Romney failed veterans
Yes, I’m blaming Romney for failing veterans. He ran a piss-poor campaign to attract veterans. It’s been eating away at me that half of veterans in Virginia voted for Obama, if Fox News is to be believed. Of course, veterans in Virginia are going to be the hardest hit when sequestration takes hold because of the large presence of defense contractors there and the fact that many veterans are on their payroll there. But, back to the campaign. To their credit, the Romney campaign asked for help from milblogs early on, well, they reached out to Blackfive who reached out to the rest of us. I pledged that I would comment on the campaign in regards to politics related to veterans. But, you know what? That was the last we heard from them. Maybe others heard about it, but TAH didn’t.
You might remember that I wrote a piece last month about the Romney campaign and veterans. That was because I had to pester John Noonan, the Romney campaign’s defense policy adviser, because he happened to be one of my Facebook friends. Yes, I had to get answers on Romney’s veteran policy on Facebook.
Most of the issues I asked Noonan about, I also had to provide links to news stories because he didn’t know what I was talking about. Most of the news stories links were already on TAH. For example, when I asked Noonan about the Obama Administration shutting down Tricare Prime, he admitted in the email that I published as a post that he didn’t know anything about it because the Obama campaign hadn’t said anything about it. Why would they admit that they were screwing veterans in their campaign? It was Romney’s job to point it out, but he didn’t.
Just like in the debate, when Romney brought up sequestration, Obama’s answer was that sequestration isn’t going to happen. That short answer to a complicated question. Apparently, defense contractors think it’s going to happen, they’re already laying off people in prepartion of it. But Romney let Obama get away with his lie that the law wasn’t going into effect instead of pressing the issue.
The weekend of Hurricane Sandy, I wrote to Noonan again on Facebook and told him that I knew the campaign was going to cease out of respect for the tragedy and that they should mount an offensive on the blogs and let us carry Romney’s water for him during the campaign blackout. I didn’t hear anything back from him, not a word. Well, except the one video he sent everyone about Bill Clinton, which I dutifully posted.
Now, I’m not so conceited that I think I can influence entire elections with my little corner of the internet, but, if political campaigns can’t take advantage of the reach some of us have, they really don’t want to win. Do you honestly think that Obama would have got half of the veteran vote in Virginia if they had heard that Tricare Prime was being shut down in five western states in April? Everyone on this blog knows it, why didn’t the Romney campaign know it, and once they were told about it, why didn’t they hit Obama with it?
Yeah, Romney failed veterans by taking our votes for granted and it may have cost him the election.
Category: Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan, Veterans Issues
John, Romney ran a decent, pandering-free campaign.
One can fault him for using that model because he didn’t win. But if pandering to every damn splinter group is necessary to win elections, then we have a much, much bigger problem in America, one that will lead to our collapse in the none-too-distant future.
So I’m not particularly impressed with this post. It’s another highway sign with an arrow pointing to “PERDITION.”
Truthfully, it is not the candidate as much as it is our citizens. Look beyond the Presidential campaign, so many corrupt people either kept their positions or were elected in spite of their history. Jesse Jackson Jr. won and he’s been in a mental hospital since May and is under investigation for corruption! Elizabeth Warren, fake Indian and she practiced law without a license. Claire McCaskill, doesn’t pay taxes and her husband took stimulus money and worst of all Alan Grayson is back!!! For the life of me, I can’t wrap my head around WTF people are thinking! The soul of our country is rotting and it shows in who we elect to represent us!
I don’t know why any of you guys serve (or served), but I’m not in this for the college money and ugly military women. I want the greatest and strongest country in the world to also be and stay the richest, and if that means we have to cut defense spending and stop throwing pallets of money at contractors so we don’t spend ourselves into debtor’s prison, then that’s what we need to do.
This makes a hell of a lot more sense than killing Big Bird and having him for Thanksgiving dinner. If you’re cutting weight and your diet consists primarily of grilled chicken and ice cream, guess which one you’re better off eating less of?
