What does it mean???

I don’t get it.

Can someone explain it to me???

The analysts say that Obama won because he got the immigrants’ vote.  Conservatives like legal immigrants.  They encourage and assist them in achieving the “American dream”.  Do legal immigrants think that illegal immigrants should be able to sneak into America, access all of the educational, medical, and social services that they—the legal immigrants—have worked so hard to earn and pay for???  Or is it that illegal immigrants are voting???

The analysts say that Obama won because he got the single-woman-between-18-and-35 vote.  They say that these women think that conservatives want to “run their lives” and to “rule their bodies”.  Are they really that stupid???  Do they really think that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would send ogres to their homes to be sure that they had no contraceptives???  Do they really think that the most important objective in the lives of conservative men is to repeal Roe v. Wade???  How can they possibly base their vote on the $9 per month that it costs for contraception???  Can’t they spend any time at all to learn the truth behind organizations such as Planned Parenthood rather than take the word of the left-leaning media???  Can’t they even call Planned Parenthood and ask them for a “free mammogram” and see what they say???

The analysts say that Obama won because he got the “youth vote”.  These would be the same youths that can’t find a job or are way under-employed, and are likely tens of thousands of dollars in debt due to college loans.  They are also likely competing for jobs against older workers in the same fields who have years of experience--older workers who are highly motivated, with families to support and mortgages to pay.

The analysts say that Obama won because he got the vote of those who are “on the dole”, the “47%”, the needy, the welfare generation.  It is said that this group now gets the equivalent of $37,000 per year from the government.  This is simply not sustainable.  Even by increasingly “taxing the rich” it is simply not sustainable.  What is worse, as higher taxes trickle down—and they must—and those who earn only a slightly better lifestyle than the government largesse provides decide that working is no longer worthwhile, the working class will shrink and the “47%” will grow at an alarming rate.  This “domino effect” will bring down America in short order.  Conservatives seem to understand this.  Obama and his liberal friends do not.

“Thanks for the reply. I'll attempt to clarify a few of my points here but I do still believe that the presentation of the conservative message by Mr. Romney and the GOP was what ultimately decided the election.

First off, I have to agree with you that Mr. Romney was not, is not and never has been a conservative. That, imo, was the biggest problem throughout the election season; you had a candidate whose core beliefs were at odds with the conservative message. Saying you're a conservative doesn't make you one and it did give the impression that Mr. Romney was less than honest about what he believed. The long campaign season made that point tangible in the eyes of independent and undecided voters.”…TonyB

Okay, so even if I stipulate to all of that, so far in this discussion we have been ignoring the fact that there were only TWO candidates in this election who had an actual possibility of being elected: Romney and Obama, and we have been ignoring Obama throughout the discussion.  Given that Romney is not a true conservative, it cannot be denied that he is more conservative than Obama, can it???  It certainly appeared to me that there was a clear choice, and given that clear choice, for conservatives (or anyone else) to abstain from voting would be akin to voting for Obama.  True conservatives would certainly NOT want to help Obama to another four years, so why wouldn’t they vote for Romney???  It just doesn’t make sense to me.  Most of the Democrats that I know claim to have voted for Romney, a Republican, this time--the first time that they have voted for a Republican in their lives—because of Obama’s ruinous economic and energy policies.  How could Obama have gotten more votes than he did in 2008…and why would conservatives refrain from voting, knowing that by doing so they were helping Obama to a second term.  Are you saying that they couldn’t think that far ahead???  It is as I tried to explain to VietVet in another tread: The vote that would be better for the American economy would be best for everyone in the long run.  So…I am certain that Obama lost at least some votes from 2008.  It would seem to me that some others would have become disenchanted because the “change” that they had “hoped” for didn’t materialize.  Those are the ones that I thought would “stay home” quicker than anyone would.

“The "compassion" issue is also something that Mr. Romney had trouble with on many occasions. Watching staged events like the conventions where Mr. Romney could play his role in the story wasn't as telling as the unguarded moments caught on tape. It made Mr. Romney seem insincere and in politics, perception is everything. If I convinced you that it was the media who made Mr. Romney look insincere, you'd also have to cede the point that Mr. Romney didn't do himself any favors with some of the decisions he made and the things he said. Romney was the wrong person to run after the bank collapse in 2008; his business practices seemed greedy and disconnected to most Americans.”…TonyB

I assume that you are referring to his business practices at Bain Capital.  Anyone who thinks that those business practices were “greedy” just doesn’t understand business.  Bain took failing and struggling businesses and tried to turn them around, some made it, some did not.  Most needed some degree of consolidation before they could grow and prosper.  Once again, the media concentrated on reporting the failures that closed and not the successes (like AMC Entertainment, Aspen Education Group, Brookstone, Burger King, Burlington Coat Factory, Clear Channel Communications, Domino’s Pizza, Dunkin’ Donuts, D&M Holdings, Guitar Center, Hospital Corporation of America, Sealy, The Sports Authority, Staples, Toys “R” Us, Warner Music Group, and  The Weather Channel.)  Hundreds of thousands of people probably have jobs that otherwise wouldn’t have, thanks to Bain Capital.  The ones who lost their jobs probably would have lost them quicker, if not for Bain.

