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.

dems suck

United States

#8180 Feb 9, 2013
Barefoot reminds me of the creepy child molester that lived down the street where I grew up.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8181 Feb 9, 2013
dems suck wrote:
Barefoot reminds me of the creepy child molester that lived down the street where I grew up.
You are the creepy child molester that lived down the street where I lived.

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8182 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Uninformed?

Of course, you are a flat out m/f, c/s liar.

Tell us how you got 2,000 a week again.
You really hate that 1,135 number!!!

Is it because it is represents a lot of mothers, fathers, elders, children, and illegals or is it because is a lot less than 2,000?

See? Liberals do not care about the TRAGEDY behind their laws because everyone else is JUST A NUMBER!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8183 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>HIghest price gas ever was= George Bush.

If you insist the POTUS controls price of gas.
See? You are mine now!!!

You ALREADY blamed Bush for exactly what Obama is doing, so now you either admit Obama is causing high gas prices to make his Saudi friends richer OR admit you are a hypocrite!!!

Liberals typically ADMIT they are hypocrite, will you too?

But they never say it they just SHIFT the topic, for example like saying "it was higher under Bush"!!!

See? Under Bush it was never this LONG so high for so many years do long for so long for so many months in a row for so many years for so long...

Gotcha!!!

See? Bush DID something to help us with high gas prices while Obama did the opposite!!!

You really think that allowing the oil pipe would had not lowered prices even a single cent!!!

Every cent matters, dude, you are wrong again!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8184 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>7.9.

Who caused the recession?

George Bush.
And you believe the number fudging by the Obama Administration!!!

See? Liberals are brain dead hypocrites easy to be fooled by the Obama Administration, LOL!!!

Hey, did you know they no longer count the ones still looking for jobs?

They admit it is a NEW way to count unemployment, LOL!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8185 Feb 9, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>there is a reason there actually and it is because of Nixion when Nixon by executive order took the US off the Gold Standard Nixion had to find another way to prop up & give the US dollar value which he got OPEC to agree to value Global Oil in US Dollars on the Global Market which make the US Dollar backed by black gold vs gold which is why we are so involved in the Middle East because of OPIC agreeing to value Oil in US dollars only.

Nixon, Gold and Oil

http://aheadoftheherd.com/Newsletter/2012/Nix...
I thought it was Bush's fault, now it is Nixon's?

Can you Liberals make up your mind?

For four years YOUR Liberal Media told us it was only Bush's fault, now you come here after five years of Obama and tell us it is Nixon's fault?

See? Liberals are brain dead hypocrites easy to be fooled by their own Liberal Media!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8186 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Lower than when George Bush was president.
Obama Vs. Bush On Gas Prices: It Is A FACT Obama Costs You At LEAST 85 Cents A Gallon More Than Bush Cost You – And Gas Is Going UP Under Obama

I’ve written a few articles comparing gasoline prices between Bush and Obama. Frankly, it is amazing how much bogus quibbling I’ve received in my comments from liberals.

What liberals ultimately want to do is take the very worst of Bush’s second term gas prices (which occurred while and BECAUSE Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate and refused to allow Bush to enact the policies that he ultimately pursued by executive order which LOWERED gas prices) and then compare them to some arbitrary Obama period.

We can’t compare Obama’s second term to Bush’s second term because Obama hasn’t HAD a second term yet. And I guarantee you that if Obama GETS a second term, gas prices will be SKY HIGH. Why do I say that? Two reasons. One, Barack Obama is the “Under my plan, energy prices will necessarily skyrocket” president. Barack Obama is the president who has literally said he WANTED gas prices to go up as long as the increase was gradual so he wouldn’t get blamed. Barack Obama is the president who appointed an Energy Secretary who is literally on the record saying he wanted to see U.S. gas prices at $9-$10 a gallon. Which is to say that Obama is a radical environmentalist ideologue who believes gasoline is evil and wants to force Americans to use a more expensive “green” alternative. And two, because Iran is by all accounts at the threshold of attaining nuclear weapons because Obama has abjectly failed to deal with this crisis that the Democrats once blatantly mocked Bush for warning us about.

