What the 2012 election taught us

What the 2012 election taught us

There are 10317 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: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3439 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text>Oh really? Republicans want govt. out. They didn't want social security but the govt. went forward and has stolen from their paychecks for decades. They don't have options for health care when they reach a certain age because govt. insists they rely on it for assistance. Republicans never wanted it but they have been forced to pay for this program as well. Libs are a stupid bunch because they actually think these programs they forced on Americans suddenly make gimmes out of those who never wanted it. It's like those losers who have kids and then don't want to support them.
And when oscumma moves his commie healthcare plan through, those republicans become gimmes too? Of course they are in your mind. Keep in mind, there are people who are not influenced by the liberal media and their backwards ideology.
So tell me, support your statement that 'half of those gimmees are staunch republicans'. Hahahahaha.
it is not only democrats that use gov't handouts. just a fact.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3440 Nov 27, 2012
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Your damn right, and they better tone down Fox and tell heir House republicans to start legislating for the good of the country, instead of for the party politics....Time to return to a recognizable centered, republican party and quit protecting the corporate wealthy.....
In other words, you want the GOP House to do exactly what Obama wants, or to put it another way, the opposite of what the democrats did while Bush was president.
hahahahahaha

Carmel, IN

#3441 Nov 27, 2012
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Your damn right, and they better tone down Fox and tell heir House republicans to start legislating for the good of the country, instead of for the party politics....Time to return to a recognizable centered, republican party and quit protecting the corporate wealthy.....
The great lie about the corporate wealthy has been touted by the liberal elite for some time now. They have been promoting a class warfare for decades and oscumma perfected the scam. The corp wealthy are neither republican or democrat because they will blow whomever is in power. Since these corporations have such close ties with the govt., that does make them liberal elites and not republican at all. Corporations will pass on their costs incurred by govt. intrusion or leave until the climate clears. You don't even know who the boogyman really is.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#3442 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text>Oh really? Republicans want govt. out. They didn't want social security but the govt. went forward and has stolen from their paychecks for decades. They don't have options for health care when they reach a certain age because govt. insists they rely on it for assistance. Republicans never wanted it but they have been forced to pay for this program as well. Libs are a stupid bunch because they actually think these programs they forced on Americans suddenly make gimmes out of those who never wanted it. It's like those losers who have kids and then don't want to support them.
And when oscumma moves his commie healthcare plan through, those republicans become gimmes too? Of course they are in your mind. Keep in mind, there are people who are not influenced by the liberal media and their backwards ideology.
So tell me, support your statement that 'half of those gimmees are staunch republicans'. Hahahahaha.
You might want to take a look at the Republican Presidents, that have raided Social Security, over the years?
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#3443 Nov 27, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, te top 1% earners in te Us changes over quite rapidly.
Facts are fun!
What many people see as people being ''guided', others see as someone taking advantae of a n opportunity. i have seen so many people with great ideas or opportunities just do nothing with them. i have also seen many people from wealthhy families do nothingg but waste away te family fortune.
your myth about people not beingg able to succeed in the US from any backround is not based in any fact.
What definition are you using for succeed?

I mean this as a serious question as there are many measures of success. Not all measures involve money. You can be successful in your marriage, in your enjoyment of life, in your hobbies, in school. The conversation has been involved primarily with financial success. I have been stating there is very little opportunity for almost all people. The rich or way upper middle have more opportunity than they could ever use, no one else really has any. By opportunity, I mean the ability to receive a reasonable portion of the fruit of one's labor. When you look across the last 30 years, the economy has grown, however 100% of that growth has gone to the extremely wealthy, and none to the middle class. On average, wages for the middle class has fallen over those 30 years.

This is a direct result of the republican policies which lower wages and benefits and opportunities. The large corporations who lobby congress want the ability to pay less for labor, so they write the laws to flood the labor pool and reduce wages. They also lobby congress to damage small companies so that none can grow big enough to be competition. Then they lobby for welfare to get money directly from the government without doing anything.

It will take quite some time to reverse this trend. Clinton had a minor reversal and the economy improved after about 6 years, and he had 2 years of a good economy for the middle class. bush wiped that out, pushing even harder to reduce wages and eliminate start ups.