We are the ice cream, gentlemen, and we must be prepared to deal with this fact. The blind allegiance of servicemembers and veterans to conservatives and the military-industrial complex must end if we are to survive and prosper as a country.
Folks here in Fairfax have little idea as to what they just voted for…
Passing on help from the milblog community is a failure of imagination. And probably a failure of senior campaign advisers of knowing what a milblog is.
@3 So what you are saying is that defense spending,as mandated in the constitution must be cut, but the non-sustainable entitlement and ‘green energy’ programs can stay fat and happy? And on top of that, we are going to be adding to our government spending once Obamacare kicks in next year.
I understand that cuts will need to be made all around in order to balance the budget, but show me what else is being cut. It looks like the only thing being cut IS defense, how is that going to balance the budget if other programs spending is not equally curbed.
What has happened is that those on the dole have discovered that they can vote for ‘bread and circuses’ on the taxpayer’s dime. It was the downfall of Rome, it WILL be the downfall of us, if we are not careful.
There IS no budget. Has not been one since 2009.
Beat me to it, Ex. Now, @#3, how about we stop throwing pallets of money into the real entitlements, like never-ending unemployment comp, SSI for the folks who’d rather file for some BS disability than work?
Gotta agree with RayRay, we have entered the era of Bread and Circuses.
I agree with you Poohbah.
In particular note the strong Latino voter support for obama.
I’m sure this happened because Romney would not compromise his views on illegal immigration. Romney held steadfast to his principles on a live national debate.
Not to mention that it is hard for republicans in general to avoid being labeled racist.
With the changing demographics of America, it is a sad thought to think that republicans will have to sell themselves out and pander to every single race in order to get elected.
No wonder the thought that our country is further going to be balkanized present in many people.
I admire the heck out of you guys for your service, but, respectfully, Romney didn’t lose because he took veterans for granted. Did that contribute? Possibly. Obama won this campaign (yes, there’s a difference between saying he won vs. Romney lost) because his campaign did a better job turning out their core voters. They did a good job at creating divisions with Hispanic, young, women and African American voters. Incumbent presidents have a distinct advantage, and Obama used his well. Halting deportations for young illegal immigrants. Eliminating work requirements for welfare recipients. Employer paid-for birth control. Plus, they were smarter on turn out. For Pete’s sake, they had a “barber shop and beauty salon” turn out program for AA voters. That’s really f’ing smart. I spent 7 years working on some of the top and toughest federal campaigns in the country. The Obama campaign capitalized on Romeny’s weaknesses (real or perceived) and made fewer mistakes.
Tman – and just wait until Obama introduces comprehensive immigration reform…the leaderless Republicans will trip over each other trying to be the loudest, harshest anti-immigration voice, and the media will trumpet the worst of it, and Obama will be certain to include enough poison pills to prevent even pro-immigration voices on our side from going along.
The Hispanic vote – the inexorably growing Hispanic vote – is lost, and gonna get MORE lost…
@6: “how is that going to balance the budget if other programs spending is not equally curbed.”
One ounce of garden variety soft-serve ice cream has just over 60 calories in it. The same amount of grilled chicken? Less than half that number. I consider the point made.
Profligate spending did not begin with the Obama administration. What you people call “entitlement programs” are an investment in the human capital of our nation necessary to ensure our future prosperity. They are also a fulfillment of our human obligations that come with living in cities and states as opposed to treetops and caves – we would not choose to keep in our company, for example, someone who ignores a baby teetering at the edge of a well or a gunshot victim bleeding out at their feet.
Our disagreement comes from what we think people are entitled to, and what percentage of the beneficiaries of our humanity we are willing to risk abusing our trust. I feel that one able bodied welfare cheat does not represent good cause for stopping benefits to five decent citizens who have fallen on hard times and need help keeping their families fed.
I agree wholeheartedly that we should encourage people to be able to stand on their own, but this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be there for them when they can’t. If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.
All of the exit polls said there were more Republicans in the lead. Now, we find out that more Dems won by landslide. Now, I’m not trying to say that there was any voting fraud, but… well, I only wish we had an independent investigation firm that could look into it besides Obama’s gestapo… I mean the Justice Department.
