My view...2 cents

[BLADEMDA]

Posts like these make me pretty hopeful for the Dems come 2012. The old guard of the GOP won't let social issues go and are too stubborn to see that Americans want small government, but want Social Security and Medicare more.

I don't foresee Republicans having a resurgence for awhile. Voters like 2win, hoyden, and BladeMD will vote for the hard right candidates in the primaries when more moderate voters either can't or don't bother. Then, in the main showing, the candidate has to desperately track back to the center. Mitt couldn't pull it off, and I doubt others will either. And all that extremism will push minorities and young women into the open arms of the Democrats.

Congrads on the win. I had hoped Romney would pull it out. He didn't. We lost.
The most suprising part was the big demograpphic shift which showed up in this election.
I fully concede that the 'R' candidate will NEVER win another Presidential Election unless the 'D' candidate is an idiot or the GOP moderates the social lissues during the campaign.

What we won't compromise on are smaller, leaner govt., individual rights and less regulation. A Large Federal govt. isn't the solution because it is usually the problem.

So, while your 'D' won the election I truly believe his policies are bad for business, investors and upper middle class taxpayers trying to "make it" in America. As for future Physicians you might as well kiss that upper middle class lifestyle goodbye because ObamaCare is just a fancy name for Medicare/Medicaid as the single payer solution.
Meanwhile, your 'D' is going to leave you with massive debt loads without the income past Physicians enjoyed after Residency. You better get used to Tuna Helper a lot.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[yappy]

Blade, before we get too discouraged about the R party potential in the future, we must consider that Obama was an incumbent president. How many get unseated - especially considering the previous R was Bush?

I can see a R candidate doing quite well next election as long as they work on messaging and don't get dragged down in the primary appealing to the ultra-right. If they stick to economic issues they CAN win the Hispanic vote - especially once they start paying taxes (half kidding).

This is the type of holier than thou I was talking about. You act as though the reason the R lost was because R ideals are too noble for a modern-day-corrupt US. It's not an accurate or productive position.

we lost because of the immature tea party sentiment that was set in motion in 2010 and has persisted for the last few years.

Congrads on the win. I had hoped Romney would pull it out. He didn't. We lost.
The most suprising part was the big demograpphic shift which showed up in this election.
I fully concede that the 'R' candidate will NEVER win another Presidential Election unless the 'D' candidate is an idiot or the GOP moderates the social lissues during the campaign.

What we won't compromise on are smaller, leaner govt., individual rights and less regulation. A Large Federal govt. isn't the solution because it is usually the problem.

So, while your 'D' won the election I truly believe his policies are bad for business, investors and upper middle class taxpayers trying to "make it" in America. As for future Physicians you might as well kiss that upper middle class lifestyle goodbye because ObamaCare is just a fancy name for Medicare/Medicaid as the single payer solution.
Meanwhile, your 'D' is going to leave you with massive debt loads without the income past Physicians enjoyed after Residency. You better get used to Tuna Helper a lot.

 

[DoctwoB]

What we won't compromise on are smaller, leaner govt., individual rights and less regulation. A Large Federal govt. isn't the solution because it is usually the problem.

The idea of a small, lean, government is a powerful one. In markets where incentives are aligned with outcomes (say smartphones or laptops), the free market does an incredible job of making great products for low prices, lots of jobs, and the government should stay out of the way.

What right wingers need to acknowledge though is that not all markets are perfect, and as such regulation can be necessary to counteract market failures like externalities, unequal information, or monopoly. Environmental regulation is necessary to prevent companies from destroying excess environment (a negative for society) and internalize that externality. Pharm regulation is necessary to ensure adequate study and prevent excess harm to patients. I'm not defending the EPA or FDA in their current, bloated incarnations, and government does need to take a long hard look at itself from time to time and cut the fat.

All I'm saying is that republicans should focus on fiscal conservatism, but also acknowledge that government regulation when properly applied can be a positive force for the country. Enough with the "kill the epa" rhetoric.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Congrads on the win. I had hoped Romney would pull it out. He didn't. We lost.
The most suprising part was the big demograpphic shift which showed up in this election.
I fully concede that the 'R' candidate will NEVER win another Presidential Election unless the 'D' candidate is an idiot or the GOP moderates the social lissues during the campaign.