...

http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2012/...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8187 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Lower than when George Bush was president.
Bush Vs. Obama On Gasoline Prices In One Very Simple Picture

Update, September 11, 2012: my new article on gas prices looks at Bush’s entire presidency (average price $2.14/gal) and his first four years (average price $1.68/gal) to DOCUMENT that he was FAR BETTER at gas prices than was Obama thus far in his first four years (average price $2.99/gal). Please read it too.

Update, September 4, 2012: Given that liberals are genuinely idiotic people, it is apparently necessary to point out that the article and the accompanying chart that I cite below was compiled in March of 2011. How long had Obama been president as of March of 2011? If you do the math, you will find that March 2011 occurred 26 months into Obama’s presidency. Which is to point out that every single liberal who has bitched about my “cherry picking data” is an astonishingly idiotic dumbass. The Heritage article that I cite below compares the first 26 months of Obama’s gas prices – which was all they had available in March 2011 – with the EXACT SAME PERIOD DURING BUSH’S PRESIDENCY. That is as apples-to-apples as you can get.

At this point in September 2012, Obama has been president for 43 months. If we compare Obama’s first 43 months in office to Bush’s first 43 months in office, you will find that Obama has still been awful in comparison. At this same point during Bush’s first term, in September of 2004, gasoline cost $1.89 a gallon. Versus with Obama and gas prices of $3.82 a gallon today. There is absolutely no legitimate comparison that will make Obama look anything other than terrible. Barack Obama is the “Under my plan, energy prices will necessarily skyrocket” president. Barack Obama is the president who has literally said he WANTED gas prices to go up as long as the increase was gradual so he wouldn’t get blamed. Barack Obama is the president who appointed an Energy Secretary who is literally on the record saying he wanted to see U.S. gas prices at $9-$10 a gallon.

Cont...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8188 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Lower than when George Bush was president.
Cont...

The shocking gas prices Bush faced in 2008 were due to the fact that Democrats took over both the House and the Senate in 2006 and refused to allow ANY domestic oil production or refinery construction WHATSOEVER until Bush finally issued his executive order in frustration. The shocking gas prices Obama has faced and will continue to face are due to the fact that Obama is a leftwing ideologue. Which is why Obama is setting records for high gas prices and will continue to set such records if the American people are foolish enough to allow him to remain in office.

http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2012/...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8189 Feb 9, 2013
TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm just going to ignore that moron - he'/ she / it's a complete imbecile. You can't have a rational conversation with a lunatic.
Liberals hate facts!!!

http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2012/...

Bush Vs. Obama On Gasoline Prices In One Very Simple Picture

Update, September 11, 2012: my new article on gas prices looks at Bush’s entire presidency (average price $2.14/gal) and his first four years (average price $1.68/gal) to DOCUMENT that he was FAR BETTER at gas prices than was Obama thus far in his first four years (average price $2.99/gal). Please read it too.

...

OUCH!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8190 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Who ran up the debt? George Bush. Who was handed the first budget surplus when he took office in forty years? George Bush.

Who decided that by collecting less money he could pay off more federal debt?

George Bush.

Who decided by spending MORE money and collecting less money, the debt would go down?

George Bush.

Who started two wars, including the war in Iraq to help himself get elected in 2004?

George Bush.

Who decided rather than pay the wars off as we went, to add the cost to the debt that he was increasing every day?

George Bush.

Who was the worst president this country has seen in 80 years?

George Bush.

Who decided that the best approach for this country was to pay off the debt and the two recessions caused by George Bush?

Barrack Obama.
Had Obama "paid off the debt"?

Ladies and Gentlemen, will he answer the above question or will typical Liberal run away and ignore-forget the question?

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8191 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's check how Jose lies:

martinezjosei wrote:
[QUOTE]
If Texas is so bad, why 2,000 people move IN every week, mostly from California, WHY?
"

+++++ FROM SAME POST

[QUOTE]
The Census Bureau calculates that the most popular destination is Texas (58,992 folks relocating from California to Texas in 2011),

"

Let's check that math...
58,992 divided by 52 weeks = 1134.46 (1135)

How does he get 2,000?

He "rounds" it off...

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

¿Que huevos, eh?
You forgot to add the illegals and the ones not accounted for for other reasons!

See? You blindly believe the government that is why they will control your life and mind as they do now today!!!

You really thin the government numbers are perfect, exact, scientific!!!