In fairness to Romney, in terms of EV count he did better than vets George Bush 41 in 1992, Bob Dole in 1996, John McCain in 2008…Romney’s problems were on a much greater scale: he got 61% of the white vote (though fewer Republicans voted than in 2008), but lost 93% of black vote, 71% of the hispanic vote, 65 % of single women, 60% of under 30 voters. White voters are GOP’s strongest base, but have shrunk from 87% in 1992 to 72% in 2012 as percentage of the voting block.
Based on 1992 models, Romney’s 61% of the white votes would have routed Obama in a landslide. If the majority of the people want big gov’t ( most blacks, latinos, and single women) than the GOP platform can’t survive on a national election basis. We could be looking at a United States of California…where its all Democrats all the time and Republicans are just token opposition. Not too much longer before Texas and Arizona – GOP strongholds, are purple or bluish states than its game over.
Yes, I suppose Romney’s campaign was pretty pandering-free, except for the amazing amount of time all of the GOP spent kissing Israel’s butt. Too bad Israelis don’t have a vote in our elections, but they do put more than their share into PAC’s. I wonder if Karl Rove has had to go to ground, lest the Mossad come looking for him, because all their money was pissed down a well.
If you look at Obama voter demographics, it’s clear that his campaign did a better job of motivating women, young people, and people of color. A lot of these people were probably a little bent at being dismissed as “the 47%” by Romney.
And there’s the crux of it. Romney preaching endlessly to his already-converted base, ignoring the people he needed to get elected. In other words, attacking the enemy where he ain’t.
IMO it was the fact that Romney was a pretty terrible candidate, just based on his resume. A liberal governor of the most liberal state in the country is supposed to be our next Reagan? I don’t see it. And a pampered billionaire to boot. The amazing thing isn’t that he lost, it’s that he didn’t lose worse than he did.
Seriously, Republicans need to at least give their core voters a reason to get out of bed. Nominate someone with a liberal history and a magical ‘road to damascus’ conversion doesn’t automatcally transform him into Ronald Reagan.
The other factor is that conservatives have been on the losing side of the cultural wars for a long time and that will only get worse as long as the pro-lifers hang like an albatross around their necks.
The GOP’s base is big business. When big business sent the jobs overseas, the GOP lost their base because their base got put out of work. Until that gets rectified, the GOP will continue to lose voters. The one vital component to the conservative platform is gone — to China. It needs to come back to America.
I’ll get down off my soapbox now, before I fall off and hurt myself.
Not really disagreeing with your overall sentiments here, Jonn, but I would phrase it differently. Romney really didn’t fail veterans because he, by definition, has not had an opportunity to either serve or fail veterans. He did not pander to vets, and we kinda missed that because we, too, have gotten used to being pandered to.
No, it is Obama who has failed veterans. He has also lied to and about veterans. Entirely too many US citizens chose to believe the lies instead of taking the time to discover that he really did lie about a multitude of things.
On the other hand, there are many more things about which he has been entirely honest. Scary things. And folks have chosen to either embrace those scary things or ignore the obvious.
” What you people call “entitlement programs” are an investment in the human capital…” Right. So, from your last paragraph, you consider yourself a Christian? Pleases allow me to point out a couple of things. #1 Free stuff, what ever shape or form: “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we might not be a burden to any of you; 9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, that you might follow our example. 10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone will not work, neither let him eat. 11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. 13 But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good. 14 And if anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that man and do not associate with him, so that he may be put to shame. 15 And yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (2Th 3:6 NAS)” Years ago, I spent a significant amount of time in my church body’s Food Pantry, and occasionally now, as the Spirit leads. To sum up that experience, coupled with my observations during the last six decades, free money, in what ever form, is the MOST ADDICTING SUBSTANCE IN HUMAN EXISTENCE. It didn’t even… Read more »
That was addressed to #12 Harrison btw … can’t submit posts that are too long.
No doubt SGT E.