What we won't compromise on are smaller, leaner govt., individual rights and less regulation. A Large Federal govt. isn't the solution because it is usually the problem.

So, while your 'D' won the election I truly believe his policies are bad for business, investors and upper middle class taxpayers trying to "make it" in America. As for future Physicians you might as well kiss that upper middle class lifestyle goodbye because ObamaCare is just a fancy name for Medicare/Medicaid as the single payer solution.
Meanwhile, your 'D' is going to leave you with massive debt loads without the income past Physicians enjoyed after Residency. You better get used to Tuna Helper a lot.

First off, I want to apologize for calling people out by name in my previous post. That was unprofessional and just a dick move in general. I don't know much about any of you, and I don't know how you vote. Sorry about that.

To answer your post, I generally agree. I think the "soft" libertarian position (as I call it) is very appealing to a lot of Americans. Getting contraception, family planning, and marriage choices out of the GOP talking points would go a good way in allowing single women and gays to vote R. Bringing in a sensible immigration policy is more important yet to get Hispanics to go R.

Leaner government and more individual rights will resonate with many voters, so if the GOP can keep vocal social conservatives out of the news (and out of the primaries), I think the GOP becomes relevant again.

Regarding me and my debt, I'm okay with how things look now. I'm potentially aiming for primary care, so I see my salary being relatively flat. I came from a middle class household and have yet to develop expensive tastes, so I doubt there'll come a time when I feel poor on a doctor's salary. As a side note, I've never eaten Tuna Helper, and I don't ever plan to.

Voters like blade, hoyden and 2win do not have to pay their medical school debt unlike stupid medical and prehealth students who think the social issues ever take precedence over economy. Voters like 2win, hoyden and blade have already learned that social isuues do not matter, if the economy is abysmal. medical and prehealth students will learn that too and pay the price for their stupidity as well. Voters like 2win, hoyden or blade have the freedom to say whay they really think because they actually THINK and ANYLYZE, unlike the medical and prehealth students, who just repeat the talking points like parrots.

Nothing new under the sun

You can post all the laughing emoticons you want, but women went 56-44 for Obama and Latinos went 71-27. You're welcome to say there's nothing new under the sun, but the status quo is not going to win the GOP many more elections.

 

[hoyden]

Obama won on womans issues AND the economy. The far right is dogmatic in their understanding of the economy. I'm a centrist and regularly blow conservatives out of the water on economic issues. How many peer reviewed economic journals do you read Hoyden? How much empirical evidence has been published to support far right ideas relating to the economy? It's pathetic. The whole party has been reduced to sound bites and dogma pushed forward by AM talk show hosts who are cashing in on peoples ignorance via book sales. Did you know that prior to the election the R buried their own study that found empirical evidence was contrary to the fundamental assumptions Romneys tax plan? You've been played for a fool... a real fan boy.

"""yawning"""

I am an anesthesiologist not the economy strategist. But I've seen socialist economies fall live.

And btw, new updates on the front of obamanomics - massive layoffs announced today by major corporations and in a smaller private world - in my hospital ancillary and kitchen staff is going to be grossly reduced due to upcoming fiscal cliff.

putting their money where their vote was

 

[hoyden]

First off, I want to apologize for calling people out by name in my previous post. That was unprofessional and just a dick move in general. I don't know much about any of you, and I don't know how you vote. Sorry about that.

To answer your post, I generally agree. I think the "soft" libertarian position (as I call it) is very appealing to a lot of Americans. Getting contraception, family planning, and marriage choices out of the GOP talking points would go a good way in allowing single women and gays to vote R. Bringing in a sensible immigration policy is more important yet to get Hispanics to go R.

Leaner government and more individual rights will resonate with many voters, so if the GOP can keep vocal social conservatives out of the news (and out of the primaries), I think the GOP becomes relevant again.

Regarding me and my debt, I'm okay with how things look now. I'm potentially aiming for primary care, so I see my salary being relatively flat. I came from a middle class household and have yet to develop expensive tastes, so I doubt there'll come a time when I feel poor on a doctor's salary. As a side note, I've never eaten Tuna Helper, and I don't ever plan to.






