What the 2012 election taught us

What the 2012 election taught us

There are 10313 comments on the The Washington Post story from Nov 6, 2012, titled What the 2012 election taught us. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

We've been scouring the data for clues as to what we should learn from what happened tonight as President Obama relatively easily claimed a second term.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

Since: May 13

United States

#10579 May 22, 2013
IRS admits planting question so to admit what they had denied for 18 months.

Hey Liberals, today they come for us tomorrow they will come for you, idiot.
Stoneman

Boise, ID

#10581 May 22, 2013
Oh look. Weiner is running for mayor of NYC.

You lefties are amazing. We have a GOP president 40 years ago that tried to cover up when a group of over zealous supporters broke into a political headquarters and stole information, he was run out of office and lived in exile in California for the rest of his life. His name is synonymous with evil to this day.

You have a president whose administration targets thousands of citizens for IRS audits, harassment, phone tapping, and more for years, you think he's the best president in history.

A GOP congressman from Indiana was caught sending suggestive text messages to a page, he was run out of office in less than two months back in the 90's.

You had a president that had his genitalia sucked and ejaculated in the face of a page, you regard him as a "statesman" and have him speak at your Socialist/Democrat convention years later.

You lefties are worthless, parasitic slime who vote for politicians that give you free stuff. Don't try to whitewash it with some high-minded principles about "caring".

That's how a guy who shows off his unit to an employee and disgraces his wife is perfectly OK as a mayoral candidate. As long as he promises free stuff to the people of NYC, that's cool.
bobgurs

Pittsburgh, PA

#10582 May 22, 2013
youtube.com/watch... Get Over It lets party

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10583 May 22, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
Oh look. Weiner is running for mayor of NYC.
You lefties are amazing. We have a GOP president 40 years ago that tried to cover up when a group of over zealous supporters broke into a political headquarters and stole information, he was run out of office and lived in exile in California for the rest of his life. His name is synonymous with evil to this day.
You have a president whose administration targets thousands of citizens for IRS audits, harassment, phone tapping, and more for years, you think he's the best president in history.
A GOP congressman from Indiana was caught sending suggestive text messages to a page, he was run out of office in less than two months back in the 90's.
You had a president that had his genitalia sucked and ejaculated in the face of a page, you regard him as a "statesman" and have him speak at your Socialist/Democrat convention years later.
You lefties are worthless, parasitic slime who vote for politicians that give you free stuff. Don't try to whitewash it with some high-minded principles about "caring".
That's how a guy who shows off his unit to an employee and disgraces his wife is perfectly OK as a mayoral candidate. As long as he promises free stuff to the people of NYC, that's cool.
Democrats, do you know where your Weiner is?
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10584 May 22, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
We're really sorry your side lost the Cold War.
Oh, I see. You believe that communism is such a great form of government that it is much better than what we have here.

The communism as practiced in the Soviet Union was dysfunction and they were bluffing most of the time. They knew they could never win a war against the US. To imply that Reagan in any way "won" the cold war is to completely ignore the actual history. Reagan was a buffoon. He is largely responsible for the disaster we now have. Of course bush jr put his policies on steroids and killed the middle class.

It is disappointing that you think winning the cold war means it's perfectly fine to lose decency in the US.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10585 May 22, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I see. You believe that communism is such a great form of government that it is much better than what we have here.
The communism as practiced in the Soviet Union was dysfunction and they were bluffing most of the time. They knew they could never win a war against the US. To imply that Reagan in any way "won" the cold war is to completely ignore the actual history. Reagan was a buffoon. He is largely responsible for the disaster we now have. Of course bush jr put his policies on steroids and killed the middle class.
It is disappointing that you think winning the cold war means it's perfectly fine to lose decency in the US.
You truly read too much of your won propaganda.
But, let's review the history of the Cold War just to see what conclusion we arrive at:

