«

»

The Election Post Mortem

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else – Winston Churchill

I think our Constitutional Republic is the least worst form of government. That sounds like damning with faint praise but it’s not. It’s a triumph. We can argue and disagree and governments can change hands (or not) without a drop of blood being spilt. No matter what the result, that is preferable to the previous hundred thousand years of human history. No matter how bad you think Obama or Romney are (or would be), there is no country and no time I would rather be in than American in the 21st century. We stagger and take wrong turns — see the Churchill quote. But the arc of American history, while tangled, is still toward progress.

Whatever the results last night, we Americans will soldier on and do our best, as we always have. I think it was one of the Reason commentators last night who said it’s ironic that we vote in the real bastions of civil society: schools, churches, community centers, etc. We are the strength of this country, not the men in expensive suits thinking they can change the world.

So what did I think of the results?

Ballot Initiatives:

On the whole, I was pleased with how things went on the ballot initiative front. Virginia passed reform for one of the worst imminent domain regimes in the country. Gay marriage won in Maine, Washington, Maryland and Minnesota, consistent with a rapidly shifting public opinion on the issue. Marijuana was legalized in Colorado and Washington and for medicine in Massachusetts, which should give us some amazing legal battles. And issue 2, which would have given unions perpetual power, was defeated in Michigan.

The big blight was California, which continues its slow decline. They passed issue 30, which will “temporarily” raise taxes. They defeated issue 32, which would have limited union payroll deductions. They defeated issue 34, which would have ended the multi-hundred-million dollar death penalty regime that has resulted in zero executions recently. They passed issue 35, which could lead to heavy sentences on anyone connected with prostitution and they passed issue 39. The redistricting issue 40 passed and issue 36 passed, which will only impose three strikes on felonies. But overall, this was a horrifying slate of voting for California.

The House:

This was probably the single most important fight of the election and the Republicans won. This means they will control the purse strings for at least the next two years. They can force a deal on the deficit, although I suspect they will have to cave a little bit on taxes (I’ll have more on this later).

Allen West and Joe Walsh went down in flames while Michelle Bachmann barely held on. Alan Grayson is apparently back in. So the clown college contingent is unchanged. But I can’t tell you what a relief the Republican victory in the House is. If it were a choice between Romney and a Democrat House vs. Obama and a Republican House …

The Senate

I’ll have more on this below when I talk about Romney. But I want you to think of these names: Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Richard Murdouck, Todd Akin. Right now, the split in the Senate is 52 Democrats, 45 Republicans and 2 independents, both of whom are likely to side with the Democrats. Let’s posit a Berg win in North Dakota. That’s 54-46. Had it not been for those four looney tunes blowing extremely winnable seats, the Senate would be tied. Hell, without their bullshit, we might have seen Thompson pull out Wisconsin or Allen pull out Virginia and Republicans would have the Senate.

Just to be clear: I like that the Tea Party is challenging the establishment. I do not like that they have put up four far religious right lunatics in winnable races. The problem is not that they put up conservatives. The problem is not even that they put pro-life religious right people. Sane pro-life conservative christians have won their races. It’s that they put up people who were so far out on the wing that even Republicans didn’t want to touch them. A Republican senate would have been very nice things to have for the next two years, particularly when it come to SCOTUS.

That said, we at least have enough senators to filibuster. Although I think the filibuster abuse needs to stop, I’m not against it’s occasional use to stop bad laws.

I’m disappointed that Scott Brown lost but I really think he should come back in two years to try to take out John Kerry. Kerry’s an institution but I don’t think he’s invulnerable, especially after two more years of Obama. And wouldn’t you just love to see another Kerry concession speech? Come on, I know you would.

The President

Ah, the big one. I know we’re going to have a long discussion about this. But here are my initial thoughts.

I do not think Mitt Romney was that bad a candidate. I think he’s a good man and a capable manager and he ran a solid campaign. That really came across in his short but gracious concession speech last night. And the surge in the polls he enjoyed was a reflection of America realizing that. I think his flip-flopping hurt him. We’re used to politicians tacking to the base in the primaries and the center in the election; but Romney completely reversed on many issues. That did not go unnoticed by the electorate. I spoke to at least one person last night who voted for Romney because she wanted something different but admitted she didn’t knew what she’d get with him.

Romney’s being criticized for not attacking Obama enough, but I find that absurd. He spent three debates raking Obama over the coals. In the closing days, they ran ads in Pennsylvania that were all about the President and barely mentioned Romney. If you want to get tactical, the problem was not that he didn’t attack Obama enough. The problem was that he didn’t give people enough to vote for except vague promises to balance the budget in about 10 years, maybe.

I’m reminded an awful lot of the 2004 campaign. The Democrats thought it was enough to just run against Bush and his unpopularity would carry the day. But Kerry never gave us an idea of what he wanted to do.

But I think the problem is far deeper than that. We seem to be missing the writing on the wall, which is that 2008 was not an anomaly. The Republicans have now lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Why? Well, check out the Presidential cross-tabs. Check out which groups Obama and Romney won:

Obama: women, everyone under 40, blacks, latinos, asians, liberals, moderates, catholics, jews, muslims, non-religious.

Romney: men, everyone over 40, whites, conservatives, protestants (especially evangelicals).

There’s some overlap in those, of course, but the message is clear: Republicans are rapidly becoming a party of old white protestant men, the one demographic that is not growing. What’s particularly alarming is the plunge in certain demographic groups. Republicans used to get 80% of the Muslim vote; now they get less than 5%, almost certainly because of anti-Islam rhetoric from the party fringe. Bush 43, to his enormous credit, made great efforts to court the Latino vote and regularly polled in the mid-40′s. Romney got 27%, almost certainly because of anti-immigrant rhetoric. The drop in Latino support alone is basically Obama’s margin of victory. Young people have been driven away by anti-gay rhetoric. I’ve said that I think the near-record 18-point gender gap is more a product of different philosophies than the “War on Women”. But the remarks of people like Akin certainly didn’t help.

Just to be clear: none of that is Romney’s fault. He dropped culture issues as fast as he could. He tried very hard to be inclusive. I think it very likely he would have governed as a social moderate. But the simple fact is that Republican brand has become toxic in many segments of our society. And this isn’t about pandering. These people are Americans; their voice matters.

There’s going to be a lot of soul-searching over the next four years and certainly cries to avoid “moderates” and “RINOs” in the future. But the way I see it is that the Republican Party needs to focus itself like a laser on fiscal and economic issues. Mitch Daniels had the right idea: declare a truce on culture issues. Try to maintain the existing framework of abortion law (parental notification, no public funding, etc.) while not extending it. Move to a neutral position on gay issues while protecting religious freedom. Come out in favor of serious immigration reform with the difference from the Democrats being rigorous enforcement. Purge the Todd Akins and Michele Bachmanns of the party to find people more like Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan: conservatives who are religious and proud of their faith but not crazy; men who embrace immigration but reject law-breaking.

Ed Morrissey:

We do not need to change our values, but we do need to find ways to communicate them in an engaging and welcoming manner. We need to think creatively about big issues, philosophy, and how we can relate conservative values to the needs of a wider range of voters. Conservatism cannot become constrictionism, or the realignment will continue, and it will become ever more difficult to win national elections.

This will require a new set of national leaders for the Republican Party and conservatism. We need men and women who can think creatively, produce a positive agenda that isn’t defined by an oppositional nature, and who can eloquently communicate that agenda and the values that drive it. That should be our focus over the next two years before we start thinking about who to nominate as the party’s presidential nominee — and if done properly, that process will naturally produce the right leader for conservatism. And if that is done properly, too, perhaps we’ll be in position for another realignment four years from now.

