anybody in the US freaked the fuck out right now?

[Genius Gone Insane]

The American people are too stupid to realize Obama and Romney are the same person.

This. The "election" was a scam.

In upcoming days you will read stories about how the media made the election seem closer than it really was. That is also a scam.

 

[Pedro Teixeira]

I do like how the media gave this big show on how "tight" it was, never seen so much sensationalist journalism on such a serious matter, as if no one knew that Obama was going to win all along.

 

[viralz]

I do like how the media gave this big show on how "tight" it was, never seen so much sensationalist journalism on such a serious matter, as if no one knew that Obama was going to win all along.

So true, I watched the last moments on fox and the guy said something like ''Its far from over folks''.....and literally seconds after Obama was declared re-elected.

 

[MotherEel]

You watched, they won.

 

[Terminus]

Yay for earth another four years of fossil fuels and ipads

 

[Jind]

If they're all the same - tell me what would be your "perfect world" president/candidate - no need to name names (unless you really think one exists), just tell me what you think they should stand for - be precise, don't just give me some bullshit like "respecting mother earth". Tell me some specific policy choices that you believe would garner enough of a populations vote to not only get elected but also have the capability to enact given the checks and balances inherent to our political system (if you really don't understand our system of government it's probably tough to judge the difficulty built into it).

Wishful thinking does not win any majority of a population as diverse as that of the United States, any candidate hoping for national success will have to appeal to more than their base vote. While small representative sectors can clearly influence small races at the state or district level as has been demonstrated by Republican successes at these levels, the problem is that many state or congressional races are somewhat captured audiences where a candidate may indeed know the pulse of their neighborhood among the demographic he/she sees as similar to themselves and can unfortunately start to think the whole country is just like them and believes as they do when it comes to some of the more socially divisive issues. Those same small sectors tend to fail when that candidate overreaches for national office with the same base mentality.

Regardless how the media has hyped the division in this country, it's still a centrist driven voter base where at least at the national level you need to appeal to a broad demographic and hope your base that got you to the candidacy will not poison the well with it's extreme views thus alienating potential voters that might agree somewhat with what that candidate stand for but are horrified by other aspects.

Dreamers of a "perfect world" will always dream big (that others see things the way they do) while disregarding the truth of how a system works, the natural checks and balances that push everything to be palatable to a majority, not what may be a fringe minority.

I'll be honest - I did not always think this way, perhaps it is age that made me more aware of it being about a lot more than what I see a "perfect world" as, but regardless, ultimately my beliefs would only get me so far politically I can be just as disillusioned as anyone else about this country and it's people, but then something comes along and makes me realize it's made up of some really good people that don't have to believe what I do to be good people none the less.

The one clear thing about this country is in it's ever changing demographics - quite a few fear this and run from it, those that embrace it have a greater shot at success. The evolutionist in me comes out - adapt or die.

As always - just my opinions, individual mileage may vary.

 

[B36arin]

I do like how the media gave this big show on how "tight" it was, never seen so much sensationalist journalism on such a serious matter, as if no one knew that Obama was going to win all along.

Same here, the election campaign reminded me of WWE Smackdown, to the point where I wasn't surprised that Obama sucked in the first debate which made the race more exciting.

 

[PhilTheBeard]

I am just stoked that Romney didn't become president. I can handle another 4 years of Obama.

 

[oroinvictus]

I am just stoked that Romney didn't become president. I can handle another 4 years of Obama.

+1. Way too many politically uninformed crybabies. (not here, just in general)

 

[Jind]

I am just stoked that Romney didn't become president. I can handle another 4 years of Obama.

Same here - I readily admit that I've been disappointed with aspects of Barrack Obama's presidency and if given a viable (somewhat fiscally conservative yet socially liberal - as in every person is entitled to the same rights under the law type liberal and not the "I don't want government in my life or religion, but I want the government to tell you what to believe and how to act - as long as it's similar to what I believe in" type conservative) alternative I would have most likely voted for them instead.

And no - I'm definitely not an Ayn Rand objectivist/libertarian - it just doesn't work for me as a philosophy. Sure it sounds good on paper - but so do so many other things that lead to unhealthy results. Not here to argue anyone feelings on that one since I'm certainly of the mind - to each his own, just don't expect me to follow you down that path. Enjoy the trip.

But the thought that Mitt Romney would become president, a man willing to say anything to anybody to get their vote (and then willing to say the exact opposite to another group for theirs), was just a non-starter for me. The clown circus the Republicans put up this election cycle was just shameful and unrepresentative of what I can only hope many of those that simply vote along party lines had hoped for. Their simple denial of changing country demographics speaks volumes to the fringe pulling the cart. While I'm not religious by any means, one can't help but think of the "reap what you sow" quote as being applicable.

While I'm sure my more conservative friends could paint an equally disturbing picture of why they voted the way they did - for me, thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

Happily for me - several of my most disliked government officials lost reelection bids and the local candidates I could not stand lost as well- life is good for the time being.