You can post all the laughing emoticons you want, but women went 56-44 for Obama and Latinos went 71-27. You're welcome to say there's nothing new under the sun, but the status quo is not going to win the GOP many more elections.

I am a woman myself.

but I don't vote by my uterus

oh, and I am an immigrant, however, not illegal

 

[yappy]

That was a surprise to me.

I am a woman myself.

but I don't to vote by my uterus

 

[jwk]

Saw this quote today - it pretty much sums it up in a nutshell...


"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

 

[jwk]

And btw, the black vote is typically always >90% Democrat.

I have NEVER understood this. How does the party of the KKK, the party that was SOLIDLY pro-segregation and anti-civil rights, become the party of choice for black Americans?

 

[hoyden]

That was a surprise to me.

sorry, kid, you will find a lot of surprises ahead of you, because you digest all the talking points as they are being spoon fed to you by liberal pundits of comedy central

as a desert - when I came to this country, both d and r were absolutely equal to me and as I was working my way up the ladder from being a babysitter and caregiver, while saving money for immigration lawyers ( everything is possible, if you want to spend money) working 3 jobs at a time, and then taking the USMLEs and going through residency I was able to take a close look not only at life in America from the very bottom, but at the political options being offered.

lying left, as usual and everywhere, pretends to be a friend to " working class" and as usual is calling for class welfare and redistribution. somebody somewhere had already lived through this - and there were no happy endings in that story

 

[BLADEMDA]

Saw this quote today - it pretty much sums it up in a nutshell...


"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

Wow. That summarizes how many of us feel quite well.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I have NEVER understood this. How does the party of the KKK, the party that was SOLIDLY pro-segregation and anti-civil rights, become the party of choice for black Americans?

They pivoted hard and embraced the Black Vote. In short, the GOP must do the exact same thing for the Latinos.

 

[BLADEMDA]

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States[1] that outlawed major forms of discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities, and women.[2] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public ("public accommodations").
Powers given to enforce the act were initially weak, but were supplemented during later years. Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its power to regulate interstate commerce under Article One (section 8), its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment. The Act was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, who would later sign the landmark Voting Rights Act into law.

 

[wjs010]

this is why I'm with a brazilian woman...American women have no sense of self efficacy..to get their jimmies THAT rustled over the stupid right wing religious views and to overlook the most important feature of political elections( the economy) is just downright empty-headed.

 

[Somnus Tuto]

On the freedom of a mother to choose or the freedom of an embryo to live

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats (even) its animals." once said a great man. In our society we are up in arms when an animal is mistreated. In the some states, you get a ticket for driving under the influence, for potentially taking the lives of other drivers into your hands BUT you get automatic jail time and mandatorily heavy monetary penalties for fishing outside of a particular season or within certain counties or for capturing oceanic animals that are larger than a certain threshhold.

When we fail to extend the same simple human consideration, any conscience whatsoever or any restraint to the taking of innocent lives and the shedding of the blood of the unborn, for whom we should have the greatest measure of compassion, in the name of freedom, that assaults certain of our most primal instincts for justice, for the protection/defense of the defenseless. It should evoke in us the same feelings of horror that the mass murder of the mentally ******ed did during a dark time in our human history. I don't know that we can fully characterize this as a freedom.

This is a difficult issue. It cannot simply be whittled down to platitudes about women's suffrage, women's rights or female empowerment- all of which I embrace. When our freedoms come at a cost to innocent life, we need to either temper them severely and with soberness or reconsider what we define as freedom.

 

[wjs010]

No patriot has ever willingly laid down his life for the sake of his country's economy. The most important issue that faced this country in this election, or any election, is freedom. From the moment that our rich, prosperous founding fathers turned their back on the certainty of English markets this nation has bet everything on freedom, and generation after generation, the proudest moments in our nations history have been those that bring us closer to the ideal of complete self determination. The freedom to chose your own path in life us always the most important issue.

