To my fellow conservatives on here...

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 3:30 AM GMT
    Yes, Obama won on Tuesday night. It sucks, but c'est la vie. I mean, there's NO WAY that you could vote out a President with an approval rating of at least 50%. Oh, yeah, and Nate Silver's going places.

    But anyway, let's look to the future.

    Remember, Democrats felt just as demoralized in 2004 when Kerry lost and the GOP won more Senate seats. Then, look what happened to the Dems in 2006, 2008, and this year. It's almost as if they won the lottery.

    We can stick this through and make gains in the 2014 midterms as well as in the 2016 general election. It's not like this is our last election ever, as much as some doomsday hyperbolists would make it out to be.

    Who do YOU want to see running in 2016?

    Me, personally:

    Rand Paul 2016 (My first choice...he needs to carry on his Dad's legacy)
    Justin Amash 2016 (He could help Michigan go red)
    Luis Fortuño 2016 (Excellent executive experience)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 3:36 AM GMT
    yourname2000 saidI want all the same players to come back again next time around, lol. The primaries were hilarious. icon_lol.gif

    Sorry, but you're not going to be seeing retreads anymore. I think the GOP might learn its lesson this time...in order to win, you've gotta be forward-thinking in terms of who runs.

    I don't think you'll see anyone past the age of 50-55 run in 2016.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 3:40 AM GMT
    Given that the conservatives on here behaved like complete wankers before the election, maybe a little reflection is good for them?

    Your prescription is flawed anyway: mitt Romney would have been electable if he'd had the right policies.

    It's the POLICIES the republicans need to examine, much less the candidates.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 10, 2012 3:51 AM GMT
    libertpaulian said

    Who do YOU want to see running in 2016?

    Me, personally:

    Rand Paul 2016 (My first choice...he needs to carry on his Dad's legacy)
    Justin Amash 2016 (He could help Michigan go red)
    Luis Fortuño 2016 (Excellent executive experience)



    Personally, the last thing I want to even THINK about right now is 2016. It will take months just healing the wounds of 2012. Unless the GOP does some serious reinventing -- and I believe they will -- I don't know where my political persuasions will be in 2016. Hell, if Hillary runs she may well get my vote.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 4:00 AM GMT
    We do need a woman.

    ANN ROMNEY would be my choice.

    We owe her something.

    She had to watch the man she once admired

    become an empty suit who'd say ANYTHING

    and betray every belief he ever had

    in order to win the votes of those HE DID NOT RESPECT.

    Mitt's Vanity Campaign

    was the very definition of humiliation.


    ANN deserves a few spa weekends...

    and after she's rested,

    Let her be Queen Bee for awhile.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3280

    Nov 10, 2012 4:15 AM GMT
    libertpaulian said
    yourname2000 saidI want all the same players to come back again next time around, lol. The primaries were hilarious. icon_lol.gif

    Sorry, but you're not going to be seeing retreads anymore. I think the GOP might learn its lesson this time...in order to win, you've gotta be forward-thinking in terms of who runs.

    I don't think you'll see anyone past the age of 50-55 run in 2016.


    Do not underestimate our public servants ability to underwhelm us with inaction and anger us with excess and scandal. Obama likely would have done better from a political strategy point of view with both houses in Republican control.

    Now he has to deal, which is something he will have alot of difficulty doing. It is chronicled that he has a poor relationship with congress.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 4:16 AM GMT
    JockTheVote saidWe do need a woman.

    ANN ROMNEY would be my choice.

    We owe her something.

    She had to watch the man she once admired

    become an empty suit who'd say ANYTHING

    and betray every belief he ever had

    in order to win the votes of those HE DID NOT RESPECT.

    Mitt's Vanity Campaign

    was the very definition of humiliation.


    ANN deserves a few spa weekends...

    and after she's rested,

    Let her be Queen Bee for awhile.

