[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why We Lost (Page 1 of 19)
Posted: 11/7/2012 6:25:00 AM EDT
|
As I started reading some of the comments today, I realized that many of you are confused at why we lost this election.
It was not because we didn't have enough "true conservative" ideas. It was not because of "right to life" or "traditional marriage" support. It was not because we didn't embrace ""Libertarian" ideas. A couple of hundred years ago, a Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville studied the newly formed American system and said these things: “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” Sadly, I believe we have passed the "tipping point" on that scale. Romney was correct when he stated that he could not reach the 47% of the people that were sucking at the government tit. But he was wrong about the 47%. I believe it has passed that number. The only way for the Republican party to beat the Democrats now would be to give more benefits to the lazy, paid for by the hard work of the non-lazy. And we won't do that. What's the answer to this problem? I just don't know. I am afraid that the scale has tipped and we will never go back. |
|
I know you are correct. And that's why the results from this election scare me.
Their are now more leaches than providers. And the providers will continue to be vilified. America as we knew it is gone unless something major happens. I firmly believe this. And I think it's why so many people have such a huge pit in their stomachs this morning. |
|
+1
I am also a little peeved that people are blaming the pro-life cause for some senate losses. People need to remember that if you are against killing the unborn the media hates you and will go after you mercilessly. That is what happened in Indiana. Notice how pro-choice politicians never have to defend their stance. Just once I would like to hear one of them asked 'if a woman is nine months pregnant and has a perfectly healthy baby inside of her, is she allowed to kill it?' or 'is abortion okay if it is solely for sex selective purposes?' These questions are never asked because the media is so liberal. |
| I have to agree. I have no problem with honest people taking assistance in any form they choose if they actually need it. I can't stand the people who choose to not work, not actively find work, not better themselves, and just sit back and let the rest of us pay their way. |
|
I think we had a chance this time but your premise covered at least 47% of the population and will cover more than that by 2016. Todd Akin and his ilk combined with Chris Christie really didn't help our chances. Johnson endorsing Romney for the good of the country would have been nice too. |
|
Quoted:
As I started reading some of the comments today, I realized that many of you are confused at why we lost this election. It was not because we didn't have enough "true conservative" ideas. It was not because of "right to life" or "traditional marriage" support. It was not because we didn't embrace ""Libertarian" ideas. A couple of hundred years ago, a Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville studied the newly formed American system and said these things: “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” Sadly, I believe we have passed the "tipping point" on that scale. Romney was correct when he stated that he could not reach the 47% of the people that were sucking at the government tit. But he was wrong about the 47%. I believe it has passed that number. The only way for the Republican party to beat the Democrats now would be to give more benefits to the lazy, paid for by the hard work of the non-lazy. And we won't do that. What's the answer to this problem? I just don't know. I am afraid that the scale has tipped and we will never go back. I agree completely that the parasite mentality is the main driver of the Democrats victories and the only solution I am sorry to say is a forced one as, for example, an economic collapse when the freebies will just plain stop. It will be ugly but I don't see any other solution. Especially when Democrats refuse to allow us to become energy efficient, which would bring us millions of jobs and remove the plethora of regulations that hinder business initiatives, etc. I am afraid Old Painless that it may be too late. We have become a nation of parasites. |
|
The only answer is more education. Let people know that the government cannot tax us in to prosperity or borrow our way out of this problem.
We've allowed ourselves to be divided: haves vs. have nots, and the have nots love it. This is a multi-pronged approach, divisiveness combined with early indoctrination into nanny-statism via the public schools* spell the beginning of the end. *every younger person I know- and obviously the older liberals- is very comfortable allowing government make decisions of all kinds for them. It's sad because they paradoxically feel strong and intelligent even as they give up more and more. 