“The off-shore bank accounts gave the impression of tax evasion and Mr. Romney's refusal to release his tax returns reinforced that perception. His lack of specifics on what deductions he would eliminate and then saying that if he told what they were no one would vote for him was one of the most self-defeating moments I have ever witnessed.”…TonyB

I am not familiar with the “if he told what they were no one would vote for him” instance, which surprises me since I watched a ton of political stuff during both the primaries and the presidential campaigns.  (I’d appreciate it if you could send me more info so I could look this up.)  However, as for the “offshore bank accounts”, that is so bogus!!!  I’m not saying that he didn’t have them…I’m sure that he did and still does, but so does Obama.  And guess what??  So do I.  And so do millions of other Americans who are not rich, tax-cheating fat cats.  Anyone who owns diversified mutual funds in a 401K likely has them.  Anyone who holds diversified mutual funds outside a 401K (as an individual investor, as I do) also likely has them and if their taxes are properly prepared, their return includes a form showing their profits (or losses) on their “offshore accounts”, as my return does.  Does that make me some sort of devious scoundrel that is cheating the government by hiding millions in a Cayman account???  NO!!!  It simply means that I own a hundred shares of a mutual fund, and that mutual fund consists of investments in THOUSANDS of diverse companies, some of which may be banks in Jamaica or the Cayman Islands, or even in Switzerland.  I have no idea from day-to-day what it is invested in, but I do get a pamphlet (about 40 pages) four times a year that lists thousands of companies—most of which I’ve never heard of—and how well, or how poorly, the fund performed that quarter.  And guess what??  There is nothing wrong with that—not for me, not for Obama, and not even for Romney!!!  What IS wrong is for folks who should know better to try to insinuate that there IS something wrong with it.

“I don't know how I can say it any planer than this: Mitt Romney was the wrong candidate at the wrong time. If he had been the nominee in 2008, he might have beaten Obama and it would have been Romney running for reelection. After running for 6 years to win the presidency, Mitt Romney had been damaged by the Republican primaries and election rules that favor the incumbent. President Obama was able to define Romney as the wrong person to be president and in the end, the voters agreed. It is all the more astonishing to me because this was an election that the GOP could have won.”…TonyB

Well, you are probably correct.  I know that I would rather have had someone else be the candidate, but the like it or not, the fact remains that Romney won the primary process, and that is the only legal way for either of the two major parties to nominate a candidate.  Just as with Akin and Mourdock (the two Republican senate candidate screwballs), once a candidate wins a primary, the party (either Democrat or Republican) cannot just decide that they’d rather have someone else and replace them.  The party does not pick the candidate…the rank-and-file members do, through the primary process.

“It certainly isn't a matter of convincing the media. However, I have to laugh at the idea that the media is "liberal". There is a wealth of media now; to declare the entire industry one thing or another is absurd. There is a liberal point of view in the media; there is also a conservative point of view. Both sides accuse the other of being biased; that's not news to me. What's news to me is that you believe the "liberal" media is going to give the conservative viewpoint positive press. They are going to look for the dirt just like the conservative press is going to do. You'll have to admit that Fox News doesn't exactly put a positive spin on any story about Obama. It doesn't surprise me in the same way that MSNBC didn't have much positive to say about Romney. Saying the liberal media is responsible for Romney's loss doesn't solve the problem for the GOP.”…TonyB

Well, I guess that I’m failing to communicate my thoughts on this particular matter, so we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

“We've already seen in the last few days how the Republicans are going to govern as the minority party but in control of the budget process. It's back to status quo, hold the government hostage and gridlock. If the House Republicans can present a deal to the president that can increase revenues without raising tax rates, they might be able to get a deal. If not, the media blame game is going to go into full overdrive.”…TonyB