I see yet another article today on Yahoo about the second guessing of what went wrong with Romney’s campaign, and one of the mentions was, you guessed it, Romney’s stance on illegal immigration.
When I watched that town hall meeting, when that hispanic lady asked Romney about immigration, I knew it was a ‘set-up’ to make Romney look bad for latinos.
Yet Romney did not pander or sell out, similar to his stance on abortion.
So now republicans are supposed to sell out and suck up to every single racial/ethnic/sexual group out there in order to get elected?
Sadly it looks like a lose lose situation to me in the near future and long term.
Harrison – Not sure where you are aligned (right, left or middle of the road) but, I really do not believe we want to completely do away with social entitlements. What I personally would like to see is that any one living here, categorized with “Illegal” in front of their status, be treated as just that, ILLEGAL.
NPR recieves enormous pledges from other areas, therefore, they are a profit generating organization and should not get the huge amount of taxpayer money they do receive.
No one wants to see anyone starve or go without in this country, however, if that individual starving has not tried to fend for themselves, so be it.
Welfare to single parents could be drastically reduced just by allowing the benefit to last one month past the first day of employment, freeing the individuals stress level of how they would survive until their first paycheck came in. Also by limiting the length of time allowed to stay on the benefit. I.E. find a job or we will find one for you until you do.
As for the military and defense of this country and the Constitution, we are not the “Ice Cream”, more like the mortar that holds the dairy barn together so all of those stinking cows can run around crapping on themselves and moo about every little thing they don’t like.
You say that 1 in 5 individuals smell up the benefits system, in my experience its more like 1 in 3. These people do not want to work, regardless of what they say to the outsider. When given the chance, they turn tail and walk away, yet they are the first to complain and the first to be in the hand out line.
Again, I am not sure where you come from, but, I live in a pretty impoverished part of the nation and we believe in taking care of the young, old and those that cannot do for themselves, not the able bodied, lazy entitlement driven individuals that suck the life out of our country and community.
GOP platform is about low taxes, small gov’t, entrepreneurship, rugged individualism, low to moderate welfare safety net. Yep, your party is in real trouble if more than half the people want big gov’t…as Bill O’Reilly said “The people want stuff — they like politicians to tell them they can have stuff.”
Romney’s campaign failed him in a number of ways. I can’t say with any degree of certainty whether it was up to his advisers or Romney himself. 1. He brought a smile to a gunfight. When the opening shots from Obama’s people were outright lies, misrepresentations and slander, he should have taken Officer Jim Malone’s advice from the movie the untouchables and hit back hard. Expose the lies for what they are. Don’t let him dodge you in a debate. Don’t let up on him in areas where he’s soft (like Benghazi). He should have thrown Obama’s lies right back in his face. Each debate should have spawned some demolishing TV ads. When Obama said Romney wanted to abandon the Auto industry, ads should have run with Obama’s quote and then showing the actual text where he said the auto’s should have had a structured, protected bankruptcy. 2. He let the media scare him off Sandy. While Obama was out there with his WH jacket on and looking presidential, Romney tried to help. Some say he did it in a poor way, but he tried and the MSM crucified him for it. Didn’t hear much about ole Mitt trying to help out after that. I think the MSM scared him off. And he lost time while Obama gained photo ops. 3. I like Ryan. I really do. I think he’s a damn decent guy. I think he’s one of the few people that have had the guts to put out a plan and get it passed (in the House anyway) for dealing with our impending national financial disaster. I like Ryan. I also absolutely think he was the wrong guy for the Veep slot this go around. Obvious choice? Rubio. There’s a good chunk of the Hispanic vote. Rubio shows that the RNC doesn’t hate brown people, no matter what they’re told. He would have shown people “hey, it’s ok to be Hispanic and be Conservative…Hispanics and Conservatives have a lot in common.” Another good choice? Christie. He’s a straight talker that does it in a way people LIKE. Likeability… Read more »
This is another viewpoint on why Romney lost. It’s very long, so instead of taking up space, I’m including the link.
http://news.newsmax.com/?K6Ov.toFBlJCLOZS2dE8Y57n63sfNLvAK&http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/why-romney-lost-obama/2012/11/07/id/463241?s=al&promo_code=109FA-1
I think one of the biggest mistakes was in not buying ads sooner, at a lower price. My TV didn’t quit on me until Oct.1 and I saw NO ads for Romney on TV before then.
