or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama's Mandate and First 100 days
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama's Mandate and First 100 days - Page 2

Poll Results: What percentage of popular vote does Obama need to claim a mandate?

 
  • 50% (9)
    50-52%
  • 16% (3)
    53-54%
  • 11% (2)
    55-56%
  • 22% (4)
    more than 56%
18 Total Votes  
post #41 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

That right there is what it's all about.

And, clearly, if the GOP wants to compete, it's going to have to move to the left.

And, of course, inevitably, the liberal media is embarking on its usual orgy of "now Obama must govern from the center with lots of input from the right, because Americans really hate and fear one party rule and bipartisanship is the greatest virtue there is."

It's incredibly irritating, since this is a narrative that never applies to Republican rule. Some cable news show actually had the panel agreeing that the last time we had one party rule was....Carter.

It's like Republican rule is so normative that it doesn't even register as an unusual condition.

I expect the conventional wisdom to converge on the idea that Obama must resist the demands of the "anti-war left and Daily Kos crowd" so he can continue to govern like Bush, with a few tweaks.

Because his election clearly means that's what the people want.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #42 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And, of course, inevitably, the liberal media is embarking on its usual orgy of "now Obama must govern from the center with lots of input from the right, because Americans really hate and fear one party rule and bipartisanship is the greatest virtue there is."

It's incredibly irritating, since this is a narrative that never applies to Republican rule. Some cable news show actually had the panel agreeing that the last time we had one party rule was....Carter.

It's like Republican rule is so normative that it doesn't even register as an unusual condition.

I expect the conventional wisdom to converge on the idea that Obama must resist the demands of the "anti-war left and Daily Kos crowd" so he can continue to govern like Bush, with a few tweaks.

Because his election clearly means that's what the people want.

Exactly. While I think that Obama will likely govern as a pragmatist and will, inevitably, piss off folks like me and you, this election (despite Dick Armey's claims this morning on NPR) would seem to be a clear repudiation of not only the last 8 years, but of the last 40 years of GOP electioneering.

BTW, Avravosis on the "pox on both houses" meme.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #43 of 135
Thread Starter 
For all that's gone on and Obama's excellent campaign he moved only 3% of the voters to his side. There is a solid history of democrats over reaching when they get the hill and the white house. The number of independents is growing.
post #44 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Exactly. While I think that Obama will likely govern as a pragmatist and will, inevitably, piss off folks like me and you, this election (despite Dick Armey's claims this morning on NPR) would seem to be a clear repudiation of not only the last 8 years, but of the last 40 years of GOP electioneering.

BTW, Avravosis on the "pox on both houses" meme.

Good link. It reminds me of the other inevitable narrative-- that the honorable McCain must once again be forgiven, because the dreadful contingencies of reality once again forced him to behave like a fucking sack of shit. And he feels really bad about it.

How the hell has this guy sold so many people on the idea that he is a man of principle who is constantly being obliged to jettison his principles for reasons he feels bad about? I guess a little barbecue goes a long way, in certain circles.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #45 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

For all that's gone on and Obama's excellent campaign he moved only 3% of the voters to his side. There is a solid history of democrats over reaching when they get the hill and the white house. The number of independents is growing.

Bush won in 2004 by 3.5 million votes. Obama will likely be close that 8 million when it's all done

11.5 million votes is nothing to sneeze at, and is 8.9% of 130 million votes.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #46 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

For all that's gone on and Obama's excellent campaign he moved only 3% of the voters to his side. There is a solid history of democrats over reaching when they get the hill and the white house. The number of independents is growing.

Nothing in the history of overreaching will ever compare to what Bush and the Republicans did.

At any rate, you can do all the spinning you want; 2006 and 2008 are clear refutations of the entire edifice of Republican ideology and their half-assed, wedge issue, photo op, fear mongering bullshit.

And when Obama stumbles, as he will, what are the Republicans going to be offering? If it's more half-assed, wedge issue, photo op, fear mongering bullshit, do you expect those independent voters to rush back into the arms of people with nothing to offer?

You still haven't figured out just how far the right has wandered into the weeds. Look at that map that someone posted of which counties went more R or more D. Notice that "more R" was almost entirely Appalachia. Without some serious course correction, the Republicans are well on their way to being a regional party of the South and of old white people in the least populated states in the union.

What you're not getting is that it doesn't matter what Obama does, if the Republican Party continues their descent into irrelevancy.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #47 of 135
Ouch. And this trend is not bound to change much anytime soon with minorities.

post #48 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

the Republicans are well on their way to being a regional party of the South and of old white people in the least populated states in the union.