As I said during the convention, I see hope on the horizon. Nicky Haley, Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Susanna Martinez, Scott Walker — these are serious conservatives who are more interested in governing and leading than in demonizing the opposition. These people are making serious changes on the state level, rescuing entire regions from fiscal apocalypse and putting together broad coalitions. These are the men and women who can rebuild the GOP into the center right party it is supposed to be: one focused on fiscal responsibility; one that believes in a hand not a handout; one that respects and sustains faith while not pushing it.

And this works. Scott Walker won his recall and the Republicans took back the Wisconsin legislature last night. Christie may have a tough fight next year, especially if the very popular Cory Booker runs; but he remains popular. Other Republicans are finding equal support and success with this approach.

(And, in fact, I would say Mitt Romney was a part of that renewal. He did earnestly try for a broader appeal. Had he not, this would not have been as close as it was.)

The GOP has now spent six years wallowing in the darkness, trying to find its voice. Its only unification was a hatred of Democrats and of Obama in particular, interrupted by the occasional circular firing squad and ritual suicide.

We literally can not afford that anymore. I’m cooking up a post on what I expect for the next four years, but the short story is that, while I don’t expect apocalypse, I don’t expect things to improve much either. I think we might be able to limp through to 2016, but not much beyond that. Beyond that, we really do need change we can believe in. And that requires a much healthier GOP.

Random Post Scripta: Anyone notice that, apart from a few idiots, Romney’s Mormonism never came up? I am extremely grateful for that.

Gary Johnson is polling at 1% right now. The media will ignore this obviously. But I’m not sure the politicians will, especially if Johnson can build on that in 2016 (preferably at Clinton’s expense, not Daniels’).

In the end, we spent billions of dollars to flip two states over to the GOP. This was a status quo election. What was the message from the electorate? I have to think it was a lack of confidence in either party. It was mostly a “come on now, grow up” message.

I find the talk that this was a fundamental shift in America to be hilarious, especially the talk that this is fundamental shift to the Democrats or to dependency. There was very small shift last night — and it was to the right. NYT’s cover page has an awesome graphic showing how the country moved redder this time. But I think the insanity of the GOP fringe tempered that rightward shift just enough to keep Obama in office.

I’ll post more analysis as I come by them. I linked to Morrissey’s essay above, which is worth your time. Here’s Ken at Popehat and Bernstein at Volokh and you should read everything Doug Mataconis is posting at Outside the Beltway..

I didn’t say much about Obama because there’s nothing much to say. He held serve. He had a formidable ground game, just like he did in 20122008. But I have to think he’s looking at a narrow re-election (he’s the first incumbent to lose popular vote be re-elected while losing popular vote share since Roosevelt in ’40 and ’44), zero coat-tails, a Republican House and a slight rightward shift nationally. If he wants any sort of legacy other than a massive pile of debt, he’s going to have to work with the Republicans. There’s simply no other way.

54 comments

No ping yet

  1. Hal_10000 says:

    In the words of Popehat: Too long; didn’t read.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  2. Thrill says:

    I’m glad someone had the fortitude to show the silver lining of the election in such a thoughtful post, Hal. Thank you.

    But it’s this that weighs heaviest on my mind:

    If he wants any sort of legacy other than a massive pile of debt, he’s going to have to work with the Republicans. There’s simply no other way.

    I was doubtful about this across-the-aisle stuff happening with Romney and it drives my pessimism now. For better or for worse, this is now going to have to play out according to what the people have asked for.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  3. RightOnDave says:

    wait, what?

    He held serve. He had a formidable ground game, just like he did in 2012. But I have to think he’s looking at a narrow re-election (he’s the first incumbent to lose popular vote since Roosevelt in ’40 and ’44)

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  4. Hal_10000 says:

    Dave, I think my phrasing was unclear. No incumbent has won re-election while losing share of the popular vote since Roosevelt in 40′ and 44′ (mainly because ’36 was a such a landslide). Obama’s organizing skills are good: he had TONS of field offices. Also, i need to fix that to say 2008.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  5. Poosh says:

    The racial thing is very interesting, though I think we all knew Obama was building a coalition of brain-washed victims. It’s really the worse and most negative problem with Democracy.

    As Bill Whittle points out, at the end of the day conservatives outnumber libs 2 to 1. .. however, that aside

    Cause 1: The Media and entertainment industry: their bias was just plain shameless, the media have just lost it, it is beyond shocking – but they do have a dominating power which conservatives will need to address sooner or later, ESPECIALLY given that the entertainment industry has a direct hand in shaping the consciousnesses of so many of us. Believe me, what comedians on their late night shows, say, holds real power that I can sense now you’re scoffing at. Big mistake.

    Cause 2: Obama can play chess better: he had the data, the numbers, the money, the manpower, he did the numbers game, he knew who to bring in and what to say. Romney just couldn’t stand toe-to-toe with such a politician. Obama is an idiot, but he knows how to play the game.

    Primary Cause: the steady class warfare that Obama has waged has simply worked and it is deep in the psyche of many because it APPEALS to all those shabby conditions that lesser men are prone to. Was it Hawkings of Right Wing News who pointed out, in the age of Occupy you throw them an ideal “super villain” for them to lie about and smear? On top of that, Romney does little to defend himself.

    ________ on a broader note, their are aspects of the conservative movement (which our UK Conservative leader tried to purge, and it did little good quite frankly, but ignore that) which are simply unacceptable and wholly irrational. When a single idiot says something stupid about abortion it does the works on social media and is used to create the false impression that ALL conservatives think the same : and it works, people are stupid – i read somewhere plenty of young people came out to vote for Obama, why? Because their heads were filled with this sort of absolute bullshit. Young voters will literally vote based on a single youtube video taken out of context.

    It seems intuitive that the next election the GOP will win it slam dunk. That makes sense but now I’m not too sure. There is now a vast apparatus and segmented voting blocks that seem to have enough power today to stop the GOP from winning. Obama managed to force doublethink upon his supporters, thinking on one level he is the man still to unite all, yet on the other their support is entirely based on his creation of a villain, “The other side” to revenge upon.

    A final point: if Romney had sat down and explained the MORAL case for capitalism, he just might have pulled it off. But he didn’t. And he wouldn’t, cause’s a moderate. Which is what you all knew!

    You need a HARD RIGHT Austrian economics mother f*cker who can bring the point home who is also SOCIALLY MODERATE but none-the-less steeped in conservative values that matter (supporting the family, nationalism, etc).

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  6. Thrill says:

    Believe me, what comedians on their late night shows, say, holds real power that I can sense now you’re scoffing at.

    No question. Jon Stewart has more influence on the Left than Barack Obama could dream.

    Obama is an idiot, but he knows how to play the game.

    It’s his entire political career: Win elections and accomplish nothing. He got the campaign people but not the types who can govern.

    It seems intuitive that the next election the GOP will win it slam dunk. That makes sense but now I’m not too sure.

    I don’t think so either. We will dominate the House for the foreseeable future, but I don’t see a path to decisively winning the presidency until there is a major realignment. Whatever will bring that about hasn’t emerged yet.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  7. Poosh says:

    A musing, but I noted people are drawing conclusions about what the “public” think from certain ballots etc. That is dubious because it could – and often is – the case that, at least in this election, the public were less involved as a leftist proactive and focused attempt to get specific people out to vote: social-media and van’d in voting units are not the same as “the public” – just something to take into consideration. Union members with orders, and hysterical victim groups, are not “the public”

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  8. Hal_10000 says:

    Here’s another good graphic on how the country shifted right this election (mostly). Pretty amazing.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/2012-exit-polls/

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  9. Thrill says:

    The Independent shift was massive on that chart. I wonder how much was a true shift though and how much of it wasn’t a whole bunch of Republicans and center-right Independents who either sat out 2008 or fell for Obama saying with one collective voice: “Oh, God, what have I done?”