Obama appears to have halted most of the attacks on the middle class and I would guess in about 2 years the economy will temporarily improve. You can see the start of the improvement now. I am looking for more of an FDR type of improvement, not a two year reprieve.
hahahahahaha

Carmel, IN

#3444 Nov 27, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree. The GOP should just step aside and let the left do exactly what they want. Zero opposition would prevent them AND their media sycophants no one to blame but each other.
Not without a fight. Republicans should block everything and stand by their promise to reduce spending. If they don't get re elected then let it happen. The stupid won't have anyone to blame but themselves. If the republicans compromise, then they will be at fault and the blame game will never end.

The govt. is way too powerful and controlling. The majority have to wake up and realize what is happening and if we let the libs take this country down, we will be able to rebuild the right way. Let it fail and let the people get their country back.
Some Random Dude

Santa Cruz, CA

#3445 Nov 27, 2012
Billy Ringo wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL- old man Ray-gun? Are you referring to the old POS coward who turn and ran like a chicken-shit coward after 300 of our boys were murdered while they slept? You should be ashamed of yourself for even mentioning his name in a public forum.
The families of those murdered marines still grieve. Ray-gun's term was an embarrassment and disgrace of epic proportions.
Ooh! You're gonna ruffle a lot of conservative feathers with that comment! Don't you know that Ray-gun was the best president that ever lived? Funny, because in today's republican party, Ray-gun would be laughed out of the party for being way too moderate. But you mention his name and conservatives take their hats off and they hear angels singing "hallelujah".

au contraire

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3446 Nov 27, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>When have i ever talked about the war on women? if you have to make up outright lies, you are really in sad shape...
The post above starts out the war on women. Does that help clarify the post? You seem to have a short memory, I hope that is all.

au contraire

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3447 Nov 27, 2012
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Your damn right, and they better tone down Fox and tell heir House republicans to start legislating for the good of the country, instead of for the party politics....Time to return to a recognizable centered, republican party and quit protecting the corporate wealthy.....
What will you do if they don't, pee down your leg again? Please grow up before voting again.
hahahahahaha

Carmel, IN

#3449 Nov 27, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
What definition are you using for succeed?
I mean this as a serious question as there are many measures of success. Not all measures involve money. You can be successful in your marriage, in your enjoyment of life, in your hobbies, in school. The conversation has been involved primarily with financial success. I have been stating there is very little opportunity for almost all people. The ric... the economy has grown, however 100% of that growth has gone to the extremely wealthy, and none to the middle class. On average, wages for the middle class has fallen over those 30 years.
This is a direct result of the republican policies which lower wages and benefits and opportunities. The large corporations who lobby congress want the ability to pay less for labor, so they write the laws to flood the labor pool and reduce wages. They also lobby congress to damage small companies so that none can grow big enough to be competition. Then they lobby for welfare to get money directly from the government without doing anything.
It will take quite some time to reverse this trend. Clinton had a minor reversal and the economy improved after about 6 years, and he had 2 years of a good economy for the middle class. bush wiped that out, pushing even harder to reduce wages and eliminate start ups.
Obama appears to have halted most of the attacks on the middle class and I would guess in about 2 years the economy will temporarily improve. You can see the start of the improvement now. I am looking for more of an FDR type of improvement, not a two year reprieve.
I'm not sure where you get this idea that the wealthy has received all the benefits of economic growth and the middle class have not. Sounds like class envy to me.

The cost of living has risen because dual income households are the norm which means spending power has risen dramatically. At one point, a household had a single wage earner which meant those dirty republicans were the only folks who could go to the country club and play golf on Saturday. A doctor or business owner made $150,000 and the average white collar worker would make $40,000. Huge difference in spending power. So the class envy raged on with hatred towards the country club crowd vs the rest of society. The media loved portraying this great divide in their Hollywood flicks. In the 70's women entered the workforce with a gusto and now they could compete with the country club crowd. Dual income families could now live life like the country club crowd. Then divorce began to increase, sending women in particular further backwards. Many relying on the govt. for handouts because their deadbeat husbands wouldn't pay the freight to raise his kids.

So, it's not republican policies that have caused the great divide, it's the very people who are complaining the most. It sounds as though you have swallowed the liberal elite's propaganda because in order to gain financial success, you have to work your azz off. You have to scrimp and save and not take vacations. You have to work 7 days and wish there was an 8th. You have to work hard in school and take advantage of all that is available....and there is more than enough opportunity.