What you're not getting is that it doesn't matter what Obama does, if the Republican Party continues their descent into irrelevancy.

This is, as I understand it, the explicit purpose of Dean's 50-state strategy: box the GOP in in the South.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #49 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

This is, as I understand it, the explicit purpose of Dean's 50-state strategy: box the GOP in in the South.

And they called him a madman.......

Actually, I seem recall certain folks getting all deliriously happy that Dean was going to head up the DNC, since he was such a madman and radical and extremist and shrill partisan that he would no doubt drive the party off a cliff in short order.

If I might just say: HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahem. HA!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #50 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And they called him a madman.......

Well, Rahm Emmanual certainly did. In 2006, he and Dean battled over the strategy and Dean won. The result was GOP repudiation #1. Now, in 2008, the result is a rout of the GOP and incursions into the West. Am I hearing correctly that they're now looking at Texas as a possible target?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #51 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

For all that's gone on and Obama's excellent campaign he moved only 3% of the voters to his side. There is a solid history of democrats over reaching when they get the hill and the white house. The number of independents is growing.

True about the Independents. A lot of them abandoned McCain and for very good reasons. The GOP must soak their heads for at least 4 years now (some might call it 'waterboarding') and hopefully realize they've become the party of religious zealots and the military-industrial complex... they sold their souls to the devil(s) on any account.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #52 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Well, Rahm Emmanual certainly did. In 2006, he and Dean battled over the strategy and Dean won. The result was GOP repudiation #1. Now, in 2008, the result is a rout of the GOP and incursions into the West. Am I hearing correctly that they're now looking at Texas as a possible target?

So what's the deal with Obama wanting Emmanual for his Chief of Staff?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #53 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

So what's the deal with Obama wanting Emmanual for his Chief of Staff?

I have no fucking clue. I couldn't believe it when I heard it, but as a poli sci friend of mine pointed out, we don't know what their relationship is outside of politics. For all we know, they've been friends for ages.

And also, FWIW: KRUGMAN FOR TREASURY!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #54 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

Ouch. And this trend is not bound to change much anytime soon.


And don't forget that the Dems got 66% of the under-thirty vote. That's the number that sounds the death knell for the right.

For the last forty years the Republicans have pored their resources into to developing their base, in a manner pretty much guaranteed to erode the faith of, if not flat out horrify, everybody else. That base is a shrinking demographic. Everybody else is growing. The end.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #55 of 135
Merkley just won in OR. The only senate race left uncalled now is MN, right? Dems = 57 in the Senate, now.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #56 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I have no fucking clue. I couldn't believe it when I heard it, but as a poli sci friend of mine pointed out, we don't know what their relationship is outside of politics. For all we know, they've been friends for ages.

Yeah. I knew that Obama would immediately begin to freak me out with pragmatic but uninspiring choices. Maybe it's just a nod to the power bases he doesn't already control, but you'd think he'd be pretty damn confident, at this point, in his own circle. I just hope to fuck he can resist the siren song of villagers and not appoint a Republican to State. We really need to start killing the "Dems are week on national security" nonsense.

Quote:
And also, FWIW: KRUGMAN FOR TREASURY!

Hells yeah!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #57 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Merkley just won in OR. The only senate race left uncalled now is MN, right? Dems = 57 in the Senate, now.

The Franken people seem to think they have a pretty good shot. Apparently Coleman thinks the election is too important to allow a recount. Gotta love your Republicans.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #58 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

The Franken people seem to think they have a pretty good shot. Apparently Coleman thinks the election is too important to allow a recount. Gotta love your Republicans.

I'm figuring Olympia Snowe is going to be very important in days to come.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #59 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Merkley just won in OR. The only senate race left uncalled now is MN, right? Dems = 57 in the Senate, now.

I'm really glad about this. Gordon Smith had this really dumb smear commercial about Merkley showing him at a BBQ chewing food in slow motion to emphasize the negative things they were saying " Jeff Merkley likes to raise taxes " etc.

Then of course there was Smith's commercial " Reaching across the aisle to Obama ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #60 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post


11.5 million votes is nothing to sneeze at, and is 8.9% of 130 million votes.

Shhhhh, Floorjack is giving us the facts, don't spoil them with your liberal, fancy pants maths!
post #61 of 135
Well I haven't chimed in yet, so here goes:

First, congratulations to Obama. I sincerely wish him success. I am quite apprehensive about what he's going to try and implement, but I still hope for the best.

Now that said, I think many of you are making a very large mistake wrt demographics and voting trends. While it's true that Republicans are going to have to reach out to minorities as demographics change, the nation is not riding some new "blue wave" of liberalism.