Now wait just a minute!!! This harks back to the previous question about how the left-leaning media gets out the liberal message!!!  This is all I hear when I listen to any network other than Fox.  However, it simply is not true!!!  The House Republicans are NOT “in control of the budget process”!!!  First, according to law, the PRESIDENT must submit HIS budget to congress no later than the first Monday in February!!!  In February of 2009 and 2010, Obama had a DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY in both the House and the Senate, yet NO budget was passed.  So, how did the Republicans “control” the budget process” those two years???  There has been only ONE budget voted upon in the DEMOCRATICALLY-held Senate in nearly FOUR years, and it was defeated 99-0.  (I would certainly call that a “bi-partisan” vote, wouldn’t you???)  If you say that the Republicans can govern as a minority party by controlling the budget process, then I say SHOW ME ONE budget that Obama has proposed since he became president, that has passed the Senate (which has had a Democratic majority the entire time) that the Republicans have then defeated in the House!!!  You cannot show me even one!!!  This proves that you have been misled by the media into thinking that the Republicans are controlling the budgeting process!!!  But is simply is not true!!!

“The conservative message is in serious danger if a third party emerges. The talk has already started and it would be a disaster for the GOP. I know that you are sincere about wanting to understand why this election turned out the way it did and to change the results of the next election. A stronger candidate would go a long way to that end.”…TonyB

Actually, I think that a third party would be a good idea as I believe that the two-party system has failed.  The so-called “moderate” branches of the two major parties are so close together as to be indistinguishable.  The biggest problem I see with a third party is that it would take so long to become strong enough to be a contender that our country may not survive to see it (at least not as we know it).  I had hopes that the Tea Party Movement would lead the Republican Party back to its roots.

TonyB,

I think we’ve about beat this to death, so I won’t go point-by-point through your last response.

I have enjoyed the discussion, though, and I would like to make a few more comments.

First, while you were commenting on the Cayman accounts, you said:

“…the fact that Romney had MONEY in those accounts, not just instruments of investment.”

Do you recall where you learned of this “fact”???  Also, how would you propose one would respond to this if it were not true???  (For example, if I accused you of having Cayman bank accounts, how would you prove that you did not???)

Next, regarding the Romney/Ryan economic plan, you referred to their having stated:

"Too complicated to explain","take to much time to explain", "if I told you, you wouldn't vote for it";

Do you recall where you heard this???  As I mentioned before, I am somewhat of a political junkie who watched and listened to tons of coverage for over a year and I can’t recall ever hearing these particular remarks.

Lastly, regarding your final remarks:

“The GOP has to fix what it can and overcome the rest. If it splits into 2 parties, neither will be able to overcome the Democratic coalition that has been built this year. That would indeed change this country and not for the better. There has to be a viable option in elections or there really is no choice. The next 4 years give the GOP a chance to figure it out. Let's hope for all of our sakes, they do.”

We are in complete agreement here.  As much as I would like to see a third party,  it would take far too long (a minimum of decades, in my opinion) for one to become viable, and I fear that our country simply does not have the time for that to occur.  If for no other reason, the interest on the national debt will soon overwhelm us if it is not attended to promptly, and I fear that the bunch in Washington will simply “kick the can” until it is too late.  I fear that it will be “too late” sooner than most of us realize.

One final thought on “what happened”:

I think that the Republicans “wasted” a lot of time, effort and money on votes that they had already “cinched”, and the Democrats must’ve better spent their pre-election time, effort and money.  I am NOT talking about campaign ads now.  Here is what I mean:

Anyone who is the least bit familiar with campaigning know that you can get lists of the registered voters, by PARTY, for the last however many elections from the Board of elections.  Using myself as an example, they should’ve known that I have voted in the REPUBLICAN primary every primary year since 2000, and have remained registered as a Republican ever since then.  They should also have known that I am a member of the Butler County Republican Central Committee.  Also, when I got the first live phone call urging me to “vote early”, I assured them that I would vote, and when I voted I would vote for Romney.  Still, I got at least six calls a day (some live, some taped) asking for my vote.  They were wasting their time, efforts and money.  They already HAD my vote.  They should’ve been talking to voters who were NOT registered Republicans instead of wasting their time on me.  They should’ve had a mechanism to stop soliciting votes that were already “cinched” so that they could concentrate on trying to actually harvest additional votes.

On the other hand, we did not receive even one call from Obama’s team.  I guess that they were smart enough to know not to waste their time, effort, and money on a Republican Central Committeeman.  (One lady did knock on our door late one night just a couple of days before the election to ask us to vote for Obama.  I guess she couldn’t see the Romney/Ryan yard sign in the dark.)

Now, this may seem like a small thing—but there are over 10,900 precincts in Ohio, so that means over 10,900 Central Committee members, all of whom should have been “cinch votes”.  If each one got called one to two hundred times during the last month of the campaign, that’s one to two MILLION calls in Ohio alone that were completely unnecessary—a total waste of time, effort, and money.