Do you really think that the government is perfect and their numbers are EXACTLY perfect?

Oh, wait... You are a Liberal, you DO believe that!!!

See, even if only ONE (1) person has to leave his home, job and family because of LIBERAL POLICIES, that, for a compasionate Conservative, is TOO MANY!!!

But for you liberals, is just a "rounding error"!!!

Liberals are the most cold hearted animals rummaging on Earth!!!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#8193 Feb 9, 2013
martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought it was Bush's fault, now it is Nixon's?
Can you Liberals make up your mind?
For four years YOUR Liberal Media told us it was only Bush's fault, now you come here after five years of Obama and tell us it is Nixon's fault?
See? Liberals are brain dead hypocrites easy to be fooled by their own Liberal Media!!!
Nixon and Bush were both Liberals

This, then, is the half of the answer that Bartlett gets right: Bush, he says, is not so much a conservative ideologue as he is simply a politician who has taken tribal partisanship to levels not seen since the 19th century. Bush is relentless at fighting for what he wants, but it turns out that what he mainly wants is to increase the Republican majority and kick some Democratic ass. If that means he's "perfectly willing to jettison conservative principles at a moment's notice to achieve that goal"--which he obviously is--well, that's the price you pay for electoral victory, isn't it?

In other words, Bush is another Richard Nixon, a comparison that Bartlett spends an entire chapter on.

The first person to draw a parallel between Bush and Nixon was someone who knew Nixon well: then-New York Times columnist William Safire, who had been a speechwriter for Nixon. In a July 2003 column, Safire imagined a conversation with the late president, who spoke approvingly about Bush's strategy of moving left domestically while keeping the Republican base preoccupied with an external threat. Nixon had done this successfully with Vietnam and Bush was doing it with Iraq.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/200...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8194 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's check how Jose lies:

martinezjosei wrote:
[QUOTE]
If Texas is so bad, why 2,000 people move IN every week, mostly from California, WHY?
"

+++++ FROM SAME POST

[QUOTE]
The Census Bureau calculates that the most popular destination is Texas (58,992 folks relocating from California to Texas in 2011),

"

Let's check that math...
58,992 divided by 52 weeks = 1134.46 (1135)

How does he get 2,000?

He "rounds" it off...

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

¿Que huevos, eh?
Liberals do not see humans, only numbers, because they have no God, no morals, no heart, no brains, no decency, no self-respect, no life!!!

Conservative have God in their heart and all their policies benefit EVERYONE regardless of skin color!!!

No wonder Conservatives are more CHARITABLE than Liberals, it is a fact!!!

No wonder Obama wants to remove the charity deduction since ONLY the Conservatives use it!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8195 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's check how Jose lies:

martinezjosei wrote:
[QUOTE]
If Texas is so bad, why 2,000 people move IN every week, mostly from California, WHY?
"

+++++ FROM SAME POST

[QUOTE]
The Census Bureau calculates that the most popular destination is Texas (58,992 folks relocating from California to Texas in 2011),

"

Let's check that math...
58,992 divided by 52 weeks = 1134.46 (1135)

How does he get 2,000?

He "rounds" it off...

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

¿Que huevos, eh?
The more you attack me the more facts I will expose about you Liberals, ha, ha!!!

So you are only hurting yourself, and I have a chance to unmask you!!!

Let's continue...

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs.$1,227).
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/200...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8196 Feb 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's check how Jose lies:

martinezjosei wrote:
[QUOTE]
If Texas is so bad, why 2,000 people move IN every week, mostly from California, WHY?
"

+++++ FROM SAME POST

[QUOTE]
The Census Bureau calculates that the most popular destination is Texas (58,992 folks relocating from California to Texas in 2011),

"

Let's check that math...
58,992 divided by 52 weeks = 1134.46 (1135)

How does he get 2,000?

He "rounds" it off...

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

¿Que huevos, eh?
You attack me with ridicules, I attack you with FACTS!!!

And Liberals hate facts more than anything else!!!

Here we go...

While conservatives tend to regard giving as a personal rather than governmental responsibility, some liberals consider private charity a retrograde phenomenon -- a poor palliative for an inadequate welfare state, and a distraction from achieving adequacy by force, by increasing taxes. Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: "A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity." Brooks, however, warns: "If support for a policy that does not exist ... substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others."
In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other peoples' money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/200...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8198 Feb 9, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
<quoted text>Oh my goodness.