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  10. Miguelito says:

    Huh.. the financial situation bit there seems completely non-intuitive to me.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  11. TheContrarian says:

    So there are two separate issues.

    One is political; the republican party is vastly out of touch with the changing electorate. I agree with the sentiment that they continue to run national elections like it is 1980. They need to change both their values and their image. Regarding the former, they don’t need to abandon Christianity, but they do need to repudiate the extremists and adopt a consistent position in favor of separation of church and state. I think they can win the conversation about values with the majority of the country if they focus on freedom instead of righteousness.

    The republicans are gradually losing the values debate because young people have been convinced that being “good” is about redistribution of wealth. They need to understand that this is what motivates a lot of democratic voting – not just naked parasitism (though this is some of the democratic base, republicans will never get them) but rather the desire to help others. So long as they keep apologizing for wanting Americans to have more of their property and more freedom, they will lose the values debate, as they will have accepted the democrats moral premise.

    Republicans need to explicitly say “we’re ok with safety nets, we just think they can be run more efficiently and people needn’t surrender half of their paychecks to politicians to maintain them,” as that message could open up new demographics. This is how they can start fighting the image battle. It DOES matter that the media and entertainment industry are both dogmatically liberal. Until they can start painting statists as unhip, they will struggle. The libertarian contingent of the party is much better at this than the fundies.

    The second issue is cultural, and in the long term more important than the political one. People in this country are by and large not sufficiently educated to make principled decisions when voting. They instead just pick a party, or go with who their family supports, or go with who promises them more stuff, etc. Much of the problem lies with our education system. Too many adults lack critical thinking skills. Furthermore, a large segment of society possesses statist / altruist values.

    Even if the republican got its shit together and put out fantastic candidates, they would only get so far. Of the two problems – the crappiness of the republican party and the crappiness of our culture – I can’t say which is more significant with regard to this election, but certainly the cultural problem is more important over the long term.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2

      
  12. West Virginia Rebel says:

    If the states are any indication this is now a more libertarian country on social issues, while remaining largely conservative on fiscal matters. The Republican who is able to recognize this will become the next President.
    West Virginia Rebel recently posted..Slipping And SlidingMy Profile

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

      
  13. grady says:

    If the states are any indication this is now a more libertarian country on social issues, while remaining largely conservative on fiscal matters. The Republican who is able to recognize this will become the next President.

    I don’t see this. We had a few pot issues passed, but most financial policy goes to greater spending. Obama will come down hard (or at least prosecute enough to make this type of business a risky one) on the pot states as he has in the last few years and this will become irrelevant.

    WVR, I really hope that you are right with this. I just see more and more spending on the federal level. What improvements in State spending or legal freedoms will actually matter? Federal power versus State power? Who wins that battle?

    I think we are just moving towards a central-power-socialist nation. Hope you enjoy being one of the herd and that what the Shepard’s want is what you want. The majority does not want individual accountability (the only way to individual freedom). Where this goes is not the direction that I wish for.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  14. Mississippi Yankee says:

    20 things that went right on election day

    by Mechelle Malkin

    Once again showing poise and grace in the face of defeat. Wonder what Randi Rhoades or Rachel Maddow or Stephanie Guthrie would have written.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  15. Mississippi Yankee says:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/republican-turnout-in-2012-election-less-than-2008-and-2004/

    The Gateway Pundit points out that McCain received 3 million more votes than Romney. I hope every one who did not vote enjoys the fruits of their apathy!

    Assorted other ass-hats implied and included of course.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  16. dbaggins says:

    One is political; the republican party is vastly out of touch with the changing electorate. I agree with the sentiment that they continue to run national elections like it is 1980. They need to change both their values and their image. Regarding the former, they don’t need to abandon Christianity, but they do need to repudiate the extremists and adopt a consistent position in favor of separation of church and state. I think they can win the conversation about values with the majority of the country if they focus on freedom instead of righteousness.

    I think this is really what helped drive the significant support among women and gays for Obama in the election. Despite the fact the Romney had actually made headway in closing the gap up until the election, idiots like Akin, Mourdock and Bachmann spouted their nonsense and gave democrats ammo to put the republicans on the defensive when so much more ground could have been won. Women and gays are quickly becoming an increasingly embedded part of the cultural weave and have drastically increased their presence in white collar, high paying professions like Law, Financial services and politics. They are affluent, educated, well connected and actually amenable to the fiscally centrist policies that should be on the forefront of the GOP platform. By tempering and vigilantly regulating how their stance on issues like abortion and gay marriage is communicated, I believe the GOP can make significant gains in these demographics. It is no longer acceptable that the mouthpieces of Republican policy on such issues are simply the loudest and most ignorant, push them into the shadows and replace them with people who can actually speak intelligently on the topic.

    The republicans are gradually losing the values debate because young people have been convinced that being “good” is about redistribution of wealth. They need to understand that this is what motivates a lot of democratic voting – not just naked parasitism (though this is some of the democratic base, republicans will never get them) but rather the desire to help others. So long as they keep apologizing for wanting Americans to have more of their property and more freedom, they will lose the values debate, as they will have accepted the democrats moral premise

    Republicans need to explicitly say “we’re ok with safety nets, we just think they can be run more efficiently and people needn’t surrender half of their paychecks to politicians to maintain them,” as that message could open up new demographics. This is how they can start fighting the image battle. It DOES matter that the media and entertainment industry are both dogmatically liberal. Until they can start painting statists as unhip, they will struggle. The libertarian contingent of the party is much better at this than the fundies.

    I think this is really a reflection of the fact that liberals on a whole have adapted MUCH better to the internet than conservatives. For better or worse, young people today obtain a significant portion of their knowledge base from the net and when it comes to politics, the major bellwether hubs lean very far to the left which effectively gives the democrats a huge first mover advantage when it come to winning the hearts and minds of young people. If conservatives want to change things here they more or less have to just become more savvy and forward thinking in this arena which is all I can say because I’ve no idea how they can do that.

    The second issue is cultural, and in the long term more important than the political one. People in this country are by and large not sufficiently educated to make principled decisions when voting. They instead just pick a party, or go with who their family supports, or go with who promises them more stuff, etc. Much of the problem lies with our education system. Too many adults lack critical thinking skills. Furthermore, a large segment of society possesses statist / altruist values.

    We can complain about the degradation of mainstream culture all we want, but its more or less here to stay and there’s not much we can do about it except figure out the best way to succeed. If the GOP thinks a particular group is misinformed on key issues than it has to figure out a way to effectively communicate and educate that group on its platform. Two easy places to start are the Latino and Muslim minorities which has been alienated by the GOP’s extremist rhetoric in recent years despite the fact that republicans used to poll substantially better amongst them at one point. Regulate your message, marginalize the fringe so they don’t do any more damage and start a real conversation with them. These are groups with culture and social backgrounds that would actually make them strong supporters of the conservative platform and there’s no reason to squander that any further.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  17. TheContrarian says:

    I think this is really a reflection of the fact that liberals on a whole have adapted MUCH better to the internet than conservatives. For better or worse, young people today obtain a significant portion of their knowledge base from the net and when it comes to politics, the major bellwether hubs lean very far to the left which effectively gives the democrats a huge first mover advantage when it come to winning the hearts and minds of young people

    Libertarians have also done a decent job of adapting to the internet, hence the Ron Paul movement. Also, liberalism is deeply ingrained into the public education system (I was a liberal in high school. In myriad subtle ways, one’s success and perceived intelligence in school is often tied to how liberal they are). Conservatives have to fight back in all of the places where they are losing.