Gilsch points out this:

Quote:
I've said it all along. The country is changing, the demographics are changing(look at the new party registrations) with the minorities playing an ever increasing role in politics while the GOP is getting left behind. If you couldn't see the difference between the crowds at the Dem and Rep rallies, one word: Lenscrafters.

These maps are pretty interesting. It's a bigger shift than people think.

I simply disagree with that assessment. McCain lost for a few "macro" reasons:

-The economy
-Dislike of Bush
-A bad campaign with little discipline.

Then we have the "micro" reasons:

-He didn't do as well with senior citizens as he needed to.
-He lost whites overall
-He lost moderates and independents

Young voters turned out in about the same numbers as they did in the past, so that wasn't it. It wasn't that the country really embraced what Obama was saying. They embraced the vague notion of "Change." Obama ran an excellent campaign, almost replacing his name with the word "change." He ran much more to the center in the general election, as most Democrats have done. This is one reason he reacted to aggressively to the criticism of his "spread the wealth" comments. In another time with a better opponent, this would have sunk him. McCain used it and made some inroads, but it was too late. He also waited until the final week to really use the Ayers and Wright associations to his advantage.

So I think that it's misguided to assume that this election represents a long term trend. Time will tell.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #62 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Time will tell.

No, The End is Near, now that a black muslim Marxist is in power.

How God allowed this to happen is a mystery.

Unless it was punishment for all that homosexuality, book readin' and not prayin' hard enough.
post #63 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Well I haven't chimed in yet, so here goes:

First, congratulations to Obama. I sincerely wish him success. I am quite apprehensive about what he's going to try and implement, but I still hope for the best.

Now that said, I think many of you are making a very large mistake wrt demographics and voting trends. While it's true that Republicans are going to have to reach out to minorities as demographics change, the nation is not riding some new "blue wave" of liberalism.

Gilsch points out this:



I simply disagree with that assessment. McCain lost for a few "macro" reasons:

-The economy
-Dislike of Bush
-A bad campaign with little discipline.

Then we have the "micro" reasons:

-He didn't do as well with senior citizens as he needed to.
-He lost whites overall
-He lost moderates and independents

Young voters turned out in about the same numbers as they did in the past, so that wasn't it. It wasn't that the country really embraced what Obama was saying. They embraced the vague notion of "Change." Obama ran an excellent campaign, almost replacing his name with the word "change." He ran much more to the center in the general election, as most Democrats have done. This is one reason he reacted to aggressively to the criticism of his "spread the wealth" comments. In another time with a better opponent, this would have sunk him. McCain used it and made some inroads, but it was too late. He also waited until the final week to really use the Ayers and Wright associations to his advantage.

So I think that it's misguided to assume that this election represents a long term trend. Time will tell.

Well, with all due respect to your powers of prognostication, SDW, you flat out told us that McCain had won the election by suspending his campaign to attend to the financial crisis. You know, that it was a master stroke that left Obama floundering and looking foolish.

So I'm going to go ahead and assume that your sense that this election does not represent any significant trend means that we're in the midst of one of the greatest realignments in history.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #64 of 135
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post

No, The End is Near, now that a black muslim Marxist is in power.

How God allowed this to happen is a mystery.

Unless it was punishment for all that homosexuality, book readin' and not prayin' hard enough.

What are you even talking about? Is this a comment on the some points that SDW2001 has touched on in the past?
post #65 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I simply disagree with that assessment. McCain lost for a few "macro" reasons:

-The economy
-Dislike of Bush
-A bad campaign with little discipline.

Then we have the "micro" reasons:

-He didn't do as well with senior citizens as he needed to.
-He lost whites overall
-He lost moderates and independents

I think you're forgetting the "macro" reason which forms the base for all your "micro" reasons:

Palin.

The Palin pick is also highly intertwined with the "bad campaign with little discipline" reason.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #66 of 135
Thread Starter 
The media came out hard against Palin. Now that the election is over we're learning that Palin butted heads with campaign staff specifically those staff that were to get her ready for ... interviews. A bad pick with good staff could have worked. A good pick with bad staff could have worked. An unprepared Palin with staff conflicts didn't work.
post #67 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Well, with all due respect to your powers of prognostication, SDW, you flat out told us that McCain had won the election by suspending his campaign to attend to the financial crisis. You know, that it was a master stroke that left Obama floundering and looking foolish.

So I'm going to go ahead and assume that your sense that this election does not represent any significant trend means that we're in the midst of one of the greatest realignments in history.