Reasonable people can disagree about what freedom is most important, or what makes us free. Is the oppression of government regulation the greatest restraint on our few will, or is it a greater priority to lift the yolk of economic disparity that allows private individuals to oppress their neighbors? To what extent can the collective will of American to help one another through social redistribution trump the freedom of indiuals to disagree with that majority? Can the freedom of a mother to chose trump the freedom of an embryo to live? These are all disagreements that are reasonable to have. However when a party loses sight of that, when they start to truly believe that the most important thing is the balance of our bank accounts, then they are truly lost. The Republican party cannot.and should.not win another election if they can't see that

Notsureifsrs. So I take it your jimmies have been rustled by the neocons?

As a libertarian, I am ALL for individual liberties. But guess what? Economy is more important... This is why we have to elect a libertarian. Libertarians don't even have to question individual liberty. Liberty is the norm! Therefore, and still, economy always trumps/ 10

 

[hoyden]

No patriot has ever willingly laid down his life for the sake of his country's economy. The most important issue that faced this country in this election, or any election, is freedom. From the moment that our rich, prosperous founding fathers turned their back on the certainty of English markets this nation has bet everything on freedom, and generation after generation, the proudest moments in our nations history have been those that bring us closer to the ideal of complete self determination. The freedom to chose your own path in life us always the most important issue.

Reasonable people can disagree about what freedom is most important, or what makes us free. Is the oppression of government regulation the greatest restraint on our few will, or is it a greater priority to lift the yolk of economic disparity that allows private individuals to oppress their neighbors? To what extent can the collective will of American to help one another through social redistribution trump the freedom of indiuals to disagree with that majority? Can the freedom of a mother to chose trump the freedom of an embryo to live? These are all disagreements that are reasonable to have. However when a party loses sight of that, when they start to truly believe that the most important thing is the balance of our bank accounts, then they are truly lost. The Republican party cannot.and should.not win another election if they can't see that

Pretty pompous but right. Could be summarized in somebody's expression - people who choose goodies over freedom at the end do not have either. Nine dollarS per month for a pill - THIS is a sale price for individual liberty

 

[hoyden]

On the freedom of a mother to choose or the freedom of an embryo to live

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats (even) its animals." once said a great man. In our society we are up in arms when an animal is mistreated. In the some states, you get a ticket for driving under the influence, for potentially taking the lives of other drivers into your hands BUT you get automatic jail time and mandatorily heavy monetary penalties for fishing outside of a particular season or within certain counties or for capturing oceanic animals that are larger than a certain threshhold.

When we fail to extend the same simple human consideration, any conscience whatsoever or any restraint to the taking of innocent lives and the shedding of the blood of the unborn, for whom we should have the greatest measure of compassion, in the name of freedom, that assaults certain of our most primal instincts for justice, for the protection/defense of the defenseless. It should evoke in us the same feelings of horror that the mass murder of the mentally ******ed did during a dark time in our human history. I don't know that we can fully characterize this as a freedom.

This is a difficult issue. It cannot simply be whittled down to platitudes about women's suffrage, women's rights or female empowerment- all of which I embrace. When our freedoms come at a cost to innocent life, we need to either temper them severely and with soberness or reconsider what we define as freedom.

Agree completely, but in a political game where the left is always lying the issue can not be discussed at all. It should be discussed outside the political battles.USA is the only country where the real women's rights are cemented exclusively on the uterus. It is denegrating beyond any imagination but it takes thinking outside the typical standard leftist brainwashing box of American variety to realize how humiliating and outrageous this is.

 

[periopdoc]

So it seems the question the Repubs to take a hard look at is, "can we be elected if we divorce ourselves from our addiction to the evangelical vote?"

The evangelicals are becoming less and less significant in America and in American Politics, but they are still a huge bloc in states that otherwise would likely go Dem. So, have we reached the tipping point where the Repubs can stand to lose a large segment of the evangelical vote (most likely by evangelical abstention from voting, not from evangelicals voting for the other party), or is it still a significant enough bloc in critical states that the Repubs still need to pander to them?

- pod

 

[hoyden]

So it seems the question the Repubs to take a hard look at is, "can we be elected if we divorce ourselves from our addiction to the evangelical vote?"

The evangelicals are becoming less and less significant in America and in American Politics, but they are still a huge bloc in states that otherwise would likely go Dem. So, have we reached the tipping point where the Repubs can stand to lose a large segment of the evangelical vote (most likely by evangelical abstention from voting, not from evangelicals voting for the other party), or is it still a significant enough bloc in critical states that the Repubs still need to pander to them?

