Why Romney lost

[Really]

Pamela wrote:

<quoted text>
Now Ron Paul would have cut $1 trillion in spending and not had the country default on the debt. He would have forgiven the amount the Fed printed up, shut down the Fed, reduced military spending, refused to have a war with Iran, legalized pot, ended the war on drugs, and cut income taxes and welfare programs, so as far as solving problems and economic intelligence, that is Ron Paul, not Obama and not Romney.

now. He couldn't even attract a tiny minority of the voters - nevermind deal with congress on any kind of radical program. You live in a fantasyland and so does he. The only thing he ever accomplished in all his years in Congress was to ask some pointed questions.

[Mr Big Bad John Roberts]

Post Turtle wrote:

<quoted text>Ha /vigger STFU,Worthless POS

Yo' post turd, you are a stupid klannigguh monkey racist. DO NOT stfu because the rest of this forum want you to keep reminding us that even after President Obama ended Romney's stinking career, there are still people like you that are stupid ya' COONservative yard monkey.
Lol!!!!!!!!!!
Lol!!!!!!!!!!
Lol!!!!!!!!!!

[Pamela]

freebird wrote:

<quoted text>
Who's become the middle class? Government union workers! Where do they get the money? Taxes! Why should I pay more taxes so that government workers live better that I do?
Romney wasn't the answer for most Americans but neither is Obama.

Exactly. The ONLY people left who can make middle class wages without any education are the government workers, and we pay for it. We don't even pay for it. We borrow $1 trillion a year to hand out to the states. So we pay $450 a year in interest on the debt. But our tax revenues don't even cover their salaries and pensions.

I agree neither party is the answer. Ron Paul was the answer.

[Pamela]

Really wrote:

<quoted text>
now. He couldn't even attract a tiny minority of the voters - nevermind deal with congress on any kind of radical program. You live in a fantasyland and so does he. The only thing he ever accomplished in all his years in Congress was to ask some pointed questions.

Both parties took the U.S. to bankruptcy and you all think they know one thing. They have no clue what they are doing, and Ron Paul is saying just that. He was talking about the insanity of running up debt back in the 2007 debates when Bush was running up debt. He has the real answers and young people love him. It's just that everyone only votes for who they think will give them money from the government. NO one is interested yet in solving the real problems. Only after the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency, only after we default on our debt, only after deep austerity measures begin, then people will look to Ron Paul for the spending cuts and for the real solutions. This is all status quo crap. People voted back in a guy who ran up $5 trillion of debt in 4 years and cannot do one real thing ever. It's a joke. As long as all looks well as long as we can borrow TRILLIONS, people have no idea that the U.S. dollar is about to collapse, that we will default on our debt because we pay $450 billion a year in interest on the debt. They have no clue the U.S. is out of jobs, going third world, has half the young people on welfare and half the nation is old people on the government with no one to pay for any of it. We have fallen down in education standards, we have an old infrastructure. We have no way to keep going. Ron Paul was right about everything. What did you all accomplish by fighting over Romney and Obama all these years? Not one thing has changed. Billions of dollars in campaign commercials and not one thing changed. House is R, senate and president is D. Same stuff.

[Pamela]

Really wrote:

<quoted text>
now. He couldn't even attract a tiny minority of the voters - nevermind deal with congress on any kind of radical program. You live in a fantasyland and so does he. The only thing he ever accomplished in all his years in Congress was to ask some pointed questions.

You all wanted change. What do you propose to do to get rid of both major political parties?? At least I had a vehicle to do it, Dr. Paul. No one else even gets it that we need to get rid of both parties' big huge spending policies and no one even attempts to stop both parties. So you are solving nothing and the truth is, Ron Paul was the perfect vehicle to take down both parties corruption and dysfunctions and big, huge spending.

[Pete-o]

Pamela wrote:

<quoted text>You all wanted change. What do you propose to do to get rid of both major political parties?? At least I had a vehicle to do it, Dr. Paul. No one else even gets it that we need to get rid of both parties' big huge spending policies and no one even attempts to stop both parties. So you are solving nothing and the truth is, Ron Paul was the perfect vehicle to take down both parties corruption and dysfunctions and big, huge spending.

There was no chance Paul would get elected , he has a couple good ideas, but the rest is outright kooky.

[fedupwiththemess]

He lost because he is a dumbazz.

[inbred Genius]

fedupwiththemess wrote:

He lost because he is a dumbazz.

he lost because he is a honky, in a country that has more non honkies than honkies.

[fedupwiththemess]

inbred Genius wrote:

<quoted text>
he lost because he is a honky, in a country that has more non honkies than honkies.

You said it, not me. you are a racist. He lost because he is a mormon.