Republicans have been branded “the Old White Men party.” That needs to change, and it will change when we come up with a viable solution to the illegal immigration problem; when the men in the party stop treating the women in the party as ornaments; and when we can pry the religious fundamentalists off our necks (someone already made that point, with which I agree.) And that’s just part of the domestic side of the house.
@26
I heard it suggested from one of the talking head pundits that the ’12 ticket was probably the last all-white ticket we’ll see from the Pubs for a while. I suspect that’s true. There is a lot of damage done to the party’s image over race.
@27 Agreed. And not just race, either. Until we crush the “legitimate rape” and “binders full of women” mentality, we’re last week’s fish-wrap as a party. Those two comments alone, rang so loudly with so many women that they heard nothing else. They not only have to stop making brain-dead comments like that, they have to stop THINKING them.
One thing’s for certain. The RNC needs to figure it out. The MSM is not on their side. Ever. Everything they do and say is going to be over-parsed well beyond any limit of what a normal person would consider reasonable.
That said, I was glad to see the two idiots running for the Senate losing their positions. Akin and Mourdock deserved their losses. However, I have a hard time putting “binders full of women” anywhere near that same category. Taken in context of the statement it was fine. But the lesson that should have been learned is the over-parsement that was sure to go on. Yes, it would have been better said as “binders full of women’s resumes”.
It is sad when Republicans have to not only contend with their opponent, but the media as well.
As a veteran myself (and father of a 3-tour infantryman), I was somewhat put off when Romney’s wife went so far as to try to compare Mormon missions to military service. But then again, running out of Grey Poupon probably counts as a hardship for her.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/18/ann-romney-mormon-missions-and-u-s-military-are-different-ways-of-serving/
>>>>If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.
I am going to rely on Caesar to take care of my people said Christ -NEVER
“If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.”
“we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat” 2 Thessalonians 3:10
@12 #2 To Whom does this duty belong? To stand aside and watch a fellow citizen suffer want, while it is in your hand to help? That is certainly not Christ-like. From the U.S. Constitution: Article I -The Legislative Powers Section 8 “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;” IMO, this contains the much abused “general Welfare” clause that has been used to justify all kinds of, and what simply boils down to, vote buying. If you go to this link, please scroll down to Art. I, Sec. 8 and examine the examples delineated therein. In every case, the issue addressed is for “the general Welfare.” This is NOT the case wrt issues like Social Security, Welfare (no matter the disingenuous title it has, or whether it is for individuals, corporations, farms,), etc. These all favor, at the taxpayer expense, individuals or groups of individuals, not the entire population of the country, as all of the others do. So, to address the original question, to whom does this duty belong (and I DO see it as a duty)? The Church. Why? 1. The multitude of admonitions and instructions in the Scriptures say so. Or, where does it say, “Go therefore unto Caesar for Thy daily bread and drink?” No, but it says to ask of Him, and He will provide – nearly always, this happens through His people. And that is because, over time, so long as we forget what lies behind and pursue the upward calling of Christ, we become more and more like Him. And it simply is His nature to Love. To care for the poor, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, shelter the homeless, etc, all of this flows forth from His Love, which we have, and by His grace, continues to grow and increase in us. 2. Government sponsored welfare, with all it’s bureaucracy, completely removes Love, and… Read more »
@24 Nik
Concur on Rubio VP pick.
We as a people failed, and now we have a proven failure enjoying a second term in office to push his social agenda and piss poor foreign policy that our enemies laugh at down our throats.
Romney and his campaign made some major mistakes, but “We the People” no longer exist. It is everyone putting their hand out, to include Veterans. Oh those evil republicans did not vote on a Jobs Plan… that was utter Bull Shit, but we got all pissed off when it did not come to a vote nonetheless, because it was “for us”.. needed or not. How easily bought and paid for.