 

[Linerndunch110]

I read a interesting article on some of the cuts Romney aid he would make day 1, and all of them would have cause nj, ny, and probably most of the east coast affected, to not be able to deal with adequate response teams for natural disasters ie hurricane sandy.

I may not agree 100% with Obama but I glad he has the shot at another 4 years to finish some of his endeavors. Obamacare is a bit screwy, as is some other policies, but I think it may work put for the better in the end.

That said, it would have been incredibly interesting to see how Romney really would have gone about 4 years in office. Yes some of his takes are a bit extreme but would it have worked out in the end as well? To me, he comes off as someone who beats around the bush(in a deceitful fashion) and has a "just trust me,I know what I'm doing" way of things that runs me the wrong way. I just couldn't picture him representing America if he couldn't just talk straight and lay out some detail for the American people.

I did think he was much more personable than Obama, and more likable, which really "irked" me. I really did want a viable alternative to Obama, Romney just didn't quite do it for me

 

[JeffTD]

The scariest thing to remember is that Romney was the very best the GOP had to offer, as far as they thought. Can you imagine any of the other candidates from the primary against Obama in this one? Santorum, Perry, Bachmann? Jesus Christ... That party has some serious re-thinking to do. If I were in charge I'd immediately disassociate from the evangelical right, take the voter hit, and spend the next 2 election cycles re-tooling the party into a socially moderate, fiscally conservative party that actually can stand by the 'conservative' title and steal independent/moderate Dem votes in the process. The Christian Right is holding back the party, this country, and humanity as a whole.

 

[Skinny Viking]

^ I could have seen Huntsman as a viable republican candidate

too bad he's too normal ... could have been interesting

 

[Jind]

The scariest thing to remember is that Romney was the very best the GOP had to offer, as far as they thought. Can you imagine any of the other candidates from the primary against Obama in this one? Santorum, Perry, Bachmann? Jesus Christ... That party has some serious re-thinking to do. If I were in charge I'd immediately disassociate from the evangelical right, take the voter hit, and spend the next 2 election cycles re-tooling the party into a socially moderate, fiscally conservative party that actually can stand by the 'conservative' title and steal independent/moderate Dem votes in the process. The Christian Right is holding back the party, this country, and humanity as a whole.

While I'm certainly on board with you in the belief that there must be a separation of state and church in some fashion for the GOP to make themselves a bigger tent endeavor (I'm very much a keep your religion out of my government and I'll keep my government out of your religion), I think the underlying problem, while possibly relating to deep seeded religious beliefs, has been a denial of evolution - not just in the biblical sense, but in the way of a simple denial that America's makeup has changed, societal views have changed.

It's like they took a snapshot of America in the 50's and assumed it would always stay that way - that as a society our views would never evolve (in the non biblical sense), that our racial makeup and long held views of peoples places in the structure of society were simply the way things were supposed to be. This is not the denial of evolution in the Genesis sense, it's a denial that society adapts to the realities around it - that peoples views on things once thought out of place can be seen as normal human behavior.

You could kick out the religious right and you would still have societal evolution deniers dragging the party to stay with a vision of America that just doesn't jibe with reality. Even their world view is that of the past. Neo-Cons look to spread democracy through the world as long as the free elections they strive for elect the leaders that align themselves with conservative beliefs. They deny the tribal nature of many societies with thousands of years of inner conflict and think if the people are simply given the choice to vote all that will go away - once again denying the evolution of societies, the simple fact that no change happens overnight - old enemies simply don't become friends if a "majority" votes them into power. The right to vote is simply the first step in a long line of changes freedom brings.

Related to presented belief in democracy the GOP states, but conflicting message they send supporting the "will of the people", we saw the way they deal with reality in this last election. In 2008 a large percentage of minority and underprivileged voters turned out to support the election of President Obama - they clearly saw that reality (surprise surprise), but there reaction was not to craft a policy/position that would draw that electorate to their views, to possibly adapt/evolve to make that tent bigger. No - the choice they made was to suppress the vote by using the clear advantage they held in many state houses to enact voter ID laws for supposed voter fraud issues. In person voter fraud accounted for 1 case for every 15 million votes (10 cases since year 2000). Is it coincidental that the states that sought voter ID laws were overwhelmingly lead by GOP governors? Fortunately subsequent legal challenges overturned or at a minimum delayed the implementation of these laws as they would adversely effect minority and underprivileged voters. Once again - deny the makeup of the electorate and protect the "image" they perceive the country to be built upon. No effort to make the tent bigger - just to make it so a certain population has no involvement in who gets elected and represented.

Too many conservatives simply want too much of the population to see the world as they see it. The refuse to come to grips with the fact that different people hold different views and unfortunately this refusal taints their ability to recognize the areas where people can agree.