    We can complain about the degradation of mainstream culture all we want, but its more or less here to stay and there’s not much we can do about it except figure out the best way to succeed.

    I disagree completely. As Hurd wrote on capmag, “It’s not twilight in America because Obama won. Obama won because it was, sadly, already twilight in America.” If we concede the culture to the statists then the future is lost, as we would be conceding morality. Improving the republican party could do wonders to slow down the march toward tyranny and even possibly rollback the state in places because I think a lot of Americans unconsciously support smaller more accountable government. However those who want to fight for the future are wrong to think this election result is purely a political problem.

    Imagine thirty years in the future. If the John Stewart of that era scoffs at central planning to big applause, if the school teacher corrects student who argue that the constitution endorses socialism, if the parent inculcates a deep preference for freedom over security in the child – only then will we have a meaningful lasting victory.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  18. Poosh says:

    The UK Conservative party went through a makeover, and it was a total failure but we’re talking about separate issues I think. Generally moving to the centre WILL NOT WORK (Romney, like Cameron, are weak centrists). But kicking out unstable nutcases who want to ban abortion full stop, or think goo is a baby – kick them out. It;s 2000 and it’s repulsive. I don’t know how the Republicans were painted, apparently, as people who don’t want a welfare social net as even the Tea Party want that.

    There is the temptation to blame this defeat on everything about you… when in fact you just got beat at a GAME. Leftists here in the UK are not too different to some of the leftist in the US. Their bread and butter is to divide society into victim groups, instil fear-of-right into them and get them to vote in swathes. And it is also their tactic to swamp the homeland with immigration – destroying the culture and ensuring welfare dependency thus creating voter blocks i.e why would an immigrant who didn’t *fight* to get into your country be patriotic or culturally American? From what I can see, now, conservatives in your country AGAIN did not bother to turn up to vote or voted for a third candidate. The Dems just had a better battleplan, and did work by the numbers.

    I mean did at any point did Romney try to point out the fact that blacks are worse off under Obama than Bush? Obama was already standing on a racist campaign, so you might as well have fought back. “are you stupid? You think this guy has your back? He just wants your vote – LOOK AT THE FACTS, you can’t blame that on Bush. And you voted for him because you thought he was ‘one of you’? Are you brain-dead? Don’t be a pawn.”

    For better or worse, young people today obtain a significant portion of their knowledge base from the net and when it comes to politics, the major bellwether hubs lean very far to the left which effectively gives the democrats a huge first mover advantage when it come to winning the hearts and minds of young people.

    BLAM. Exactly.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  19. Poosh says:

    btw, have any of you seen that bizarre Family Guy episode which attacked the Tea Party (and confused anarcho-capitalism with simply wanting less government). That was a pure propaganda piece and it would have worked WONDERS on the young in framing their ideas.

    I suggest you all head over to PJ Media / TV etc and try to help them out. The military are the ONLY type-institution in America that are culturally right-wing, other than that, you’ve got liberal bastions. And guess what… the army tend not to get involved and mind their own business.

    A very quick history, the key reason Marx’s theory was wrong – in the eyes of marxists – was that he could not explain why nations could not throw off their capitalist ideology despite their physical and social conditions. The answer, that Marx did not concern himself with, was CULTURE. Marx did no appreciate the depths of so-called capitalist culture. The solution that post-marxists gave? CHANGE THE CULTURE. via the schools, entertainment industry etc etc.

    And they’ve done it. The philosophers always dictate your lives, in the end. Post-marxist philosophers and social theorists advocated the above, and this was filtered through down though the minds of many who now run things, and it morphed into the culture.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  20. CM says:

    I mean did at any point did Romney try to point out the fact that blacks are worse off under Obama than Bush? Obama was already standing on a racist campaign, so you might as well have fought back. “are you stupid? You think this guy has your back? He just wants your vote – LOOK AT THE FACTS, you can’t blame that on Bush. And you voted for him because you thought he was ‘one of you’? Are you brain-dead? Don’t be a pawn.”

    This is exactly why large numbers of people won’t vote for the right, and why the right struggles so hard to attract a wider base. You can’t insult people into voting for you. Why is that so difficult to understand? Stop. Insulting. People. Otherwise, the same thing will keep happening. Stop pretending that only idiots voted for Obama. Consider the possibility that people have geniunely held and reasonable beliefs that make them vote for the other side. If you continue to reject that reality, you’ll get nowhere. If you refuse to even bother understanding, because you’re obsessed with the whole maker versus taker mentality and can’t see beyond it, nothing will change and old white people will die out and the party of the right will really struggle.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  21. Iconoclast says:

    Scores of US Businesses Announce Closings and Layoffs Due to Obama’s Re-election

    Over the days following President Obama’s re-election, the US stock market has undergone a two day sell-off resulting in a loss of over 400 points. On Wednesday, immediately following the election, the market suffered it greatest single day loss of the year.

    …many business owners have indicated Obama’s re-election as a direct cause of the faltering business climate and loss of confidence.

    Cheer up guys, it’s gonna get worse…

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  22. Iconoclast says:

    Stop. Insulting. People.

    You mean like you insult us? One would think that tailoring the rhetoric for a specific audience/venue would be an obvious move. I sincerely doubt that Poosh was advocating the literal use of “Are you brain-dead?” in recruitment efforts, but by implying he/she did, you are insulting our intelligence. In truth, it appears that many of those who vote liberal are indeed brain-dead at some level. Personally, I attribute it to laziness; many seem content to allow the MSM be their sole source of “information”, being either oblivious or abjectly apathetic toward the obvious liberal bias in said media.

    Consider the possibility that people have geniunely held and reasonable beliefs that make them vote for the other side.

    Again, you insult by assuming that we do not make such considerations. It’s funny how you argue against dichotomies elsewhere:

    The world, including America, isn’t as simple as 0 or 1. Now more so than ever as we all mix together so much and societies aren’t homogenous. That’s not the ‘gray premise of the left’, that’s reality.

    But then you turn around and indulge in false dichotomies here. Obviously, those who vote Democrat consider their “genuinely held” views to be “reasonable”, even if they appear to be “brain-dead” to those of us who voted otherwise. Nobody is suggesting that those on the left consider their views to be irrational, or that those on the left don’t take their beliefs seriously, but you imply that we do indeed think that such is how they think, which is insane. The point is to convince them that their “genuinely held” views are not in their best interest, but the problem is that we are primarily emotion-driven creatures, regardless of pretenses toward “facts”, “analysis”, “objectivity” and so forth. And it appears that liberals are more skilled at playing to base emotion than conservatives are, hence the threats of doom should Romney have won — no more Medicare or Social Security, tax hikes on the middle class while the “rich” get tax breaks, the obvious character assassinations of Romney and Ryan, and so on. The facts of Obama’s actual dismal record didn’t seem to matter. “Yeah, the economy sux, but Romney is evil personified, better stick with Obama who really seems to care…”

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  23. CM says:

    Yeah because the “fiscal cliff” worries and a horrendous German industrial production report Wednesday were weren’t factors at all.

    Here we go again – alternative-reality land. Where everything is Obama’s fault.

    As for your Examiner link (the home of unskewedpolls), it says:

    The following is a list of companies which have announced layoffs directly as a result of President Obama’s re-election.

    The first one is Westinghouse. At the link it says:

    According to the Anniston Star, the company said the employees are no longer needed as a result of the facility reaching another closure milestone and the layoffs are expected to be permanent.

    Westinghouse has downsized its workforce by approximately 100 positions over the last year through attrition, transfers of employees to other sites and voluntary departures.