If you are upset about the mega corps who are snuggling up to oscama, you better talk to your liberal elite handlers.They are behind all this corp welfare. THEY are responsible for this, not the republicans. Republicans are all about the middle class....all about the folks who built this country and made it great.

Libs have spent decades portraying Republicans as uncaring country club elites when in fact it's the libs who have perfected this lifestyle of the rich and famous. They will have 'benefit concerts', tell jokes about conservatives on tv, have talk shows and scam the public about those wicked conservatives, direct movies about the greedy rich when in fact HOllywood is really the greedy rich who have exploited the stupid for decades.
Billy Ringo

United States

#3450 Nov 27, 2012
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text>Your damn right, and they better tone down Fox and tell heir House republicans to start legislating for the good of the country, instead of for the party politics....Time to return to a recognizable centered, republican party and quit protecting the corporate wealthy.....
Dems picked up a bunch of House seats and 2 more Senate seats this time. In 2 years time, they will pick up some additional House seats.

If the Rethugs beome a little more flexible now, as appers likely, it is because they are scared shytless of losing their seat in 23 months.

Cons believed they had this election locked up, that they would win back the WH and the Senate.

Then Obama kicked their azzes.

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#3451 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text> Well....there are quite a number who climb out of the ghetto and play basketball or go into the entertainment industry. But when it comes to working hard....the poor have a good thing going. Libs keep their voting base addicted to big govt. and reality tv which makes them less inclined to work hard enough to become independent. Much easier to lay on their backs, multiply and take govt. money. When govt. was less intrusive many who came from nothing became successful. Television has also contributed to slothdom and laziness as the poor can escape rather than work on ways to 'escape' from their poverty. Ironically, they will worship the uber rich royalty of liberal elites in Hollywood who keep them pacified while at the same time teaching them to hate successful hard working folks. The stupid usually never recognize this fact although there are a few and do something with their lives without govt. handouts.
Good to see you agree that their just are not that many moving up in the world.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3452 Nov 27, 2012
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>The post above starts out the war on women. Does that help clarify the post? You seem to have a short memory, I hope that is all.
and the follow up was a farcical piece from fox about some supposed war on men. a normal mind would have realized that i don't believe either one is correct..

yet you stated i mentioned it several times, which i have never done...why did you make that up?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#3454 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text> ...which is why having more kids brings in more govt. money-duh. Have you had any experience working around the poor? Many of them exploit their kids for drugs, govt assistance and other freebies they wouldn't get without them.
Exploitation of kids for drugs is a REpublican Myth. It was proven to be a Myth (Yes, some do that, but it is such a small number as to be insignificant) by Florida when they instituted mandatory drug testing.

Alcohol may be another question, but then that is legal.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3455 Nov 27, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
What definition are you using for succeed?
I mean this as a serious question as there are many measures of success. Not all measures involve money. You can be successful in your marriage, in your enjoyment of life, in your hobbies, in school. The conversation has been involved primarily with financial success. I have been stating there is very little opportunity for almost all people. The rich or way upper middle have more opportunity than they could ever use, no one else really has any. By opportunity, I mean the ability to receive a reasonable portion of the fruit of one's labor. When you look across the last 30 years, the economy has grown, however 100% of that growth has gone to the extremely wealthy, and none to the middle class. On average, wages for the middle class has fallen over those 30 years.
This is a direct result of the republican policies which lower wages and benefits and opportunities. The large corporations who lobby congress want the ability to pay less for labor, so they write the laws to flood the labor pool and reduce wages. They also lobby congress to damage small companies so that none can grow big enough to be competition. Then they lobby for welfare to get money directly from the government without doing anything.
It will take quite some time to reverse this trend. Clinton had a minor reversal and the economy improved after about 6 years, and he had 2 years of a good economy for the middle class. bush wiped that out, pushing even harder to reduce wages and eliminate start ups.
Obama appears to have halted most of the attacks on the middle class and I would guess in about 2 years the economy will temporarily improve. You can see the start of the improvement now. I am looking for more of an FDR type of improvement, not a two year reprieve.
in this argument it would be financial success, as that is what the topic is about. i stated this clearly in my other post to you about the ability of anyone to succeed financially in the US.

yes, many people have made what they consider successful lives and they are far from wealthhy. thay are not the ones bitching that it is impossible for anyone to succeed in the US, are they?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#3456 Nov 27, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, te top 1% earners in te Us changes over quite rapidly.
Facts are fun!
What many people see as people being ''guided', others see as someone taking advantae of a n opportunity. i have seen so many people with great ideas or opportunities just do nothing with them. i have also seen many people from wealthhy families do nothingg but waste away te family fortune.
your myth about people not beingg able to succeed in the US from any backround is not based in any fact.
Correct, however defining the "rich" that way would be to say the Walton Heirs are not rich. Want to try that again? And you are correct, Facts are Fun!