- pod

A bird in a hand is better than two in the sky. Republican party should concentrate on latino block almost entirely and forget about single women or young electorate, because the vast majority of those are simply too infantile yet. Both categories eventually partially change as they encounter real not imaginary problems.

And I honestly believe that the mantra about rigid evangelical block is essentially a myth - our liberal members stamp marked everybody with that meaningless label who does not agree with them. Even if they are not even close to the description. Obviously, the left can't fathom the fact that conservative principles might come not from religious views but from scientific, historic or simply logical facts.

 

[QQm]

.

 

[hoyden]

78% of "white born-again Christians" voted for Governor Romney in this election and that's up from 74% in 2008; if that's not a rigid voting block (similar to 93% African-American vote for President Obama in 2012), I don't know what is.

Sources: www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls and http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p2

To answer the original question, though, I agree the Republican party can't just punt the evangelical vote because it's too big a support base. If future Republican candidates can approach or meet the 44% Latino vote President Bush got in 2008, they'll have a strong chance to win; the real question is whether any candidate supporting "sensible" immigration reform will survive the grueling primary process.

I meant rigid not on voting preferences, but on the life views . I have lived in four states including the belt and have yet to find the proverbial caricature live person which you and others like to view as evangelical rightwinger. Hey, I've been labeled such myself and I am not even Protestant

 

[leaverus]

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

you guys ever visit peopleofwalmart.com? every single one of those cretins has a vote - quite frightening actually. if the founding fathers knew that one day even the "walcreature" would be voting, i think our system of government would be quite different indeed.

 

[dotcb]

http://samuel-warde.com/2012/11/cry-babies-and-sore-losers/

http://whitepeoplemourningromney.tumblr.com/

http://www.ericgarland.co/2012/11/0...republican-strategist-regarding-white-people/

 

[Renaissance Man]

sorry, kid, you will find a lot of surprises ahead of you, because you digest all the talking points as they are being spoon fed to you by liberal pundits of comedy central

It is interesting that you keep mentioning that liberals only repeat talking points spoon fed by the media, and yet I could turn on Fox News and hear your exact arguments almost verbatim. And guess what? I could turn on MSNBC and hear the liberal arguments word for word! It is a crazy world where people tune into a media outlet they tend to agree with!

The president won the most-educated population of America by something like 10%. Somehow I doubt that this was due to Colbert. My vote had nothing to with two comedy shows, or MSNBC, or Fox News.

 

[hoyden]

you guys ever visit peopleofwalmart.com? every single one of those cretins has a vote - quite frightening actually. if the founding fathers knew that one day even the "walcreature" would be voting, i think our system of government would be quite different indeed.

The real problem in producing lazy idiocy is that people do not feel the NEED to work harder to get somewhere - taxpayer's money will take care of all their needs,

It is very obvious even in the most dynamic parts of the population - fresh immigrants. Those who can not count on government assistance, generally prosper much better than those that have this feeding tube from the very beginning. I am not talking about illegal immigrants, only about legal ones - there are different casts between them also.

 

[neuropathic]

The president won the most-educated population of America by something like 10%.

Just curious, how is the source define the "most-educated" population?

 

[hoyden]

Just curious, how is the source define the "most-educated" population?

self-assessment

 

[sleepallday]

Just curious, how is the source define the "most-educated" population?

http://www.happyplace.com/19076/election-infographic-shows-most-educated-states-voted-for-obama

 

[Renaissance Man]

Just curious, how is the source define the "most-educated" population?

It was an exit poll on CNN, it was defined as voters with post-undergrad education. I think that is a pretty fair definition, no?

 

[countingdays]

It was an exit poll on CNN, it was defined as voters with post-undergrad education. I think that is a pretty fair definition, no?

Corrected for race it doesn't hold up I bet.

 

[Renaissance Man]

Corrected for race it doesn't hold up I bet.

So it only matters if you are white and educated?

 

[countingdays]

So it only matters if you are white and educated?