    So why does the Examiner even bother providing the link, if the link doesn’t support what it claims? Surely it’s better to make people work to find out it’s wrong, rather than serve it up on a platter? Weird.
    The Las Vegas business-owner laying off his staff – this is an anonymous guy calling up talk-radio. Pretty lame.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  24. CM says:

    You mean like you insult us?

    I’m not attempting to get you to change your mind and vote Democratic. Usually I only “insult” you after you “insult” me first.

    One would think that tailoring the rhetoric for a specific audience/venue would be an obvious move.

    Exactly, it seems so obvious. Which is why it’s puzzling to see why it’s so difficult. Being filmed saying 47% of the US population consider themselves victims and won’t take responsiblity for their lives is one thing, but actually believing it makes it almost impossible to be convincing when you’re trying to win them over. People can see through it. IMHO the GOP needs to move on to candidates that don’t hold views like that.

    I sincerely doubt that Poosh was advocating the literal use of “Are you brain-dead?” in recruitment efforts, but by implying he/she did, you are insulting our intelligence.

    I think it’s insulting everyone’s intelligence to think you can hold that opinion (they are brain-dead, lazy, victims, take no responsibility) but pretend otherwise in an effort to win people over. It’s always going to be very difficult to keep up the pretense. Which is why people who hold those beliefs are never going to move the party forward, they’ll only continue to hold it back.

    In truth, it appears that many of those who vote liberal are indeed brain-dead at some level. Personally, I attribute it to laziness; many seem content to allow the MSM be their sole source of “information”, being either oblivious or abjectly apathetic toward the obvious liberal bias in said media.

    Well, as I say, good luck getting anywhere with that attitude.

    Again, you insult by assuming that we do not make such considerations.

    You’ve just demonstrated that you don’t. You think many of them are brain-dead. You can technically argue they could still hold reasonable beliefs and hold those beliefs genuinely, but that’s kinda meaningless as you’ve already devalued them to the point that it doesn’t matter. Republican leaders consider a vast swathe of the population to be lazy, ‘victims’, etc etc. Again, good luck getting more people to vote for the Republican Party while being insulting. I don’t see how that’s going to work.

    The point is to convince them that their “genuinely held” views are not in their best interest,

    Yep, I just don’t see how you’re going to be able to do that when you think many of them are brain-dead. I don’t see how you can separate your attitudes towards these people from your ‘pitch’ to them. That is partly why Romney was a poor candidate – although many people weren’t all that keen on voting Obama, when Romney said all the ‘right’ things to try and get minorities etc to vote for him, lots of people just didn’t believe him. Nothing else matched the words coming out of his mouth.

    but the problem is that we are primarily emotion-driven creatures, regardless of pretenses toward “facts”, “analysis”, “objectivity” and so forth.

    I agree. The whole delusion that Romney was going to win the election, and resulting astonishment and shock, is a good example. People just didn’t want to believe the data and the analysis. Apparently yard signs and belief that Romney would win were more important factors.

    And it appears that liberals are more skilled at playing to base emotion than conservatives are, hence the threats of doom should Romney have won — no more Medicare or Social Security, tax hikes on the middle class while the “rich” get tax breaks, the obvious character assassinations of Romney and Ryan, and so on.

    Both sides do it. I don’t know which side is ‘worse’. You’re trying to suggest the right wasn’t suggesting CERTAIN DOOM if Obama was re-elected?

    The facts of Obama’s actual dismal record didn’t seem to matter. “Yeah, the economy sux, but Romney is evil personified, better stick with Obama who really seems to care…”

    The facts do matter, but all the facts, not just the cherry-picked facts (e.g. ‘Examiner’ facts) that each side use. Many voters listened to both sides and decided what the facts were. They clearly didn’t buy the narrative of facts that Romney etc put up, well not sufficiently to give him the win anyway.
    I don’t think most voters who voted Obama believe that Romney was “evil personified”. He didn’t have to be to prefer Obama. Just because it makes no sense to you, doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense. I can look at ALL the facts and see why people would prefer Obama.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  25. Section8 says:

    This is exactly why large numbers of people won’t vote for the right, and why the right struggles so hard to attract a wider base.

    It actually the truth. The problem is the GOP, like Romney, say why even bother and that is their mistake.

    To point out some serious flaws doesn’t mean people are stupid.

    Here are some serious questions that need to be addressed.

    1) Why do minorities feel better off under Democrats? 40 plus years of liberal policies in the inner cities. The end result?

    Persistent unemployment, mass dropouts from school if not just gross under performance, kids turning on one another, no self respect or the respect of their neighbors. Certainly far worse self hate than at any history of this country including slavery.

    2) Why have people been convinced that obtaining individual responsibility is a white way of living?

    The left have done nothing but promote chronic dependency rather than standing on one’s own feet, which of course leads to lack of respect for one’s self, and leads to persistent unemployment, kids turning on one another, no self respect or the respect of their neighbors.

    For blacks especially, the idea of self independence (which leads to peace and prosperity) has been been virtually demonized by a propaganda campaign the Klan itself would envy. Think about it. Get a corporate job, and especially move up the latter to management, well then you are an oreo, a sell out. Just about any black conservative is deemed a traitor, not on political thought but a traitor to their own race. Why? Because these ideas have been promoted as white man’s ideas, the road to slavery. Congrats left, you have managed to remove the most important variable to prosperity by forcing the choice between self reliance and responsibility or the preservation of one’s race and culture, which selling that limitation of choice is complete bullshit.

    It’s bullshit, because these means of living are a human method of survival, not a racial one, but for years the message that floods minorities is don’t deviate from government dependence, or you will be selling out. About the only money making methods that aren’t chastised are music, sports, or a social worker blue collar job. For the first two, your chances are near null, and for the last one, well there’s where government fits in. Either work for us (which we’ll need more money and power to get you a job), or rely on us (which we’ll need more money and power to take care of you). It’s disgusting.

    Those who promotes this propaganda more than anyone are the rich white boys of the Democratic party, their well to do white supporters, and some black poverty pimps.

    So yes, the question must be, why is being treated like shit in your best interest? It’s not, it’s just been marketed very convincingly through the years that the alternative is worse, because the alternative is racist and a sell out of culture. It’s bullshit, and the left have themselves to blame for the current state of the inner city. They have been in control though local, state, and federal. After all the GOP hasn’t been involved much. It doesn’t give a shit.

    And yes, that’s the problem. The GOP needs to stand up and expose the real racists for who they are. The ones who make it white vs black at every turn. The ones who have marketed the idea that self reliance is a white thing, and you don’t want to be white do you? You don’t want to sell out your culture do you? For the GOP, it will be a hard frame of mind to change, but they must work to do so. Anyone, and I mean anyone if given the same message over and over and over again will start to believe it eventually regardless of how smart they are, and when they do, it’s hard to turn people back no matter how hideous that message was in the first place. You can see it with kids that grew up with parents who say don’t bother, all the way to the state of mind of nations. You only have to look at history or today to see it happen all the time around the world.

    Fact is the white boys on the left don’t give a shit about minorities other than using them. Their policies of 40 years couldn’t demonstrate it any better, where as the white boys on the right, whether they give a shit or not, haven’t bothered to manipulate in the disgusting manner that the left has. A manner to demoralize entire races of people, and worked hard to convince minorities that the variable leading to the best chance at prosperity shouldn’t even be considered, because it is not cool, it is “selling out”. It’s not the old white party on the right who have worked hard to create a persistent underclass. That goes to the left. The right’s flaw is that they’ve ignored it.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  26. repmom says:

    “On Wednesday…..the market suffered its greatest single day loss of the year”

    I’ve been wondering why this has been ignored here all week.