[Pamela]

He lost because people are too stupid to understand what he is saying. Rather than looking into the things he was talking about - the business cycle, Austerian economics, ending the Federal Reserve, you all sit fat and dumb and let the TV tell you too keep the Republican party, keep everything the way it is, no real changes. You don't believe in yourselves, you figure you have no real way to cause change, that you can't get rid of power politicians, that you have no power and no plan so Ron Paul must be a nut. If your IQ is below 120, yes I guess you don't understand what he is saying. That doesn't mean he is the one who is nuts. That means the U.S. is a country with most people having IQs of 90, they are almost retards, and they only repeat lies from the TV. They are so far behind normal people they never read books nor take classesd and they think only "learning" from a biased fake news channel on TV is some big thing. It is the people who are nuts, not Ron Paul. If you read books and had higher IQs, you would not be saying RP is nuts. Young people in college get it, they get what the real problems are. You have to get rid of both parties. You are old fools who believe Fox TV. Both parties are so addicted to spending they have us paying $450 billion a year in interest on the debt and have us at default. Crazy is you all letting Fox TV tell you that the REpubs are one bit better than the Dems when here Bush was sooooooo bad he's gotten Obama reelected cause people STILL blame Bush for the messes he made. Bush took the country down, Fox works to elect Repubs, and stupid people can't figure it out that both parties are finished, that the U.S. is finished and when Ron Paul says it, they say he is the one who is nuts. No, that would be the American people. They are too dumb to save the country.

[Keep]

Pamela wrote:

If your IQ is below 120, yes I guess you don't understand what he is saying. That doesn't mean he is the one who is nuts. That means the U.S. is a country with most people having IQs of 90, they are almost retards, and they only repeat lies from the TV. They are so far behind normal people they never read books

telling yourself that... LOL

Crackpot

[fedupwiththemess]

Because he is a mormon dumbazz.

[Pamela]

Keep wrote:

<quoted text>
telling yourself that... LOL
Crackpot

That's true. The Fox followers all have IQs of about 90, and 80 is retarded. This is WHY they repeat the TV and can't read books nor investigate things for themselves nor think for themselves. They sit in here and fight over TV channels for years now. That is the definition of low IQ. Yes, Ron Paul has an IQ in the 150s. He is an M.D., a Constitutional expert, an economic expert and a Congressman. Yes, he has a very high IQ, and yes, his followers are super smart young educated people. All the dummies repeat Fox TV, and Fox TV got rid of Dr. Paul because the people on fox are war profiteers and they wanted to place someone in the White House who was like Bush and who would have war after war for them to make money off of, so when they saw Dr. Paul is a decent and honest man and would not have a war with Iran, people like Dick Morris and Sean Hannity lied about Dr. Paul and said he is nuts, and, the low IQ Fox followers buy all of it. The country went under from the people being so dumb so they don't think for themselves.

Tell me ONE thing Dr. Paul said that is crazy?? Just because you don't understand sound economics doesn't mean that he is crazy. It means you are stupid.

[Pamela]

The Fox followers are soooooo stupid they think a TV channel that is clearly a total setup to elect Republicans that only does anti-Dem and pro-Repub made up stories is news. They think those made up one sided stories are real news, and they think being totally slanted and lying is fair and balanced. It takes a very low IQ to not see that stuff as it is.

A retarded level IQ is a person looking at Fox TV all the time watching the people on Fox always only hating on one party and then saying it is fair and balanced. The Fox drones have such low IQs they think if anyone ever says one real thing that they must be an evil liberal and if any news channel ever reports one real fact, it is just evil liberal media bias. They are totally brainwashed by a few uneducated, war profiteer billionaires on Fox TV, and they think that is smart. That is retarded level IQs.

Instead of listening to other citizens, they put billionaires from the TV on a pedestal and blindly believe their every word. That is retarded.

[bottlecap]

Pamela wrote:

<quoted text>Exactly. The ONLY people left who can make middle class wages without any education are the government workers, and we pay for it. We don't even pay for it. We borrow $1 trillion a year to hand out to the states. So we pay $450 a year in interest on the debt. But our tax revenues don't even cover their salaries and pensions.
I agree neither party is the answer. Ron Paul was the answer.

The problem the US faces is simple, as Ron Paul stated. "... the government media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda,”

The Unions get out votes so they get favorable media proaganda. They get great pensions by stealing from their fellow citizens but then claim they represent the working class, not the elite privledge class. Same for government workers, they get benefits far above their fellow citizens paid for with borrowed money from China.

On top of that, and most important, the International Banksters get MASSIVE amounts of Money from the US Treasury and then they install people like the Dummy and Uncle Tom in the WH.

[Pamela]

bottlecap wrote:

<quoted text>
The problem the US faces is simple, as Ron Paul stated. "... the government media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda,”
The Unions get out votes so they get favorable media proaganda. They get great pensions by stealing from their fellow citizens but then claim they represent the working class, not the elite privledge class. Same for government workers, they get benefits far above their fellow citizens paid for with borrowed money from China.
On top of that, and most important, the International Banksters get MASSIVE amounts of Money from the US Treasury and then they install people like the Dummy and Uncle Tom in the WH.

Exactly. And people do not understand what Ron Paul is saying because the media tells the low IQ folks not to like Ron Paul. Only a dummy would let a few rich people on TV tell them who to vote for and what to think of candidates. The media is half the problem. The people would have to go around both the corrupt politicians and around the corrupt media and stand on their own and put RP in office on their own. The masses don't see it that the people on TV are rich and profit greatly from lower tax rates and from the wars and that they try to start more wars. Ron Paul said it right "the government media complex."