Let's start at the beginning when the most prominent Democrat in the country aside from the sitting president, Alger Hiss, the administrative architect of the UN and the reconstruction of the US State Department, was convicted while spying for the Soviet Union, which almost caused Truman to lose the election.(We'll get to this later with factual events in evidence... it took the communists in the Democratic Party 20 years to recover from the Alger Hiss conviction.)
Concurrent with this, Ho Chi Minh goes to Paris and asks the French to return to Vietnam to remove the Chinese Army that refused to leave after they had completed their mission of monitoring the exodus of the Japanese Army after the end of World War II.
How about you give us the next significant event in the history of the Cold War?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10586 May 22, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I see. You believe that communism is such a great form of government that it is much better than what we have here.
The communism as practiced in the Soviet Union was dysfunction and they were bluffing most of the time. They knew they could never win a war against the US. To imply that Reagan in any way "won" the cold war is to completely ignore the actual history. Reagan was a buffoon. He is largely responsible for the disaster we now have. Of course bush jr put his policies on steroids and killed the middle class.
It is disappointing that you think winning the cold war means it's perfectly fine to lose decency in the US.
there is something else in your post that irks the hell out of me. You give some excuse why every time some dictator uses Marxist communism to take control of a country didn't really institute Marxist communism.
There is a reason why this never happened in history. It is because Marxism is diametrically opposed to the genetically programmed instinct of humans to stratify their societies. Therefore, the idealistic Marxist ideology in the Utopian communist system is an impossibility among humans in any and all social structures managed by humans.
Marxism was tried in EVERY instance where it was forced on the population. It failed because it is an impossibility.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#10587 May 22, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Apple is holding most of its wealth overseas to dodge corporate income tax- some 2/3's of their income.
They pay 16 million a day but would owe 45 million a day.
So what? If we didn't have Barack Hussein Obama the National Debt wouldn't be 16 Trillion.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10588 May 22, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
there is something else in your post that irks the hell out of me. You give some excuse why every time some dictator uses Marxist communism to take control of a country didn't really institute Marxist communism.
There is a reason why this never happened in history. It is because Marxism is diametrically opposed to the genetically programmed instinct of humans to stratify their societies. Therefore, the idealistic Marxist ideology in the Utopian communist system is an impossibility among humans in any and all social structures managed by humans.
Marxism was tried in EVERY instance where it was forced on the population. It failed because it is an impossibility.
You sure are out there. I never spoke in broad generalities about dictators using Marxism. I simply said that as practiced in the Soviet Union, it didn't work; thus no need for us to take it down, because it had to fall on its own. Then you sort of agree that it can't work, but you give the excuse because it is opposed to stratification. Is that your code word for slavery? Those at the top stratify to have slaves at the bottom doing all the work and getting none of the reward for that work? That implies you favor stratification and slavery. I understand that is one of the main goals of conservatism, but I am surprised a bit that you openly imply it.

So, you agree it can't work, but give Reagan credit for bringing it down, when it had to fall on its own. So what did Reagan have to do with it?

Which groups of people should be the slaves in your version of society? Will they receive medical care? You know the owner will want to keep them healthy to keep them working at peak efficiency. Will they get healthy food? That would be better than many now who can't afford food on what the giant corporations pay.

I would like a link to where you got the idea that

"the genetically programmed instinct of humans to stratify their societies."

as that is disgusting to me.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10589 May 22, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You truly read too much of your won propaganda.
.... it took the communists in the Democratic Party 20 years to recover from the Alger Hiss conviction.)
Concurrent with this, Ho Chi Minh goes to Paris and asks the French to return to Vietnam to remove the Chinese Army that refused to leave after they had completed their mission of monitoring the exodus of the Japanese Army after the end of World War II.
How about you give us the next significant event in the history of the Cold War?
I see you were convinced by McCarthyism that Lucille Ball was a communist because of her red hair, and the fact that she married a Latino. It is amazing you are still buying that garbage more than 60 years after it was proven false. I guess you are trying to divert from the massive connections between the bush family and Hitler's extreme fascism.