    Oh God, not that aristocratic, snobby wench again. We had to endure her for 2 years...NO MORE!
  • kevmoran

    Posts: 1543

    Nov 10, 2012 4:20 AM GMT
    Kim Kardashian 2016
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 4:43 AM GMT
    Not_Superman saidAre you libertarian or conservative?
    He conservative.. dont let him fool ya!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 4:45 AM GMT
    TigerTim saidGiven that the conservatives on here behaved like complete wankers before the election, maybe a little reflection is good for them?

    Your prescription is flawed anyway: mitt Romney would have been electable if he'd had the right policies.

    It's the POLICIES the republicans need to examine, much less the candidates.




    Agreed - but unfortunately the Repubs will do what they always do.
    Convince themselves that they just need a better slogan or a more effective PR tactic - to sell the same failed tired old crappy policies they've been peddling since the Reagan/Bush 1980's.

    The clueless delusional Repubs just don't want to face the fact that a majority of Americans don't like their policies.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Nov 10, 2012 5:46 AM GMT
    libertpaulian said
    yourname2000 saidI want all the same players to come back again next time around, lol. The primaries were hilarious. icon_lol.gif

    Sorry, but you're not going to be seeing retreads anymore. I think the GOP might learn its lesson this time...in order to win, you've gotta be forward-thinking in terms of who runs.

    I don't think you'll see anyone past the age of 50-55 run in 2016.



    Oh, no, I beg to differ.
    The on beyond the lunatic fringe remains alive and, well, kicking.
    In all likelihood, they think that their mistake was nominating a candidate who was TOO liberal.
    Don't be surprised if their guy in 2016 looks a lot like this.

    jjtw90.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 6:34 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said...

    Personally, the last thing I want to even THINK about right now is 2016. It will take months just healing the wounds of 2012. Unless the GOP does some serious reinventing -- and I believe they will -- I don't know where my political persuasions will be in 2016. Hell, if Hillary runs she may well get my vote.


    Now you know how I felt after George Bush won in 2004.
    Every single day of both terms in office was dark.
    Anti-depressants helped.
    I actually looked forward to the 2008 election.

    This time, though, I am looking forward to the next four years AND looking forward to the 2016 election.

    I would love to vote for Hillary Clinton for POTUS.
    We could vote for her together! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 6:45 AM GMT
    yourname2000 saidI want all the same players to come back again next time around, lol. The primaries were hilarious. icon_lol.gif


    Oh Yes! I hope the Republicans keep listening to the Tea Baggers, the Fundies, and Ann Coulter harpy demons. May they stay fractured and factioned for generations to come.

    Now. Some guy has to go after the likes of Aaron Schock and do a meth/sex tape with him to make sure he doesn't rise any further in the party.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 8:22 AM GMT
    OK here is my tip to the GOP to ever have a chance of winning again.

    They need to move back to the center. Moderate their extreme policies while maintaining a conservative flavor. To start with this will mean that they agree with Obama on most stuff. Let the debate move back to the center and then the democrats will move back to the left. At which point the GOP can run center right and the democrats center left and then there will be a real chance of them winning.

    It may take a few electoral cycles, but if they stick with the extreme conservative line they will never win again. They will be over.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 12:34 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidGiven that the conservatives on here behaved like complete wankers before the election, maybe a little reflection is good for them?

    Your prescription is flawed anyway: mitt Romney would have been electable if he'd had the right policies.

    It's the POLICIES the republicans need to examine, much less the candidates.


    The irony is, not only was Romney electable, but he had already demonstrated his moderate credentials as Governor of Massachusetts. Instead of exploiting his relatively liberal record (which would probably have appealed to floating voters), the shitty Right re-invented him, in order to court intolerant and selfish conservatives. Result: flip-flop failure.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2012 1:52 PM GMT
    Yes, by all means, keep pushing candidates that are unelectable on a national level. Rand Paul? Please.

    No, the republicans are done. Give it up. Stick with backwoods idiots for congress, that seems to be the way you nut jobs will keep trying to ruin the country, otherwise, you remain a joke. Thanks for the entertainment.