For example, when Ron Paul came out against a third war, a war with Iran, like any sane person would do, Sean Hannity who is a big war profiteer who keeps trying to start a war with Iran, he went and dug up fake information to harm Ron Paul and had him on his show and called him a terrible racist to get rid of him so that Hannity could continue to try to get Newt elected to have a war with Iran so he could get who knows, maybe 3 billion in new contracts to rebuild Iran. And the viewers don't understand they are being totally conned and used.

I read Mark Steyn's book about America collapsing and he said how do you like watching your neighbor who worked for the government getting a big fat pension and big cost of living increases every year and you are paying for it and you have no pension? He pointed out that the car companies have 7 people on pensions for every one person working. This is the crapola that goes on.

[Pamela]

The problem is it is a nation of people letting a few billionaires on the TV control the country, control what they think and what they say and who they vote for, and the people are so dumb and lazy they think doing this is smart. It would never occur to them that they should go and read books and take control of the elections and of what they think themselves. They are the problem.

It's like they can't think and so they say that 5 people on Fox are looking out for them and they put all of their hopes and faith and trust in them, and these people sell them books, radio and TV shows, show tickets, website memberships and get richer and richer off of them, and the viewers get nothing out of it.

Talk about control, they make billions off of those people AND they control the elections, control starting wars, control the tax rates for themselves. It's a total win win for them and a loser for everyone who is not them.

[Crazytempest]

BlondePrince wrote:

<quoted text>Romney lost because the Republican Party was hijacked by neocons in the 90s and since Bush stole an election, they assumed it was not a destroyed party.

The Republican Party is forever destroyed so it is a one party nation now. Last of Republicans in House get the boot in two years and in 2016, Hillary serves two terms and hands it over to the next liberal.

Republicans bought into the lies of Faux and right wing nuts that scare real Americans who will do opposite. There is no Republican Party anymore that can win anything.

There will be no Republican President this century unless they move left of center where the nation is. Since they are too dumb to realize this, they will keep losing.

Palin can move to Iran with mitty and that dumb closet case Ryan now.

AMERICANS DO NOT WANT RELIGION IN POLITICS. They go by science on homosexuality which proves normal, genetic and natural and they are not racists who like Baptists think blacks are a curse on humans.

MAINSTREAM is a word Republicans better look up instead of listing to drugged up oxy Rush and others like that guy dressed up as a woman with an Adam's apple Mann Coulter. Recent pics show he never had the sex change. The bulge even shows in dresses so poor job hiding that part too. Coulter needs to use duct tape to pull it back and hide it if he wants people to think he's a female.

Well put !!

[bottlecap]

Pamela wrote:

<quoted text>Exactly. And people do not understand what Ron Paul is saying because the media tells the low IQ folks not to like Ron Paul. Only a dummy would let a few rich people on TV tell them who to vote for and what to think of candidates. The media is half the problem. The people would have to go around both the corrupt politicians and around the corrupt media and stand on their own and put RP in office on their own. The masses don't see it that the people on TV are rich and profit greatly from lower tax rates and from the wars and that they try to start more wars. Ron Paul said it right "the government media complex."
For example, when Ron Paul came out against a third war, a war with Iran, like any sane person would do, Sean Hannity who is a big war profiteer who keeps trying to start a war with Iran, he went and dug up fake information to harm Ron Paul and had him on his show and called him a terrible racist to get rid of him so that Hannity could continue to try to get Newt elected to have a war with Iran so he could get who knows, maybe 3 billion in new contracts to rebuild Iran. And the viewers don't understand they are being totally conned and used.
I read Mark Steyn's book about America collapsing and he said how do you like watching your neighbor who worked for the government getting a big fat pension and big cost of living increases every year and you are paying for it and you have no pension? He pointed out that the car companies have 7 people on pensions for every one person working. This is the crapola that goes on.

You are right. If there was a IQ minimum for voting the likes of Bush or Obama could never be elected.

Ron Paul was ahead of his time; the smart people like him but the "Government Media Complex" manipulates the ignorant into putting people like Obama in office so they can stay in power and steal the wealth of the nation.

[Researcher]

bottlecap wrote:

<quoted text>
You are right. If there was a IQ minimum for voting the likes of Bush or Obama could never be elected.
Ron Paul was ahead of his time; the smart people like him but the "Government Media Complex" manipulates the ignorant into putting people like Obama in office so they can stay in power and steal the wealth of the nation.

Actually, Obama is highly intelligent and Bush, though a failure in every way that counts, has a surprisingly high I.Q.

"When the Harvard historian James T. Kloppenberg decided to write about the influences that shaped President Obama’s view of the world, he interviewed the president’s former professors and classmates, combed through his books, essays, and speeches, and even read every article published during the three years Mr. Obama was involved with the Harvard Law Review

"His conclusion is that PRESIDENT OBAMA IS A TRUE INTELLECTUAL."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/28/books/28klo...