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#3457 Nov 27, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
you've never been funny, just funny looking Hymie.
Bend over, Sagebrush. Your customers are getting impatient.

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#3458 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text>It figures you would manage to blame the republicans for the outrageous spending. Certainly, the libs have set them up for failure because if they don't follow in lockstep, the lib machine will brainwash the stupid into voting them out of office and bringing in more commies.The republicans should block everything that is in opposition with what they were elected for. Don't know if it would be best to let this happen so when we collapse, the stupid will realize why and if they are around to rebuild, govt. will be much different the next time around.
First, instead of blame in could be credit. I have yet to see anyone actually substantiate that the spending is "outrageous" given the circumstances we were and are in.

Perhaps the Republicans should block everything. It seems they are blocking everything EXCEPT the OUTRAGEOUS spending. Why is that?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#3459 Nov 27, 2012
hahahahahaha wrote:
<quoted text> Only in the brainwashed, the media appears to be center. The debates were a dead give away but of course the brainwashed can't see through the mire of s*** the media paints over their eyes.
You have no knowledge or experience in small business and the upper middle class. If you want to raise taxes on the uber rich, make it for only for millionaires. Leave the middle class alone and begin pecking on the lower upper classes and above. Of course this will impact jobs and many may outsource more than ever before...but at least it will leave the middle class alone. The uber rich will not be directly impacted as they will pass it down to us anyway. They have more options such as outsourcing or moving to a more business friendly country. The middle class does not have this option.
oscumma wants to destroy the middle class of hardworking folks by making them responsible for the sloths who don't want to work. The great divider and scumbag obama and friends have fanned the flames of class envy so the stupid feel entitled to take from those who have worked harder than they have. The stupid believe they are somehow entitled to their money.
Tax all income as earned income, regardless of source.

Increase taxes on the rich, those earning $250K or more per year.

They may not be "super" rich, but they are in the top 5% or so. Now if you want to argue that does not make them rich I will be happy to agree with your assessment of income stratification in this country. The last time we solved that problem it was with a 90% punitive income tax rate.
hahahahahaha

Carmel, IN

#3461 Nov 27, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Good to see you agree that their just are not that many moving up in the world.
When you have a controlling govt. dictating and stealing from the hardworking folks, you will not have many who will prosper. An overreaching centralized power is not suitable for a free society which is why our country is in a free fall.

Govt. freebies sedate the masses and mobility slows to a near standstill. Don't believe me? Look at what happens when you feed wild animals from birth? They don't know how to survive on their own. They have to remain captive their entire lives. Every once in a while, the keepers will be able to release a few.....kind of like our welfare system.

I'm not sure what exactly your expectations are for 'moving up in the world'. Do you think the poor should be provided for at the expense of the successful? Should the successful be demoted in order to bring up the poor? If so, why? This concept has failed over and over. Human beings do not function at their best when caged and controlled. Didn't you know that?

The Native Americans are a perfect example. These were a free people who had their own small govts. and roamed the land with little restriction. They were conquered by a technologically superior society and 'provided for' with govt. aid. It didn't work out well as the welfare was not only sedating, it led the people to escape in drugs and alcohol which is much like the modern day ghetto.

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.

US Senate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min sonicfilter 1,457,598
News 5 lessons activists can learn from Florida's su... 5 min Democrat Hero 3
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 10 min Big C 22,327
News Wisconsin Dems Slam Trump Backers 14 min Frogface Kate 56
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 15 min Jacques in Canada 230,924
News As anger over election of Donald Trump erupts, ... 23 min Trump your President 2,822
News Designer Tom Ford: Melania Trump 'not necessari... 30 min Democrat Hero 2
More from around the web