No my point is that he didn't win based on the educated vote, he won based on the minority vote.
39% of whites and 42% of college educated whites voted for Obama. Including educated minorities' voting based on race makes it appear that educated people prefer Obama which isn't true. Educated people preferred Romney but race trumped education for minorities on the whole.

(I know you could say race trumped education for white people, but I don't think that is the case.)

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

Speaking of the educated...


Lots of attendings I know voted for Obama. Heck, you could see Obama bumper stickers on a lot of their cars. All you needed to do was stand there and listen to them go on and on about how great Obama is and how scary Romney was.

The majority of male residents I spoke with seemed to have favored Romney; however, there were a good number of female residents AND minority residents (male/female) (hispanic, middle eastern, black, etc) who favored Obama. The majority of nurses (shockingly) voted for Obama.

Of course, this is just from my hospital. Doesn't necessarily translate to other academic centers, but my guess is the trend is somewhat similar nationwide.

 

[Renaissance Man]

No my point is that he didn't win based on the educated vote, he won based on the minority vote.
39% of whites and 42% of college educated whites voted for Obama. Including educated minorities' voting based on race makes it appear that educated people prefer Obama which isn't true. Educated people preferred Romney but race trumped education for minorities on the whole.

(I know you could say race trumped education for white people, but I don't think that is the case. Black race is the single strongest predictor of voting, stronger than medicaid enrollment, and probably even stronger than party affiliation.)

I agree with you on the bolded. I wasn't trying to say that the educated vote decided the election. Sorry if I came across as otherwise.

I was disagreeing with a poster that said liberals only regurgitate what they are "spoon-fed" on the news (and on Comedy Central). I was countering with the fact that Obama carried the post-graduate educated vote, most of whom can probably think for themselves.

 

[ED50]

So it seems the question the Repubs to take a hard look at is, "can we be elected if we divorce ourselves from our addiction to the evangelical vote?"

The evangelicals are becoming less and less significant in America and in American Politics, but they are still a huge bloc in states that otherwise would likely go Dem. So, have we reached the tipping point where the Repubs can stand to lose a large segment of the evangelical vote (most likely by evangelical abstention from voting, not from evangelicals voting for the other party), or is it still a significant enough bloc in critical states that the Repubs still need to pander to them?

- pod

This exactly, the primary was way too polarizing for Romney. He was competing for a block that was going to vote for him regardless (or rather against Obama regardless). They simply forced him to say some really crazy things so he could get through the primary which alienated him when he finally got the nomination. The Republicans need to distance themselves from Fox news since they are going to push the takers and makers idea along with encouraging the party to double down on a losing strategy. The R mantra should be smaller government and more personal freedom = strong America. Oh, and completely stop talking about abortion and deportation.

 

[ssmallz]

No my point is that he didn't win based on the educated vote, he won based on the minority vote.
39% of whites and 42% of college educated whites voted for Obama. Including educated minorities' voting based on race makes it appear that educated people prefer Obama which isn't true. Educated people preferred Romney but race trumped education for minorities on the whole.

(I know you could say race trumped education for white people, but I don't think that is the case.)

So when a white person votes for Romney we say that they were smart, voted for the issues that matter and race didn't matter but when a minority votes for Obama we say that he/she just voted on race lines?

Bottom line is that if want to talk about the educated vote as a way of saying "this group of people is knowledgeable about the issues and therefore vote for a candidate based on more than just race" then you need to count whites and minorities as equals because each has the education to vote intelligently on the issues. As soon as we start to say one educated person is not equal to another the whole argument about who educated voters favored falls apart because the reason we are focusing on them is because they can theoretically vote based on more than just race

 

[jwk]

So when a white person votes for Romney we say that they were smart, voted for the issues that matter and race didn't matter but when a minority votes for Obama we say that he/she just voted on race lines?

Bottom line is that if want to talk about the educated vote as a way of saying "this group of people is knowledgeable about the issues and therefore vote for a candidate based on more than just race" then you need to count whites and minorities as equals because each has the education to vote intelligently on the issues. As soon as we start to say one educated person is not equal to another the whole argument about who educated voters favored falls apart because the reason we are focusing on them is because they can theoretically vote based on more than just race

93% of whites didn't vote for Romney.