    “Cheer up guys, it’s going to get worse”

    Perhaps we should reconsider packing our bags…..

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  27. Thrill says:

    I was totally going to blog about it, then I got off on a Battlestar Galactica Rant.

    Seriously, though. There’s been a lot going on since the election. I hate to throw up a lot of posts while some threads are still active.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  28. Mississippi Yankee says:

    Perhaps we should reconsider packing our bags….

    repmom, from
    what I’m hearing from Rick Perry Texas is considering packing it’s bag. Oklahoma may be next. Hell I’ll relocate

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  29. Thrill says:

    Fuck that, guys. Look at the county-by-county red/blue map. We own this country. Those dicks should leave.

    If it comes to blows (God forbid), we’ll siege them in the cities and let them wither.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  30. repmom says:

    I’ve barely had the TV on since the election (didn’t think I could stomach the celebrations), so haven’t heard that about Texas, but – good! I’ll hold off on the packing. I do like it here, after all….

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  31. Mississippi Yankee says:

    I do like it here, after all….

    From your musings I take it you’re in KC. So the first question I feel obliged to axe (practicing my ebonics) ;
    Fiorella’s Jack Stack Barbeque – is the food as good at the restaurant as the stuff they send to my house?

    If you have never been there then I’ll assume you are a vegan and I will heap scorn upon you until my dieing day.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  32. Thrill says:

    I don’t know about the stuff they send you, but yes, it’s fantastic.

    Personally, I prefer Gates. It’s more the inner-city barbecue while Jack Stack is more high end.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  33. Mississippi Yankee says:

    I ordered some today. A reaction to Tuesday’s disappointment. Sort of like a fat girl and comfort food.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  34. HARLEY says:

    Fuck that, guys. Look at the county-by-county red/blue map. We own this country. Those dicks should leave.

    If it comes to blows (God forbid), we’ll siege them in the cities and let them wither.

    I have war gamed that, Laying a siege to Chicago is gonna be a rough one, but you have tl leave a exit other than the lake..

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  35. repmom says:

    Not in KC, and not a vegan, by any means, and BBQ of choice is whatever hubby does on the grill. But popular BBQ choices around here are Rudy’s and County Line.

    And I think Iconoclast is hanging around hoping for discussion on topics mentioned above.

    And skinny girls have their comfort food, too.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  36. Mississippi Yankee says:

    Of the four BBQ groups I prefer Texas the best but Jack Stack makes KC BBQ so easy to get in the cold months.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  37. CM says:

    “On Wednesday…..the market suffered its greatest single day loss of the year”

    I’ve been wondering why this has been ignored here all week.

    “Cheer up guys, it’s going to get worse”

    Perhaps we should reconsider packing our bags…..

    The problem with that theory is that the stockmarket has more then doubled since March 6, 2009. Obama’s presidency has been very, very good for investors, for 401Ks, for college funds, and IRAs. For the market, another four years like the last four would be spectacular.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

      
  38. repmom says:

    So why was it so bad on Wednesday, CM?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  39. Mississippi Yankee says:

    The problem with that theory is that the stockmarket has more then doubled since March 6, 2009.

    With you it’s always just half the story

    Actual: 14,198.10, Thursday, October 11, 2007, to a low of 6,469, Friday, March 6, 2009 … Today it’s 12,815.39 1382.71 below Boosh’s high.

    Not to mention our astronomical debt. When you rob Peter to pay Paul – Peter gets sore.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  40. Iconoclast says:

    Here we go again — alternative-reality land. Where everything is Obama’s fault.

    Here we go again — alternative-reality land. Where nothing is Obama’s fault.

    The first one is Westinghouse.

    Westinghouse may be a bad example, maybe, but there are others…

    Rocketdyne Lays off 100 ahead of Aerojet Merger

    “The uncertain future of the space industry and current economic conditions have created an environment where we must take these steps to ensure we remain competitive,” the company said in a statement.

    CVPH lays off 17

    The layoffs — nine in management and eight hourly staffers — are part of an effort to “help bolster the hospital’s financial position in 2013 and beyond,” a press release said.

    Mundy said that systemic changes in health care and a number of short-term business-cycle factors worked to undermine CVPH’s finances after three of the stronger financial years in CVPH history.

    Restaurant Chain Considering Elimination Of Full Time Jobs To Save On Obamacare Costs

    In an emailed statement, Darden said staffing changes are “just one of the many things we are evaluating to help us address the cost implications health care reform will have on our business. There are still many unanswered questions regarding the health care regulations and we simply do not have enough information to make any decisions at this time.”

    And the real point is that these announcements were made immediately after election day, even if the layoffs themselves were planned earlier. It’s entirely possible that these layoff plans were indeed pending and contingent upon the election result.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  41. Iconoclast says:

    And I think Iconoclast is hanging around hoping for discussion on topics mentioned above.

    Trust me, a discussion of Texas barbecue trumps anything I may have been yammering about…

    During my brief stint in the Houston/Galveston area, we fell in love with Joe’s Barbecue down in Alvin. Melt-in-your-mouth brisket I have yet to experience anywhere else.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  42. Iconoclast says:

    You’ve just demonstrated that you don’t.

    Nope, what I have demonstrated is that open, honest discussion with the likes of you can be an utterly futile endeavor…

    I think it’s insulting everyone’s intelligence to think you can hold that opinion (they are brain-dead, lazy, victims, take no responsibility) but pretend otherwise in an effort to win people over.

    I never said that anybody was brain-dead or irresponsible. As far as lazy is concerned, I acknowledge that we are all lazy to some degree, and prefer to spend our energy on specific pursuits while choosing to spend less energy and effort on others. That’s just part of the Human Condition, as I see it.

    When I state (emphasis added):

    In truth, it appears that many of those who vote liberal are indeed brain-dead at some level. Personally, I attribute it to laziness; many seem content to allow the MSM be their sole source of “information”, being either oblivious or abjectly apathetic toward the obvious liberal bias in said media.

    When you bludgeon those qualified and carefully-worded assertions into “they are brain-dead, lazy, victims, take no responsibility”, it is you who demonstrates the futility I mentioned earlier.

    Unless you can prove that there is no liberal bias in the American MSM, or unless you can prove that liberals are aware of that bias, seek all viewpoints (by listening to talk radio or watching Fox News or otherwise seeking right-wing viewpoints) and then objectively conclude that liberalism is the rational choice, you have nothing to say, and are certainly unqualified to pass any judgement on my views.

    Well, as I say, good luck getting anywhere with that attitude.

    Well, if my “attitude” is grounded in truth, what choice do I have but to hold it? Again, if you can demonstrate that all liberals are non-emotional, objective seekers of objective truth who objectively consider all viewpoints before adopting the liberal viewpoint, then have at it. Otherwise, keep your snarks to yourself.

    You think many of them are brain-dead.

    Ya gotta love it when people presume to tell you what you think… As always, your mind-reading skills leave much to be desired.

    Again, what I actually said was that many of them appear so at some level, but again you wield the sledge hammer of misrepresentation.

    …you’ve already devalued them to the point that it doesn’t matter…

    Looks to me that you’ve just devalued my viewpoint to the point that it doesn’t matter. Perhaps it never did, as far as you’re concerned.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  43. CM says:

    My point remains, even if I failed to include your qualifier “at some level”. Is that any less insulting? Why can’t they just have an opinion that’s as equally well informed and reasoned as you, derived from a different life experience and slightly different values? Why do they have to be brain-dead at any level?
    Victims and taking no responsibility were Romney’s words. Sorry, I thought that would have been obvious.