Yes wasn't it something like " Boy you guys sure are going to be disappointed on election night ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #68 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Young voters turned out in about the same numbers as they did in the past, so that wasn't it.

Young voter turnout likely sets new record

Quote:
About 50 percent of those ages 18-28 voted, early reports show

Young Americans can finally shake off their reputation for civic apathy. Young people appear to have voted in higher numbers than ever before, preliminary reports show. And analysts say this demographic’s heavy tilt toward Barack Obama was a determining factor in his historic victory.

An estimated 24 million Americans ages 18 to 29 voted in this election, an increase in youth turnout by at least 2.2 million over 2004, reports CIRCLE, a non-partisan organization that promotes research on the political engagement of young Americans. That puts youth turnout somewhere between 49.3 and 54.5 percent, meaning 19 percent more young people voted this year than in 2004, estimates John Della Volpe, the director of polling for the Harvard Institute of Politics. And that’s a conservative estimate, Della Volpe says.

“It looks like the highest turnout among young people we’ve ever had,” says Della Volpe, adding that 12 percent more Americans in the overall electorate voted. The youth share of the vote also rose to 18 percent — a one-percent increase over the last three presidential elections.

College campuses revel in pivotal political role

Quote:
In past elections, the youth vote fell short of expectations, reinforcing the belief that young people could not make a difference at the polls. This time, they accounted for a larger share of the electorate than the over-65 age group, with 18 percent of the 133 million votes cast.

"The youth vote has fulfilled its promise," said John Della Volpe, polling director of the Institute of Politics at Harvard University.


Almost 1000 students vote at 7am at Penn State University


People are assuming that the youth vote didn't show up because it only increased 1% from last election. The thing is that it did show up, but only for the Democrats. What happened is that only the Independent, Green, Nader and other anarchy kids who didn't think it worth worth voting for Obama.
post #69 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

What are you even talking about? Is this a comment on the some points that SDW2001 has touched on in the past?

Haven't you been reading about Obama the socialist?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #70 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Young voter turnout likely sets new record



College campuses revel in pivotal political role




Almost 1000 students vote at 7am at Penn State University


People are assuming that the youth vote didn't show up because it only increased 1% from last election. The thing is that it did show up, but only for the Democrats. What happened is that only the republican youth decided that this election wasn't worth it.

As many times as I've tried to explain to SDW that record numbers of young people were motivated and registering he just didn't seem to want to hear that.

Working on a college campus it's a little hard to miss.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #71 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

The media came out hard against Palin. Now that the election is over we're learning that Palin butted heads with campaign staff specifically those staff that were to get her ready for ... interviews. A bad pick with good staff could have worked. A good pick with bad staff could have worked. An unprepared Palin with staff conflicts didn't work.

Or maybe a pit bull with lipstick is still a pit bull, or a pig in high heels is still a pig, or a chicken with lips is still a chicken.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #72 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I simply disagree with that assessment. McCain lost for a few "macro" reasons:

He ran much more to the center in the general election, as most Democrats have done. This is one reason he reacted to aggressively to the criticism of his "spread the wealth" comments. In another time with a better opponent, this would have sunk him. McCain used it and made some inroads, but it was too late. He also waited until the final week to really use the Ayers and Wright associations to his advantage.

So I think that it's misguided to assume that this election represents a long term trend. Time will tell.

You know SDW, I really really hope what you posted above is what the Rep leadership believe as well because....well, the numbers prove otherwise. Ignore the writing on the wall at your own peril. Please. Oh, and how convenient of you to "forget" Palin. One of the worst VP candidates ever no ifs ands or buts. Way to go Mac!!
Quote:
Young voters turned out in about the same numbers as they did in the past, so that wasn't it

Uhh, ok. And no they didn't. http://www.civicyouth.org/
Quote:
About 22-24 Million Young Americans Go to the Polls:
Up by at Least 2.2 Million from 2004

Young voters favor Obama over McCain 66% to 32%; 18% of all voters were young

Medford/Somerville, MA - Preliminary CIRCLE projections show the turnout for young Americans (ages 18-29) is higher than in 2004, a year of significant increase, and is much higher than it was in 2000 and 1996.

Those are preliminary, so they could be lower or higher. Here's the interesting part though:
Quote:
Young voters favored the winner of this election by more than a two-to-one margin, forming a major part of the winning coalition. Overall, voters chose Obama over McCain by a much narrower margin of about 52% to 46%. This gap in presidential choice by age is unprecedented. The average gap from 1976 through 2004 was only 1.8 percentage points, as young voters basically supported the same candidate as older voters in most elections.