 

[Renaissance Man]

93% of whites didn't vote for Romney.

Oh you're right, in that case being educated only matters if you aren't black. Stupid African American doctors and PhDs couldn't have voted on any issues other than a shared skin color.

 

[countingdays]

Oh you're right, in that case being educated only matters if you aren't black. Stupid African American doctors and PhDs couldn't have voted on any issues other than a shared skin color.

What issues are those?

If a white person thought Romney was better on the economy, he almost always voted for Romney.
If a white person thought Obama was better on the economy, he almost always voted for Obama.
If a black person thought Romney was better on the economy, he almost always voted for Obama anyway.

 

[neuropathic]

http://www.happyplace.com/19076/election-infographic-shows-most-educated-states-voted-for-obama

This statistic is kind of meaningless. Having a college degree doesn't automatically mean that you are smart enough to understand politics or economy.

Most people voted for Obama/Democrat because they buy-in to the propaganda that there is something to gain for them personally and it has nothing to do with your education. Most Americans making less than 200k think Obama won't raise their income taxes because Obama is going to tax the rich. Wait till 2014, and everyone will pay higher income taxes, book it.

Under Obama, Hispanics think illegal immigrants will have a path to citizenships. Gays think they will be accepted just like everyone else. People without health insurance think once they get Obamacaid and they will have the same access as everyone else to healthcare.

Obama wants people to think he is the hero for the middle class and the "poor" (98% of the population). His agenda is to bring the country to the left, promote class warfare, divide the country, encourage moral destruction and more government control is the solution to most problems. He doesn't understand or care about the economy, or keeping the country strong internationally. Well, if the fiscal cliff does not get resolve, we are heading to recession.

 

[sleepallday]

How is this statistic meaningless??? Sure having a college degree does not mean you understand politics or the economy but you probably do understand it better than someone without the college education.

Also, this notion that people only voted for Obama because they think they will be getting freebies is just ridiculous. Some republicans can't seem to comprehend that just maybe we actually liked Obama's platform just a little more. Asians by far are the most educated and wealthy minority in the country. And they overwhelmingly voted for Obama. Are they also looking for some handout?

 

[neuropathic]

How is this statistic meaningless??? Sure having a college degree does not mean you understand politics or the economy but you probably do understand it better than someone without the college education.

It's purely your opinion, unless you can provide me evidence to back up your claims.

Also, this notion that people only voted for Obama because they think they will be getting freebies is just ridiculous. Some republicans can't seem to comprehend that just maybe we actually liked Obama's platform just a little more.

Tell me what exactly you like/voted for Obama's policies/platform that doesn't benefit you directly.

Asians by far are the most educated and wealthy minority in the country. And they overwhelmingly voted for Obama. Are they also looking for some handout?

What's your point? Assuming your stats are valid, I can't speak for this demographics why they voted for Obama, do you? All I know is Majority of Americans voted for Obama because they think they have something to gain than Romney.

 

[ssmallz]

If that were the case, then late August polls demonstrating a 94 - 0 preference toward Obama by African Americans would never have happened. I'm sorry, but you cannot for even a second pretend that a line like that can be drawn solely on thoughtful consideration of the issues.

Of course race played some part in the election but it wasn't the only reason or even a significant one for Romney's loss. According to wiki, African Americans make up only 12% of the population w/hispanics making up16% and whites still making up the overwhelming majority at 72.4%. Even though Obama got 95% of the black vote, it's only 11% of the population. Romney likely got some white votes simply b/c they didn't want to vote for a black guy. It may not have been the same landslide victory in the white demographic but all he needs to get is 15% of white people to simply vote based on race alone and it would negate the black vote. Or to put it another way if people just voted along race lines, Romney would have won by a landslide.

If you look at the population breakdown along SES lines you would find that only 9.4% of African Americans make over $100k and 27% in poverty. It would make sense that people in the lower SES bracket who would tend to favor Obama's policies over Romney's. It would also make sense that a disproportional amount of them would vote similarly b/c their population is more similar s a whole where as white people by virtue of being a majority are more diverse and you would therefore not get the same majority (95%) voting 1 way or another.