    Unless you can prove that there is no liberal bias in the American MSM, or unless you can prove that liberals are aware of that bias, seek all viewpoints (by listening to talk radio or watching Fox News or otherwise seeking right-wing viewpoints) and then objectively conclude that liberalism is the rational choice, you have nothing to say, and are certainly unqualified to pass any judgement on my views.

    Unless I prove something unprovable I have nothing to say?
    Awesome.

    As I say, good luck. You’re going to need it. This is exactly what I’m talking about. Good luck convincing people while talking down to them.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

      
  44. CM says:

    With you it’s always just half the story

    Actual: 14,198.10, Thursday, October 11, 2007, to a low of 6,469, Friday, March 6, 2009 … Today it’s 12,815.39 1382.71 below Boosh’s high.

    Not to mention our astronomical debt. When you rob Peter to pay Paul – Peter gets sore.

    How on earth was it “just half the story’? Why does providing the level at October 2007 provide ‘the full story’? And what has the “astronomical debt” got to do with this specific issue?
    The point was – the market doesn’t dislike Obama, the market has done very very well while he has been President.

    Here we go again — alternative-reality land. Where nothing is Obama’s fault.

    Wow, super-lame. You really phoned that in. I’m sure the election had something to do with it. You’re the one linking to horribly biased crap where the first link I check doesn’t even bear any relationship to what the article argues. The thing worse than using, unqualified, a horribly biased link, is not acknowledging it afterwards and instead responding with “no, you are” which doesn’t even make sense because all I said that there are other factors, not the opposite.

    And the real point is that these announcements were made immediately after election day, even if the layoffs themselves were planned earlier. It’s entirely possible that these layoff plans were indeed pending and contingent upon the election result.

    Well at least you’re now acknowledging that the best you can say is that it’s “entirely possible”. Because your quotes certainly don’t support your contention (by quoting the article and your comments below it) that “Scores of US Businesses Announce Closings and Layoffs Due to Obama’s Re-election”. If Romney won there would be even more uncertainty over what would happen with healthcare.

    So Westinghouse is wrong. I’ll move onto the second:

    Research in Motion Limited

    The actual article says:

    Research in Motion Ltd., the maker of BlackBerry smartphones, laid off about 200 people at its U.S. headquarters in Irving on Wednesday, according to a source close to the company who did not want to be named.

    So they made the decision and arranged the paperwork and everything overnight…..even if this earlier, it’s not really a lot of time between midnight and the next day….

    Once a mobile pioneer, RIM has struggled to regain market share lost to Apple Inc.’s iPhones and other smartphones that use Google Inc.’s Android software. RIM reported a net loss of $235 million on revenue of $2.9 billion for the quarter ended Sept. 1.

    RIM announced last summer that it would cut about 5,000 jobs worldwide by March, to offset mounting losses and dramatically slower phone sales. Manning said the company is on track to meet that goal.

    Obama is to blame for Apple taking their market-share?
    Could you explain to me how that works?

    Why is almost everything I read in The Examiner easily able to be shown to be complete nonsense? And why do people rely on anything from it?

    The third example is Lightyear Network Solutions.
    The linked article:

    Justin Prater said he knew something was going on as soon as he got to work at Lightyear Network Solutions Monday morning.

    “Friday we all went to work, and I know we came in Monday unexpected we saw some people that we normally don’t see,” he said.

    Oh fucking hell man. We’re expected to believe the management knew somehow that Obama would win THE FOLLOWING WEEK?

    Zero out of the first three? They didn’t even bother to hide the bullshit ones lower down?
    I guess they don’t have to…..people just believe it anyway.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

      
  45. CM says:

    Acknowledging you have a problem is always the first step toward solving it. In the wake of Tuesday’s election, it’s certainly reassuring to know that lawmakers are aware of a problem of a very pressing nature — you might even call it a looming cliff.

    One explanation for the market’s awful two-day post-election performance is that, once the dust had settled, the same faces were still standing in the White House and within the Congressional leadership — those that belong to people who have been so far unable (or, more accurately, unwilling) to agree to legislation that would steer the economy away from the so-called “fiscal cliff.” For those who are not familiar with this term, it refers to the massively contractionary impact of automatic spending cuts and tax increases that are scheduled to take effect from the beginning of next year.

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/11/09/heres-why-the-dow-is-recovering.aspx

    So, really, we could just as easily say it’s the Republican’s fault for holding onto the House.
    (For the humour-impaired, that was a joke)

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

      
  46. CM says:

    My god….

    The layoffs at Brake Parts LLC were disclosed Oct. 29 in a filing that government officials require before large layoffs.

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-07/vestas-to-cut-headcount-to-16-000-by-end-of-2013-from-22-721

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  47. AlexInCT says:

    The problem with that theory is that the stockmarket has more then doubled since March 6, 2009.

    That’s because the dollar has been so drastically devaluated during that same period, due to the Obamanomics policies which basically comprises a crackpot mix of out of control printing of money, artificially low interest rates to keep the government from getting hammered by all the stupid shit it is doing, and incessant borrowing. This stuff has killed the dollar. But as the value of the dollar drops, the value of properties, holdings, and foreign earnings, go up. Especially foreign holdings & earnings. That’s how these companies on the exchanges have shown growth over the past 4 years. There isn’t much, if any, good news here at home, and in fact, we are still destroying wealth for everyone but the super wealthy and the banks, all so the government can keep borrowing and buying votes. If you do not believe me, look at the actual inflation in price of commodities like gold and other precious or rare elements.

    On a personal note I can say that my 401K has not grown in the last 4 years. In fact, it is still below where it was before, but I clearly see my buying power has drastically been reduced. Even worse, this government is poised to implement more policies that will all but wipe my plans to save for retirement on my own out. I now suspect that is the intent. Can’t have people do this shit on their own without them controlling it, or they don’t have the power.

    And as a FYI, the only people that have profited, and done so massively, have been the really super rich that Obama so claims to hate, but whom then vote 80% for him. I say we let him fucking raise the taxes on the top earners and let the chips fall where they may. Between the economic impact of government siphoning even more money from job creators and Obamacare’s impending reaping, I bet you the next 4 years will make the last 4 look like golden years.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  48. Iconoclast says:

    My point remains, even if I failed to include your qualifier “at some level”. Is that any less insulting?

    Well, you still exclude my other qualifier, “appears“, but if you are overly sensitive, I suppose anything less that constant adulation and praise could be considered “insulting”. But getting back to my ignored qualifier, I can admit that things are not necessarily as they appear, but a simple observation shouldn’t be considered an “insult” unless you have an excessively thin skin or something to hide, imho.

    Why can’t they just have an opinion that’s as equally well informed and reasoned as you, derived from a different life experience and slightly different values?

    Who says they can’t? Certainly not me, in spite of your failed attempts to shove such words into my mouth. Having said that…

    Typical Obama Supporters Exposed

    I am expected to believe that this person “has an opinion that’s as equally well informed and reasoned as mine, derived from a different life experience and slightly different values”???

    “Howard Stern Exposes Obama Supporters 2012 (Official)

    These people are obviously ill-informed, but they are definitely in the tank for Obama. And I am genuinely sorry that my observations are so offensive to you, but such is life.

    Obama Supporters Actually Hate Obama’s Policies

    Granted, this is anecdotal, but seriously, there are many people who, by all appearances, support Obama out of abject ignorance. I am confident that you could take a tu quoque approach and point out Romney/Republican counterparts, but that’s simply begging the question. I made the observation that many support Obama out of laziness, as in not taking the time and energy to become better informed, and this anecdotal evidence would seem to support such a view.

    Why do they have to be brain-dead at any level?