The next event in the cold war was when Nixon sabotaged the peace treaty Johnson arranged with N. Vietnam to end the war. Nixon committed treason to stop the peace and get elected president. Don't try to deny it. We have the phone records proving proving it. They were released by the CIA a few years ago as they were wiretapping president Johnson in a call with Everett Dirksen.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10590 May 22, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
You sure are out there. I never spoke in broad generalities about dictators using Marxism. I simply said that as practiced in the Soviet Union, it didn't work; thus no need for us to take it down, because it had to fall on its own. Then you sort of agree that it can't work, but you give the excuse because it is opposed to stratification. Is that your code word for slavery? Those at the top stratify to have slaves at the bottom doing all the work and getting none of the reward for that work? That implies you favor stratification and slavery. I understand that is one of the main goals of conservatism, but I am surprised a bit that you openly imply it.
So, you agree it can't work, but give Reagan credit for bringing it down, when it had to fall on its own. So what did Reagan have to do with it?
Which groups of people should be the slaves in your version of society? Will they receive medical care? You know the owner will want to keep them healthy to keep them working at peak efficiency. Will they get healthy food? That would be better than many now who can't afford food on what the giant corporations pay.
I would like a link to where you got the idea that
"the genetically programmed instinct of humans to stratify their societies."
as that is disgusting to me.
How about a link to an education.
Humans are social animals. Humans organize into societies. Humans have never existed in an unstratified society anywhere ever.
Now, just what conclusion would you draw from those facts?
You can use your own personal life's experiences. Tell us about any society you recall being part of in you rentire life that wasn't stratified.
You can't. It never happened. It's not too difficult to figure out why all of you frauds that ludicrously call yourselves "liberals" are so miserable and are attracted to organizations that revolve around hate. You hate yourself. It goes so far that even the description of your very basic instinct is disgusting to you.

Now, to your first point. I've read a thousand times from a thousand different Marxist appologists and denialists the context of your post.
Marxism is impossible among humans because humans are genetically programmed to a) form societies; and b) stratify those societies.

You should augment your indoctrination with an education.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10591 May 22, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you were convinced by McCarthyism that Lucille Ball was a communist because of her red hair, and the fact that she married a Latino. It is amazing you are still buying that garbage more than 60 years after it was proven false. I guess you are trying to divert from the massive connections between the bush family and Hitler's extreme fascism.
The next event in the cold war was when Nixon sabotaged the peace treaty Johnson arranged with N. Vietnam to end the war. Nixon committed treason to stop the peace and get elected president. Don't try to deny it. We have the phone records proving proving it. They were released by the CIA a few years ago as they were wiretapping president Johnson in a call with Everett Dirksen.
You seem to have missed the key episode of US history.

I was convinced Alger Hiss was convicted while spying for the Soviet Union. I was convinced the Alger Hiss conviction propelled Nixon onto the national political stage. I was convinced that McCarthy was primarily trying to repeat the Nixon feat by continuing the investigation into the State Department that was restructured by Alger Hiss. My conclusion is, McCarthy was lured away from the investigation into the State Department and included Hollywood in his assault. Nixon would not have been as stupid. I'm sure there were lures thrown at Nixon. He was smart enough to outwit them and ultimately got Alger Hiss convicted. It took the communists in the Democratic Party 20 years to recover from the Alger Hiss conviction. That brings us to 1968.
Now, you say things like "Nixon sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks", but you don't bakc your bullshit up with any facts.
Let's see how much you really know.

The Cold War

At the beginning of the Cold War, Alger Hiss, administrative architect of the UN and the restructuring of the State Department after the war was convicted while spying for the Soviet Union.
Concurrent with this, Ho Chi Minh goes to Paris and asks the French to return to Vietnam and remove the Chinese army that refused to leave Vietnam after they had finished their assignment of monitoring the exodus of the Japanese army.
The French bring elections to Vietnam.
...
Your turn. What is the next major event in the Cold War?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10592 May 22, 2013
LiberalsAreHypocrites wrote:
<quoted text>
They earned it WITHOUT the help of the government but IN SPITE of.
It is THEIR money, not your regime's money.
It's America's money.

The FACTS are: they are hiding 2/3s of their income / wealth in Ireland.

It isn't illegal- but they are not paying taxes on it.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10593 May 22, 2013
LiberalsAreHypocrites wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does Liberals hate success so much?
Why do conservatives dodge their tax burdens but pretend they love America?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10594 May 22, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
Oh look. Weiner is running for mayor of NYC.
You lefties are amazing. We have a GOP president 40 years ago that tried to cover up when a group of over zealous supporters broke into a political headquarters and stole information, he was run out of office
High crimes and misdemeanors.