Furthermore, that 94% is a random sampling and doesn't take into account education or anything else so that statistic in and of itself doesn't tell us anything about how an educated black person would vote. With all that being said, the whole point of talking about an educated population was to use it as way to remove the bs and focus on a population that would vote in an intelligent manor. If we are to believe that educated = intellegent = voted on issues then we have to say that race didn't affect their vote b/c otherwise the argument is moot for black or white people

 

[jpark1800]

This country is doomed for failure. The entitlement lazy generation among the young (and I am young myself and see it among my peers) is going to doom this country. Also the illegals in California are just leeching off taxpayers like there is no tommorow.

I find it scary that people are okay with Californians paying 10% income tax for their whole lives and then having to pay the same money as illegals for tuition, even though the illegals didn't pay a penny in income tax.

The Republicans were stupid this election. Romney is an awful public speaker and Murdouck and Akin with their rape comments show how stupid they really are.

What does scare me is how people attacked successful people. Obama and his lib friends try to characterize people making 251-K as some sort of heartless villans rolling around in Lambos and Porsches. They got mad at Romney for paying low tax. How is that his fault??? Why do people attack Romney for following the law?

I'd like to close with this quote:

"Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes.”

-Judge Learned Hand in 1934.

 

[leaverus]

This country is doomed for failure. The entitlement lazy generation among the young (and I am young myself and see it among my peers) is going to doom this country. Also the illegals in California are just leeching off taxpayers like there is no tommorow.

It's mostly just the men; women are going to college/graduate/professional school in greater numbers than ever. That's the way it should be anyway. In the animal kingdom, the boy lion sleeps all day and lets the girl lion do all the work and bring him food. I'm retiring as soon as i find me a rich woman.

 

[hoyden]

It's mostly just the men; women are going to college/graduate/professional school in greater numbers than ever. That's the way it should be anyway. In the animal kingdom, the boy lion sleeps all day and lets the girl lion do all the work and bring him food. I'm retiring as soon as i find me a rich woman.

A perfect "achievement" for the feminist movement - total reversal of the roles.

Even this is a copy&paste from the society which has already lived through the mantra of wealth redistribution.

 

[2win]

It's mostly just the men; women are going to college/graduate/professional school in greater numbers than ever. That's the way it should be anyway. In the animal kingdom, the boy lion sleeps all day and lets the girl lion do all the work and bring him food. I'm retiring as soon as i find me a rich woman.

That's funny!
Anyway - I received a moderator email - informing me that my original post was found offensive for blacks, mexicans and latinos.
Facts - blacks voted for Obama.
- they vote(d) based on race ( so they racist)
- Mexicans voted for Obama
- a lot of them are "gardeners" - or they call themselves like that. As a gardener I found this a joke, because they mostly clean up leaves and cut grass.
- I am myself a foreigner and I don't feel any problems calling an illegal immigrant on his ( her) name
- This one could be one of my last posts here on SDN - just because some people are 'politically correct" - I mean - say what other people like to hear.
Guys - fight for your future and especially for your children future.
Don't let anybody steal USA !!!!!!
GOD BLESS!
2win

 

[Osteoimperfecta]

That's funny!
Anyway - I received a moderator email - informing me that my original post was found offensive for blacks, mexicans and latinos.
Facts - blacks voted for Obama.
- they vote(d) based on race ( so they racist)
- Mexicans voted for Obama
- a lot of them are "gardeners" - or they call themselves like that. As a gardener I found this a joke, because they mostly clean up leaves and cut grass.
- and I don't feel any problems calling an illegal immigrant on his ( her) name
- This one could be one of my last posts here on SDN - just because some people are 'politically correct" - I mean - say what other people like to hear.
Guys - fight for your future and especially for your children future.
Don't let anybody steal USA !!!!!!
GOD BLESS!
2win

I disagree, we do not win elections by saying stuff like this.

 

[2win]

I disagree, we do not win elections by saying stuff like this.

'
It is not about elections - it is about right vs wrong.
If you believe that saying what people want to hear in order to win an election -is the reason that Obama won - you are right.
Doesn't mean that this way is correct. Or good. Or honest.
I am out of this stuff. I have my land, my guns and above all, MY GOD!
You America ( progressive voters) can have the rest.
Atlas Shrugged.
2win