    Where did I claim that anybody “had to be” anything?

    Here you go again, flying off the handle because you apparently insist on misinterpreting what I actually say. Again, I simply stated that many appear to be brain-dead. That is about as hard, cold a fact as you can care to perceive. I never said anybody was brain-dead — that’s just your persistent misrepresentation.

    Unless I prove something unprovable I have nothing to say?
    Awesome.

    You are the one implying to everyone here that my “genuinely held and reasonable belief” — that many liberals appear brain dead at some level — is somehow detached from reality. Unless you can demonstrate that such is the case, you really have no business making such implications. I am glad you admit that you cannot prove it.

    You’re trying to suggest the right wasn’t suggesting CERTAIN DOOM if Obama was re-elected?

    There is a difference: Right-wing predictions were based on a continuation of Obama’s actual record and policies. Left-wing predictions were based primarily on character assassinations.

    So Westinghouse is wrong. I’ll move onto the second:

    I see you have nothing to say about the three examples I mentioned. Having said that, I can concede that I should have vetted the article before citing it. Alex, however, has provided a new list, one that I was going to cite, but he beat me to it. Another bit of Obamacare fall-out is that many companies will reduce or eliminate full-time positions, and hire only part-time workers. This is what the electorate voted for.

    Good luck convincing people while talking down to them.

    I am confident that the profound irony of that statement is utterly lost on you.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  49. Iconoclast says:

    Damn youtube…

    The first link should have been:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhep2QOzM2s

    Screw fancy formatting attempts…

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  50. repmom says:

    She’s quite charming. I think I’ve seen her before. Wasn’t she on that bridge in NO with Shepard Smith during Katrina demanding her water?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  51. CM says:

    Well, you still exclude my other qualifier, “appears“, but if you are overly sensitive, I suppose anything less that constant adulation and praise could be considered “insulting”. But getting back to my ignored qualifier, I can admit that things are not necessarily as they appear, but a simple observation shouldn’t be considered an “insult” unless you have an excessively thin skin or something to hide, imho.

    Dress it up however you like, if people feel they’re being insulted, they won’t be likely to be won over. I guess then blaming them for having a ‘thin skin’ would seem to be the natural next step ;-)

    I’m not talking about the hard-core left, or idiots. They’re not for the convincing. It’s that middle 30%. The people that voted Reagan but also Clinton. They voted for Dubya in 2000 but for Obama in 2008. The people who just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Romney (who was the mostly reasonable candidate the Republicans could put up).

    Again, I simply stated that many appear to be brain-dead. That is about as hard, cold a fact as you can care to perceive. I never said anybody was brain-dead — that’s just your persistent misrepresentation.

    I’m sorry, I thought it would have been blatantly obvious that we’re not talking about idiots. The Republicans can do a hell of a lot better without requiring the vote of idiots.

    There is a difference: Right-wing predictions were based on a continuation of Obama’s actual record and policies. Left-wing predictions were based primarily on character assassinations.

    Well that’s your opinion. I certainly don’t agree with it.

    I see you have nothing to say about the three examples I mentioned.

    Sorry, I got caught up in the sheer awesomeness of how incredibly bad that Examiner piece was. I’ll have a look at them now.

    Having said that, I can concede that I should have vetted the article before citing it.

    Cool. Good on your for saying so. Most people wouldn’t even consider acknowledging that.

    BTW your corrected link lead me to this, which is just superb.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

      
  52. CM says:

    Rocketdyne Lays off 100 ahead of Aerojet Merger

    You can’t say this was “due to Obama’s Re-election”. The layoffs were announced within 16 hours of the election result, and are due to “uncertain future of the space industry and current economic conditions”. There is no evidence this wouldn’t have happened if Romney has won.

    CVPH lays off 17

    The article states:

    The layoffs — nine in management and eight hourly staffers — are part of an effort to “help bolster the hospital’s financial position in 2013 and beyond,” a press release said.

    A $400,000 shortfall in revenue is blamed for the move, brought on by cuts in reimbursement, fewer admissions and less use of outpatient services, according to the Plattsburgh hospital.

    Mundy said that systemic changes in health care and a number of short-term business-cycle factors worked to undermine CVPH’s finances after three of the stronger financial years in CVPH history.

    How did the re-election of Obama late the previous evening result in a $400,000 shortfall in revenue, cuts in reimbursement, fewer admissions, and less use of outpatient services?
    That’s patently ridiculous.

    Restaurant Chain Considering Elimination Of Full Time Jobs To Save On Obamacare Costs

    That companies might only hire people for 28 hours a week so they don’t meet the threshold is certainly a concern (but then I don’t know of anyone that believes Obamacare is perfect). It also provides the competition with the opportunity to steal the best employees.

    The “uncertainly” argument doesn’t work. A Romney win would have provided far greater uncertainty.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  53. CM says:

    From Alex’s link:

    Welch Allyn

    The changes are needed “to really get Welch Allyn able to compete on a global scale,” he said.

    Looks like they’re changing their business, partly because of the tax on sales of medical devices. No suprise that a huge change in healthcare will affect a lot of businesses that are set up according to how healthcare used to work. What would have happened if Romney had won? Far greater uncertainty for a while, and then it would depend what he could get changed. What would he try to change? Depends on which version of Romney you believe. Whatever happens, it’s going to mean changes to businesses that are related to healthcare.

    Dana Holding Corp.

    Wow, the paragraph as Alex’s link suggests it’s all about healthcare. The actual link (someone’s personal blog) paints a different picture. The blog criticises the media for only reporting the financial issues not relating to healthcare. So what does Kerry Picket at the Washington Time do? Exactly the equivalent. Apparently $4 million a year is far more a significant factor (to the point that that’s all you mention) than a $54 million decrease in sales in a single year.
    Sheesh.

    Stryker

    This is another medical device company. As are many of the other other examples.

    How does adding tens of millions of Americans to the health insurance rolls not benefit the medical device industry overall? Might that explain why the industry did not fight the tax when the 2010 law was being crafted (because manufacturers knew their sales would rise with more people getting insurance coverage)?

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-06/taxing-medical-devices-will-keep-the-u-s-healthy.html
    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3684

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  54. Iconoclast says:

    Dress it up however you like, if people feel they’re being insulted, they won’t be likely to be won over.

    It’s ironic that you see fit to chide me over the “obvious”, given how obvious your observation is. In addition, you seem to be preceding from an unwarranted conclusion, namely, that I would walk up to a potential recruit and break the ice by immediately informing them that I think they’re brain-dead, which is another level of irony. Your unwarranted premise is an insult to the intelligence of anyone reading your posts.

    I’m sorry, I thought it would have been blatantly obvious that we’re not talking about idiots.

    Were we talking about idiots? I only mentioned that there are those who appear to be brain-dead at some level, and now you appear to be writing them off as “idiots”. Well, maybe they are and maybe they aren’t. Like I said before, I am willing to accept that things are not as they appear, but we couldn’t even explore those possibilities because you couldn’t get past a couple of words.

    Well that’s your opinion. I certainly don’t agree with it.

    Certainly, and that certainly isn’t surprising. However, you aren’t the one who happens to live in a swing state (the only one to go Romney’s way, as it turns out) that was endlessly bombarded with campaign ads day after day, week after week for months on end. I am.

    “uncertain future of the space industry and current economic conditions”

    Both of which are a result of Obama’s policies. Can’t blame everything on Bush, and it’s lame to try, especially this late into the game.

    A Romney win would have provided far greater uncertainty.

    Which may be irrelevant. If Romney is perceived as pro-business, his taking the reins would be seen as good for business, and that could very well have changed decisions.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      

Comments have been disabled.