Not for overtime parking.

And they were not overzealous "supporters", they were from *HIS* official organization campaign.

Orchestrated burglars, by his campaign.

PS: He resigned rather than face certain impeachment. Of both parties.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10595 May 23, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's America's money.
The FACTS are: they are hiding 2/3s of their income / wealth in Ireland.
It isn't illegal- but they are not paying taxes on it.
Here's a basic concept you just don't get about the United States:

The money in the United States doesn't belong to the country. It belongs to the individual who possesses that money in accordance with applicable laws passed and enacted according to the requirements specified in the Constitution.
If you need clarification on this particular issue, read the goddam 4th and 5th Amendments in the Bill of Rights, idiot.

If you want money, get a fucking job and earn it.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10596 May 23, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
High crimes and misdemeanors.
Not for overtime parking.
And they were not overzealous "supporters", they were from *HIS* official organization campaign.
Orchestrated burglars, by his campaign.
PS: He resigned rather than face certain impeachment. Of both parties.
Had the communist Alger Hiss not been convicted while spying for the Soviet Union at the beginning of the Cold War, nobody would even have remembered Richard Nixon's name. It took the communists in the Democratic Party 20 years to recover from the Alger Hiss conviction, which brings us to 1968.
Since you mentioned it, please comment on John Kerry burglarizing his opponent's campaign headquarters almost exactly three months to the day after the Watergate burglary occurred.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10597 May 23, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
How about a link to an education.
Humans are social animals. Humans organize into societies. Humans have never existed in an unstratified society anywhere ever.
Now, just what conclusion would you draw from those facts?
You can use your own personal life's experiences. Tell us about any society you recall being part of in you rentire life that wasn't stratified.
You can't. It never happened. It's not too difficult to figure out why all of you frauds that ludicrously call yourselves "liberals" are so miserable and are attracted to organizations that revolve around hate. You hate yourself. It goes so far that even the description of your very basic instinct is disgusting to you.
Now, to your first point. I've read a thousand times from a thousand different Marxist appologists and denialists the context of your post.
Marxism is impossible among humans because humans are genetically programmed to a) form societies; and b) stratify those societies.
You should augment your indoctrination with an education.
I would argue that most labor unions are non-stratified. Yes, they democratically elected a president, essentially a spokesperson, but that role moves to whomever is willing to take it. As to other examples, I have groups of friends that are not stratified. There is no spokesperson, no "I'm better than you" comments, just people enjoying each others company.
The pecking order arises in many different organizations, and is often institutionalized. That it exists I can understand as people ofttimes do it to themselves, but I oppose doing it institutionally.
As to Marxism, I don't support it. I do not support communism, and I don't remember any democrat supporting it. There may have been some, but it is a far cry from the democratic party. Your McCarthyist mantra of communists here and communists there is just absurd in these times. Communism failed as a form of government, just as ours is failing now. Nor do I support the democratic party. They are almost as corrupt as the republicans. I did not ever vote for Obama. There is much to complain about with Obama in office, but I doubt you know what those things are.
As to your screed about hatred, that is pure projection. Since you feel that way, you expect others to feel the same. You are wrong again.
Now, it looks like you are making the assumption that somehow, for some reason that I support communism which is totally invalid. I could just as easily make the assumption that you support fascism and all the associated horrors that go along with it. If you don't support fascism why would you support the policies that create it and sustain it?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10598 May 23, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I would argue that most labor unions are non-stratified. Yes, they democratically elected a president, essentially a spokesperson, but that role moves to whomever is willing to take it. As to other examples, I have groups of friends that are not stratified. There is no spokesperson, no "I'm better than you" comments, just people enjoying each others company.
The pecking order arises in many different organizations, and is often institutionalized. That it exists I can understand as people ofttimes do it to themselves, but I oppose doing it institutionally.
As to Marxism, I don't support it. I do not support communism, and I don't remember any democrat supporting it. There may have been some, but it is a far cry from the democratic party. Your McCarthyist mantra of communists here and communists there is just absurd in these times. Communism failed as a form of government, just as ours is failing now. Nor do I support the democratic party. They are almost as corrupt as the republicans. I did not ever vote for Obama. There is much to complain about with Obama in office, but I doubt you know what those things are.