After this election it's been interesting listening to all the "what went wrong" stories surfacing with suggestions on what needs to change. Many of them seem to think they can just make the tent bigger but still include the fringe (right wing extreme punditry crowd - Rush and Glenn Beck listeners) by simply not saying what they think - taking a "don't ask don't tell view" on social issues. They seem to think they can have the cake and eat it too - generally going back to that snapshot of the 50's where as long as it was not spoken about we can just pretend it's not relevant to the populaces choice. I've seen several conservative "luminaries" thinking it's as simple as simply not talking about the social issues and we'll stop the belief that they are the party of crazy. <wink, wink, nudge, nudge - say no more say, no more>. Once again - the belief that societal evolution does not occur if we don't talk about it. They seem to think it's the "talking about it" that get's them in trouble instead of the "thinking about it".

I'm all for a fiscally conservative party that see's the country for what it is - made up of people with differing views, all entitled to the same protections as US citizens regardless of religion, sex, race, creed, sexual orientation,... one that leaves choices best left to individuals out of the legality/illegality sphere. I know I may sound like a bit of a libertarian, but I only dabble down that path so far as I do think regulation can be a critical part of ensuring a safe society. I'm not comfortable with the whole "a completely free market will self regulate itself" type thinking when it comes to both personal safety and financial well being. I'm also a bit of a "takes a village" type person that feels while individual effort can certainly bring success - no one does it without the help of others (whether acknowledged or not). Even with free will we sometimes make the wrong choices and hopefully someone else helps pull us up.

The problems the GOP has is much larger than just the religious right. It's rooted in a vision of the past they hold dear.

As always - individual mileage may vary. Always willing to debate topics with reasonable people - we both might learn something.

 

[colonel kurtz]

The scariest thing to remember is that Romney was the very best the GOP had to offer, as far as they thought. Can you imagine any of the other candidates from the primary against Obama in this one? Santorum, Perry, Bachmann? Jesus Christ... That party has some serious re-thinking to do. If I were in charge I'd immediately disassociate from the evangelical right, take the voter hit, and spend the next 2 election cycles re-tooling the party into a socially moderate, fiscally conservative party that actually can stand by the 'conservative' title and steal independent/moderate Dem votes in the process. The Christian Right is holding back the party, this country, and humanity as a whole.

john hunstman was that guy...problem is he wasn't nutty enough for all those whackjobs, and ended up getting bumped off the island 1st. i might have even voted for that guy...and i typically don't want anything to with republicans.

 

[colonel kurtz]

^ I could have seen Huntsman as a viable republican candidate

too bad he's too normal ... could have been interesting

ha...i typed my response before i even saw this

damn shame they tossed that guy aside so quickly. he seems to possess all the good qualities that romney doesn't...and is lacking in all the batshit craziness that the rest of their party seems to live on nowadays.

 

[TheWinterSnow]

No viable reupublicans running? John Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul? Personally from the get go I had most of my chips on Johnson. While I think the three of them performed much better than Romney or Santorum, the conservative media only focused on Romney. When it comes down to it, they guy that will will the parties nomination is the guy that is receiving the most contributions from corporations and is getting more attention by by media, in this case it was Romney. The Right wing machine only wants to keep the backwards, religious whack jobs and do what they can to keep social liberal fiscally conservative voices out of the equation.

 

[egan.]

No viable reupublicans running? John Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul? Personally from the get go I had most of my chips on Johnson. While I think the three of them performed much better than Romney or Santorum, the conservative media only focused on Romney. When it comes down to it, they guy that will will the parties nomination is the guy that is receiving the most contributions from corporations and is getting more attention by by media, in this case it was Romney. The Right wing machine only wants to keep the backwards, religious whack jobs and do what they can to keep social liberal fiscally conservative voices out of the equation.

I don't think it was the conservative media but rather the GOP infrastructure that focused on Romney. The reason they did so is he was maleable and electable. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson won't tow the party line and libertarianism, while gaining momentum, can not win a national election in the current climate. In addition to this, isolationism, the draw down of our military and the end of the drug war are completely incongruent with the Reagan vision the GOP has been re-selling America.
The Mitt Romney that governed Mass. was far more electable than the other options but he had to make a hard right turn to get the nomination which completely compromised his integrity as a candidate.
IMO all the republicans had to do to win the election was to present a socially moderate candidate with a sound fiscally conservative vision but instead they gave us a milk toast candidate and the most radically backwards social agenda we've seen in years. Instead of keeping the dialog about the economy and debt they made it their mission to alienate women, immigrant, homosexuals, athiests, muslims, poor people, union members, and the entire academic community. It defies reason, but if you read the papers you'll see tea party leaders calling out the GOP for picking too liberal of a candidate to win the election. The vast vast majority of American voters are centrists which is why most negative ads focus on how far from center candidates are (Obama is a socialist, Romney is an oligarch, etc.). Somehow the GOP loses sight of this in their finger pointing.

 

[Skinny Viking]

Gary Johnson, Ron Paul?

they're Libertarian (or claim to be) ... its not the same thing

 

[Skinny Viking]

I think Huntsman had the shortest political suicide note in history ... I think it was on his Twitter or something

"I believe in evolution and global warming, call me crazy"

He was out about a week later I think