    Although, I would love to see another primary with the likes of Stoner Rick Perry, High as a Kite Herman Kain and Michelle Tranny Bachman any winter, they were the best. Of course, everyone loves Santorum, just not at breakfast.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 10, 2012 1:56 PM GMT
    I'll trust the Republican Party much more greatly when they cut off the religious zealots from political influence.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 10, 2012 2:11 PM GMT
    White People Mourning Romney

    avatar_0e1980dc8172_128.png

    http://whitepeoplemourningromney.tumblr.com/
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Nov 10, 2012 2:15 PM GMT
    JockTheVote saidWe do need a woman.

    ANN ROMNEY would be my choice.

    We owe her something.

    She had to watch the man she once admired

    become an empty suit who'd say ANYTHING

    and betray every belief he ever had

    in order to win the votes of those HE DID NOT RESPECT.

    Mitt's Vanity Campaign

    was the very definition of humiliation.


    ANN deserves a few spa weekends...

    and after she's rested,

    Let her be Queen Bee for awhile.





    icon_lol.gif



    icon_wink.gif



    icon_lol.gif
  • kevmoran

    Posts: 1543

    Nov 10, 2012 4:27 PM GMT
    coolarmydude saidI'll trust the Republican Party much more greatly when they cut off the religious zealots from political influence.

    Then they would just be Libertarians.
  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Nov 11, 2012 7:09 AM GMT
    I wish that Romney and Obama would make a lovechild: Robomney. The fiscal discipline and rejection of China's mercantilism with Obama's laid back attitude towards gays, females, people on foodstamps, Big Bird, hispanics, and generally just people that aren't him.

    I deplore Obama's fiscal track record, but I don't think it would have mattered who took office; the bills are due both of them would have had to pay them. As Conan O'Brien put it, "Obama is slated to appear on one of Oprah's last shows. He's hoping it's the one where she gives away 14 trillion dollars." In fact, Obama has borrowed more than every president (in nominal terms) from George Washington up until to the beginning of Bill Clinton. Despite all of that, I think Obama is a better person to have at the helm when that office has to tell millions of people that they can't have the benefits they've gotten used to anymore - a little less stress on the social fabric (already about to be ripped about by one hell of a generational war) than a white, wealthy guy with offshore accounts in Grand Cayman (I don't see anything wrong with having such accounts, it's just an obstacle to the mass understanding of the millions who don't.) In fact, I think after that election, Obama owes Clinton a Lewinsky.

  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Nov 11, 2012 7:23 AM GMT
    kevmoran said
    coolarmydude saidI'll trust the Republican Party much more greatly when they cut off the religious zealots from political influence.

    Then they would just be Libertarians.


    Bill Maher said it best, "I'd be a Repubilcan if Republicans were Republican!"
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 12:35 PM GMT
    kevmoran said
    coolarmydude saidI'll trust the Republican Party much more greatly when they cut off the religious zealots from political influence.

    Then they would just be Libertarians.


    As liberal political commentator Alex Bennett says, Libertarians are Republicans who want to smoke pot and get laid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 12, 2012 1:50 AM GMT
    GQjock saidWhite People Mourning Romney

    avatar_0e1980dc8172_128.png

    http://whitepeoplemourningromney.tumblr.com/


    Let them mourn for at least 4 more years! Hahahahaha!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2012 3:18 AM GMT
    maxferguson said:

    " I think Obama is a better person to have at the helm when that office has to tell millions of people that they can't have the benefits they've gotten used to anymore - a little less stress on the social fabric (already about to be ripped about by one hell of a generational war) than a white, wealthy guy with offshore accounts in Grand Cayman..."

    GREAT POINTS.

    IMHO, we are entering a period of austerity.....but one with opportunity too.

    President Obama is much more credible than Mitt when he delivers the message that

    'We are all in this together and we will work together."

    And in reality, that isn't just a feel good message----it's our only option.

    As for the generational war, it's a war for the future.

    Republicans fought for the outrageously costly Medicare Part D-------

    but fought even harder to deny healthcare assistance for children during the same time period. (Look at their fight against S CHIP)

    We've got to figure out how to fulfill our obligations to the older generation---but not to the point that we're not investing in the future.