As to your screed about hatred, that is pure projection. Since you feel that way, you expect others to feel the same. You are wrong again.
Now, it looks like you are making the assumption that somehow, for some reason that I support communism which is totally invalid. I could just as easily make the assumption that you support fascism and all the associated horrors that go along with it. If you don't support fascism why would you support the policies that create it and sustain it?
I disagree with your first statement about stratification within labor unions. My father was involved in labor union management on a national level during the era when Ed Partin testified against Jimmy Hoffa, then split his part of the Teamsters away from the international and attempted to lock down all labor in the southeastern US. During this period of organized violence, George Meany visited my father in our home to discuss the issue. They were on the same side. My father was the ONLY visible union opposition to Ed Partin within the region he was attempting to dominate. There were others opposed, but to be visible meant to be a target for assassination by the Teamsters. There was a definite heirarchy established throughout the union system.
If you have ANY experience with labor unions, you know your very first statement to be ... let's be polite... incorrect.
I have never been part of any social group, or other type of group, where there wasn't a concensus among the participants as to preference of leadership/charisma/social status. It may be as inocuous as merely popularity, or as obvious as a vote for leadership. All human societies are stratified. There does not exist a society where all members are identically regarded by every member of that society.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10600 May 23, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I would argue that most labor unions are non-stratified. Yes, they democratically elected a president, essentially a spokesperson, but that role moves to whomever is willing to take it. As to other examples, I have groups of friends that are not stratified. There is no spokesperson, no "I'm better than you" comments, just people enjoying each others company.
The pecking order arises in many different organizations, and is often institutionalized. That it exists I can understand as people ofttimes do it to themselves, but I oppose doing it institutionally.
As to Marxism, I don't support it. I do not support communism, and I don't remember any democrat supporting it. There may have been some, but it is a far cry from the democratic party. Your McCarthyist mantra of communists here and communists there is just absurd in these times. Communism failed as a form of government, just as ours is failing now. Nor do I support the democratic party. They are almost as corrupt as the republicans. I did not ever vote for Obama. There is much to complain about with Obama in office, but I doubt you know what those things are.
As to your screed about hatred, that is pure projection. Since you feel that way, you expect others to feel the same. You are wrong again.
Now, it looks like you are making the assumption that somehow, for some reason that I support communism which is totally invalid. I could just as easily make the assumption that you support fascism and all the associated horrors that go along with it. If you don't support fascism why would you support the policies that create it and sustain it?
Early in the Cold War, the most prominent Democrat aside from the sitting president, Alger Hiss, was convicted while spying for the Soviet Union.
The Democrats outright joined the communists during the Cold War.
(We should continue our discussion of the history of the Cold war, during which this will become obvious.)
John Kerry, while holding a commission in the United States Navy, organized a diplomatic mission outside of the Department of State, and met with the political arm of the Viet Cong in Paris, after which he returned to the United States and, in opposition to the position of the government of the United States, travelled around the country promoting the communists' so-called "Seven-Point Peace Plan", which ultimately led to statistically the worst case of mass murder in the history of civilization.(We will come to this period in history in our discussion of the history of the Cold War.)
Case-Church Amendment.(I could rest my case here, but there's more.)
The front of the Cold War moved to Central America after Vietnam, during which the lies from Democrats supporting the communists in Central America are actually too numerous to state in a post limited to 4000 words.(We will come to this in our discussion of the history of the Cold War.)
All known communists of note are Democrats. Have you ever asked yourself why?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Massachusetts Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Advocates push for in-state rates for undocumen... 23 hr Vote Trump 2020 30
Corruption on the highest level in Canto Court/... Jul 19 Darlene taylor 1
Judge Menno - Plymouth Court injustices (Feb '08) Jul 19 Darlene taylor 48
George and Donald Norcross are Above the Law Jul 15 Well Well 2
News County Fare: Special Olympics Mass. Hall of Fam... Jul 5 Cops are Degenerates 3
News Man Wanted for Attempted Murder in Mass. Arrest... Jun 30 Whoisconerned 1
Maine Sucks (Jan '16) Jun '17 dread 11
More from around the web