#15 – seriously? I suggest you start reading something cogent and stop getting your post election analysis from Stormfront.org. There was no Israeli butt kissing…it was hardly necessary. This administration and the Likud/NRP/Shas ascendancy in Israel couldn’t be further apart ideologically. Israelis polled supported Romney overwhelmingly without said “butt kissing.”
Is Bob Walsh Gordon Duff in disguise? Sounds like it to me.
69% percent of the Jewish vote went to Obama. That’s down from 78% last election. It’s a trifle when it’s only 1% of the population, but I think you can find a hint in that very slight drift to Republicans. It takes quite a bit to make any demographic shift, but Jews, particularly in the northeast and Florida, will elect Arlen Specter, we’ll elect Guiliani, we’ll elect Jeb Bush.
I think if the GOP could stop being so overtly hostile to the RINOs, things could look better. The “Midwestern Firewall” would still break Republican, because what, they’re going to vote for Democrats for the first time ever? And you stand a better chance in the Northeast, then, too. Pennsylvania once went Reagan, and our demographics have not changed *that* much.
I disagree with this post’s main point. People are supposed to vote for how the candidate will run the country. Will he run it better or worse, with a better or worse direction? In this case, the best case for voting, and voting against Obama, was the 4 years of Obama that we have just been subjected to. It is an invalid argument that the better candidate did not offer you stuff, or stroke your ego, even if you deserved it. We are talking about direction of the country here, not the limited and narrow interests of specific groups.
Well said SteveC!
Like #13 said, I also tend to believe that the election was stolen because I refuse to believe that a majority of Americans enjoyed the last 4 years and want more. If Romney lost because of free phones, America is in the toilet.
I can understand why there was some particular bitterness exhibited by some of my friends over this election, and several of them are not white.
We have seemingly entered a point of no return, a balkanized America where it is no longer about what one can do for their country, but what the country can do for you.
Social programs, handouts, rewarding the breaking of laws, pandering to a multitude of racial/ethnic/gender/sexual groups, the list is endless.
You don’t have to be white to see this, and unfortunately as always republicans get the short end of the stick. Look at how republicans/conservatives of color are mercilessly crucified over their political beliefs, in the most cruel and mean spirited ways. Wasn’t the celebrity Stacy Dash getting death threats over her support for Romney? Yet Beyonce can write open letters gushing and brown nosing obama and get praised for it.
Our country just seems lost because of all these divisions and lack of unity.
I find the idea of selling out interesting. No one should abandon their principles to run for office. I think the republicans as a party need to discuss what are they as a party. Are they a party holding to the principle that there can be no compromise on abortion or immigration? If so that’s great, stick with it and have at it.
But understand that the content of the pond you have been fishing at has changed whether you like it or not. You can choose to keep fishing with the same bait and catching less fish every visit, or you can choose to examine what matters more. Abortion or a balanced budget? Immigration or a reasonable tax policy? You might not be able to get all 4 of those to go your way, so what are you willing to discuss as compromise positions? If you can’t compromise on any of those positions why should the democrats compromise any of theirs when it’s clear they already have the numbers? A war of attrition can’t be won by the side with less numbers. As republicans we can choose to dig in our heels and p1ss and moan that the whole world is wrong and we are right until we are so irrelevant to current discussions that we join the green party in vote counts.
Or we could approach immigration with some of our younger hispanic members and discuss the ideas they might have to solve a very large problem. We might even ask a few of the moderate women members what is a reasonable compromise on abortion. Then you might have the changing nature of the electorate view the party as an evolving entity, one that understands the nation changes as the times change.
Or not, p1ssing and moaning seems to work well for members from both sides of the aisle so we could just keep trying that.
You’re a fool Lilyea, why would Romney campaign ask for help from you? Anyone who reads your extermist blog is already voting for Romney anyway..