Emphasis mine. The GOP has become the OGP. Old Geyser Party......and I love it.

Edit: My bad. Didn't see Artman's links.
post #73 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And don't forget that the Dems got 66% of the under-thirty vote. That's the number that sounds the death knell for the right.

For the last forty years the Republicans have pored their resources into to developing their base, in a manner pretty much guaranteed to erode the faith of, if not flat out horrify, everybody else. That base is a shrinking demographic. Everybody else is growing. The end.

The total numbers of people in each category are the more important numbers, not percentages.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #74 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

Edit: My bad. Didn't see Artman's links.

No, please provide links. SDW needs all the tru-er-help he can get.
post #75 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

The total numbers of people in each category are the more important numbers, not percentages.

Yep. And when the total number of your folks are shrinking and the total numbers of the other folks are growing, you have a problem.

Funny thing about "young people"-- they have this way of taking over. I think it's called "mortality."
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #76 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Yep. And when the total number of your folks are shrinking and the total numbers of the other folks are growing, you have a problem.

Funny thing about "young people"-- they have this way of taking over. I think it's called "mortality."

You are a piece of work, I love it.
post #77 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Yep. And when the total number of your folks are shrinking and the total numbers of the other folks are growing, you have a problem.

Funny thing about "young people"-- they have this way of taking over. I think it's called "mortality."

I think you just exposed the fatal flaw in O'Reilly's ratings dominance.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #78 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Well, with all due respect to your powers of prognostication, SDW, you flat out told us that McCain had won the election by suspending his campaign to attend to the financial crisis. You know, that it was a master stroke that left Obama floundering and looking foolish.

So I'm going to go ahead and assume that your sense that this election does not represent any significant trend means that we're in the midst of one of the greatest realignments in history.

Yes, I thought that was a good move at the time. But then he bungled it within about two hours, mostly with what Letterman did to him (over the top, but he looked dumb nonetheless). The thing with not having the debate, then having it didn't help him either. It all comes down to what a shitty campaign he ran. He had many opportunities to nail Obama. I think if he had refused to debate to work on the bailout, it might have helped. And he didn't make enough of Ayers, Wright and Obama's complete inexperience...not until it was too late.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #79 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yes, I thought that was a good move at the time.

Of course you did.

Quote:
It all comes down to what a shitty campaign he ran.

Yes. It does.

Quote:
He had many opportunities to nail Obama.

And that is where you go off the rails and don't seem to see what the rest of us do about this election. "Nailing" Obama is the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove strategy of the utter destruction of the opponent by any means necessary. Obama's campaign hinged on the repudiation of those tactics. Why do you think he ran a campaign about "hope," for God's sake?

Quote:
I think if he had refused to debate to work on the bailout, it might have helped.

No. It would have completely destroyed his campaign. Think about what you're saying: threatening to not debate looked bad, but REALLY not debating would have worked? Aree you serious? It made him look erratic and inconsistent. It made him look like he panics.

Quote:
And he didn't make enough of Ayers, Wright and Obama's complete inexperience...not until it was too late.

We had weeks and months of ALL THREE of those and none of them stuck. They didn't stick for the following reasons:

1) It's more of the "destroy the opposition," which, as I said before, is a strategy that has worked for the GOP for 40 years and that, I hope, has just been resoundingly repudiated.

2) No one cares about Ayers except the core of the GOP.

3) You can't make an argument for inexperience and not make an argument for "more of the same." It also doesn't help that at the same time people were making the tortured argument that Palin was super-experienced that it was abundantly clear that she was stunningly ill equipped.

This is the problem, SDW, that adda and I pointed out earlier when we were laughing at Redstate. The GOP doesn't need to rethink strategy. It needs to rethink itself, its coalition, and how it campaigns.

Some advice (since y'all do it every time the Dems lose)

Step one: tell the evangelicals to fuck off.
Step two: elevate the libertarian wing of the party.
Step three: cut out the wedge issues.

Oh, and clearly, move to the left.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #80 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yes, I thought that was a good move at the time. But then he bungled it within about two hours, mostly with what Letterman did to him (over the top, but he looked dumb nonetheless).

"He bungled it" but it was Letterman's fault? lol Gotta work on that excuse machine there "my friend".

Quote:
And he didn't make enough of Ayers, Wright and Obama's complete inexperience...not until it was too late.

No honest person could've done more to talk about Obama's inexperience by picking an even more inexperienced and a total joke of a candidate like Palin.

Palin was excellent at reading from the teleprompter and making it look natural. Take away the teleprompter and she's a complete ignorant whacko idiot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama's Mandate and First 100 days