This is the first "It's GEORGE BUSH'S FAULT" excuse I've heard in a month.

It's good to hear that you losers are still blaming Lord Obama's ineptness on GWB. How much longer are you going to milk that one?

Two more years?

Four more years?
Actually, the Liberal Media is planning to program then to...

Guess what!!!

Yes, believe it or not!!!!

To blame BUSH after Obama's EIGHT years!!!!

Yes you heard right!!!

I have inner sources that told me the plan is in 2016 to blame Bush on everything Obama broke!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8199 Feb 9, 2013
new hammer time wrote:
<quoted text>theres plenty of documentation that gwb policies got us into the mess in the first place. him and cheney decided that the rich needed to be taken care of when he started those wars...they were right, the rich made out like bandits b/c of the wars.
Did the blacks needed houses by ACORN?

Was not it fair for lazy ghetto liberal welfare cases to own a house?

So said the liberals back then!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8200 Feb 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>What you say is true... if we live in a fascist dictatorship.
However, we live in the United States of America. Here, we have something called a Constitution, and we are the type of government called a constutitional republic.
The Constitution defines what is called "limited government". This means that the government is authorized to do only what it is allowed to do as written in the Constitution.
Additionally, the Constitution prohibits dictatorships by limiting the authority of the president strictly to the Executive Branch of government. The president can only issue orders within the Executive Branch of government.
Now, listen very, very carefully here. This is where the Democrats will ignorantly stumble into a civil war:

The ONLY instructions any private individual or corporation or entity are required to obey come to the people in the form of laws passed by Congress and enacted in accordance with the procedures defined in the Constitution.

Any Executive Order giving instructions to any element or entity or group or individual outside the Executive Branch of government isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Because...

Every American citizen is obligated to obey only those instructions from the federal government that come in the form of laws passed by Congress and enacted in accordance with the requirements defined in the Constitution.

In short, the Constitution prohibits the establishment of a dictatorship.

You obviously object to that.
Great presentation and explanation!!!

Worth repeating:

"Every American citizen is obligated to obey only those instructions from the federal government that come in the form of laws passed by Congress and enacted in accordance with the requirements defined in the Constitution.

In short, the Constitution prohibits the establishment of a dictatorship."

WOW, that was good and powerful!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#8201 Feb 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>What you say is true... if we live in a fascist dictatorship.
However, we live in the United States of America. Here, we have something called a Constitution, and we are the type of government called a constutitional republic.
The Constitution defines what is called "limited government". This means that the government is authorized to do only what it is allowed to do as written in the Constitution.
Additionally, the Constitution prohibits dictatorships by limiting the authority of the president strictly to the Executive Branch of government. The president can only issue orders within the Executive Branch of government.
Now, listen very, very carefully here. This is where the Democrats will ignorantly stumble into a civil war:

The ONLY instructions any private individual or corporation or entity are required to obey come to the people in the form of laws passed by Congress and enacted in accordance with the procedures defined in the Constitution.

Any Executive Order giving instructions to any element or entity or group or individual outside the Executive Branch of government isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Because...

Every American citizen is obligated to obey only those instructions from the federal government that come in the form of laws passed by Congress and enacted in accordance with the requirements defined in the Constitution.

In short, the Constitution prohibits the establishment of a dictatorship.

You obviously object to that.
WOW, that was good and powerful!!!

No wonder states are enacting laws to arrest ANY federal who attempts to take our guns!!!

Great, way to go FREEDOM!!!

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 News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Race and Beyond: Let's Talk About Race and Poverty (Oct '12) 2 min RecoveringRacist 207
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min sadbuttrue 1,620,366
News 'It Stuns Me': Kelly Blasts Congresswoman for L... 4 min Retribution 21
News Schumer Calls Out Pence Prior to WNY Visit 4 min quorum 3
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 5 min River Tam 37,108
News GOP health bill all but dead; McCain again deal... 26 min Just Sayin 510
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 27 min loose cannon 242,786
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 2 hr Enquiring Mind 322
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 4 hr Travis Turbil 13,071
News Barack Obama 11 hr youll shoot your ... 63
More from around the web