We welcome your stupidity and blatant ignorance, OG. It’s amusing. Extermist blog? Not sure if anyone here is in the bug killing business.
I’m sure that we’ll be “treated” to OG’s ignorance sometime in mid January, too. Can’t hardly wait.
It’s telling how she only came back here when her savior got re-elected. That’s a pretty chickenshit move, IMO.
She could do us all a favor and just stay away. She is what she is, and I agree with your characterization.
Yeah, speaking January, there is not much time left on the Congressional schedule for that sequestration issue:
Senate Recess – August 6th – December 31st
Target Senate Adjourn Date December 31st
October 6 – November 12 House Recess
November 17 – 26 House Recess
December 8 Hanukkah begins at sundown
December 7-10 House Recess
December 14 Target House Adjournment
December 25 – Christmas Day
If the Senate does not act, the sequester will take effect in: 054 DAYS 05HRS 33MIN from today at 4:27PM CST.
Not too much time left to work on that thing, eh? No, especially with nobody in the office at all.
Here’s part of an article about the impact of the sequestration effect, by Anita Campbell in “Small Business Trends”: What is sequester? Sequester refers to mandatory government spending cuts that are looming. On January 1, 2013, $109 billion in spending cuts will automatically kick in across the board, according to the Christian Science Monitor. But that’s just the first step. Over time $600 billion in cuts are required in defense programs, and another $600 billion in domestic programs. What is the fiscal cliff? The term “fiscal cliff” is a shorthand term for the impact of those cuts. A big deadline is looming on January 1, 2013 when the cuts start going into effect. In addition, certain tax increases will also go into effect. The resulting impact is so dramatic that it could throw the country back into a recession. In other words, we’re headed toward a financial precipice. What will be the impact? The proposed changes are so sudden and deep that the Congressional Budget Office estimates they would shave gross domestic product (GDP) by 4% in 2013, triggering another recession (i.e., negative growth). That could lead to higher unemployment, with a loss of 2 million jobs. Even if you believe that government spending should be cut, as I do, the problem is that mandated cuts will be made across the board. They may not be the right cuts. The analogy I use is that one day in your business you decide to finally address your red ink. You decide you need to cut expenses. But you do it by laying off your best sales people and not paying your insurance premiums. Then the sales orders slow to a trickle. Then you have a fire and lose all your inventory and equipment, with no insurance to replace it. Hmmm, maybe you should have found have other expenses to cut. How does sequester and the fiscal cliff affect small businesses? Sooner or later with high spending, there has to be a reckoning. However, when you cut spending across the board, you can cut the legs out from important programs that should… Read more »
>You’re a fool Lilyea, why would Romney campaign ask for help from you? Anyone who reads your extermist blog is already voting for Romney anyway..
I know you feel all tingly because your tampons/government paid for birth control is safe, but know one cares what you have to say..
It’s not Mitt, it’s you. You have not had a Presidential candidate break 300 electoral votes in 20 years. You have had in that time three big elections- all midterms. 1994, 2002 and 2010. Most of your “big” victories come from the fact that Democrats just don’t vote in midterms.
In 2000 the GOP “won” the electoral vote 271 to 266 (Gore had a faithless elector) with a 5 EV advantage. In 2004 Bush won 286-251 (Kerry had a dumb-ass elector who voted for Edwards for VP and Potus) for an advantage of 35 EVs.
Contrast this with the crushing electoral defeats you’ve experienced: 1992 Bill Clinton defeats George Bush Sr. 370- 168 a 202 EV victory. Four years later Clinton beat Dole 379-159 a 220 EV victory. In 2008 President Obama beat John McCain 365 to 173 for a 192 EV advantage. In 2012 he beat Mitt Romney 332 to 206 for an advantage of 126 EVs.
So if you average out our 4 wins over the past 20 years Democrats have an average margin of victory of a little over 18o EVs and Republican’s have an average of 20 EV’s margin of victory. Much of this is due to the “genius” Karl Rove’s strategy of getting 50% plus 1. It’s a strategy built on the knife edge, and the GOP is now getting cut with it.