ran because of a sense of duty. Here's what Tagg Romney actually said:

" If he could have found someone else to take his place ... he would have been ecstatic to step aside.
"He is a very private person who loves his family deeply and wants to be with them," Tagg continued. "He has deep faith in God and he loves his country, but he doesn’t love the attention.” Originally Posted by joe bloe

You keep saying every dirty trick in the book. You keep inferring that the Obama campaign somehow cheated. Please explain or for Gods sake shut the fuck up! You just can't tell the truth about anything.

Also, last time I looked Obama won more than 60% of the Electoral College.

For a change, you're full of shit.

For a change, you're full of shit. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Whereas, you are ALWAYS full of shit, Assup! >>>

By the way, I do not refuse to take a stand. I take a strong stand against both tyranny and depotism. You can't understand that, because you have no values that go beyond yourself and your own personal desires.

I guess that's why we elected you . . .

DIPSHIT OF THE YEAR 2013

ASSUP!!!

The Republican party will probably morph into being a slightly less Marxist version of the Democratic Party, just to stay competitive. Originally Posted by joe bloe

I don't recall the democrats ever attempting to completely dismantle our free market economy and switch to a central command economy. Maybe you could remind me?

The majority of the American people are stupid worthless parasites, i.e. liberals. So of course these are good times for the Democratic Party.

We may never see fifty one percent of the American people willing to vote for a decent presidential candidate again. Clinton was trash and won twice. Gore was trash and won the popular vote. Obama is evil incarnate and won twice. I think it's pretty clear that America has reached a point of no return in terms of culture rot.

Conservatism may well be dead in America because it requires that a majority of the people be essentially decent and honorable. Originally Posted by joe bloe

Bullshit like this is the reason that our government is ineffective. It must be great living in your world where distinguishing right/wrong and good/evil is as easy as Liberal = wrong/bad, and conservative = good/right. Blaming all the country's problems on 1 group of people is nothing more than asanine scapegoating.

Whereas, you are ALWAYS full of shit, Assup! >>>

By the way, I do not refuse to take a stand. I take a strong stand against both tyranny and depotism. You can't understand that, because you have no values that go beyond yourself and your own personal desires. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

What the fuck is "depotism," Whiny? Is that the act of blowing transients in the bus depot?

I have no values that go beyond myself and my own personal desires? Youmare so wrong on so many levels.

The Unaliar strikes again ... IBCrying has taught you well.