And we are at their mercy. |
| There is only one thing that can reverse this trend. That is the collapse of our economy as a result of this wave of socialism. When that inevitably happens, it will be the card carrying members of the Free Shit Army who suffer most, as they are lost without government providing for their every need. Most of us will continue to survive thanks to our desire to be largely self sufficient and independent. After the bulk of the FSA starves to death, then maybe we'll be the majority again and common sense policies might make a comeback. |
| You and I, OP, have some basic philosophical differences......but in this, you are absolutely dead right. There are two things which never change and are to be ignored at your peril: the laws of physics and human nature. The concept of democracy flies in the very face of human nature and can never endure. |
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job than I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. Some people don't want to work and will live with the bear necessities in order to survive. They also feel you should be the same way. Just because you work makes you no better or to make more money then them. |
|
Quoted:
Just once I would like to hear one of them asked 'if a woman is nine months pregnant and has a perfectly healthy baby inside of her, is she allowed to kill it?' or 'is abortion okay if it is solely for sex selective purposes?' These questions are never asked because the media is so liberal. Its not asked because for the most part those questions have been settled. |
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. But making money takes work, unless you're on the dole. People have pretty good lives on the dole as long as they can live with themselves. Housing, food, child-care, tuition, and money for doing nothing. Not to mention all the free time you want. |
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. Because getting paid for doing nothing and bleating for a raise is easier than doing a job- any job. This is truly capitalism versus socialism at play. |
|
That's certainly part of it. No argument from me on that at all. People vote their pocket books. Where the GOP failed was not fielding a candidate that could relate to the common man. For far too many voters in those swing states like Ohio, Romney was the guy in the coat and tie who outsourced them a few years back. There was a certain level of distrust that he just couldn't overcome. His constant revision of his message didn't exactly inspire confidence, either. It came down to the Devil you know, or the one you don't. America is a nation where everybody wants to be rich but nobody really trusts a rich guy. The heck of it is you have to be loaded to be taken seriously in a primary. This election was easy pickings for the GOP. There's really no good reason why they should have lost it. All the indicators were there down to and including the fact that even Obama's base wasn't exactly in love with him. Romney's people just didn't have a consistent message through the year other than "anybody but Obama". Oh well, now we get to take a couple of years off and then the madness starts all over again. I'm growing to hate the business of politics. |
|
Quoted:
What's the answer to this problem? I just don't know. I suspect most of us know what is eventually going to happen. Is it possible to have an outcome that doesn't end with a civil war? The government's only option to avoid it is to disarm society. A lot of pople here say "from my cold dead hands", but I suspect most people will roll over. |
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. If you add up the payments for all of the welfare programs, they easily add up to what would be a working class paycheck |
|
I thought that too, but the FSA had little effect. In fact, over 10 million folks who voted for Obama in 2008 did not vote for him in 2012. He also got less EC votes. Likewise, Romney got 3 million less votes than McCain. Simple truth is the was about getting out the vote, and both candidates failed. Obama failed in greater numbers, but still got enough to narrowly win. |
|
Quoted:
As I started reading some of the comments today, I realized that many of you are confused at why we lost this election. It was not because we didn't have enough "true conservative" ideas. It was not because of "right to life" or "traditional marriage" support. It was not because we didn't embrace ""Libertarian" ideas. A couple of hundred years ago, a Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville studied the newly formed American system and said these things: “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” Sadly, I believe we have passed the "tipping point" on that scale. Romney was correct when he stated that he could not reach the 47% of the people that were sucking at the government tit. But he was wrong about the 47%. I believe it has passed that number. The only way for the Republican party to beat the Democrats now would be to give more benefits to the lazy, paid for by the hard work of the non-lazy. And we won't do that. What's the answer to this problem? I just don't know. I am afraid that the scale has tipped and we will never go back. im pretty sure your right. were just going to slide to the bottom now, and nothing we can do at the ballot box will change anything. 
|
|
Quoted: What's the answer to this problem? I know you and I are going to disagree but the GOP has to become the party of freedom instead of a right wing flavored big government party. While religious freedom is important the almost oppressive( to some) Christian overtones does drive people off that would other wise vote GOP. I realize people want the world to be run according to what they believe but that doesn't win elections unless you are promising free stuff. |
|
Quoted: As I started reading some of the comments today, I realized that many of you are confused at why we lost this election. It was not because we didn't have enough "true conservative" ideas. It was not because of "right to life" or "traditional marriage" support. It was not because we didn't embrace ""Libertarian" ideas. To discount the above is naive at best. This is a big part of the equation for the non-FSA Democrats, and yes they do exist. You either believe in Liberty and Justice for all, or you don't. Social conservatives helped us lose this election. |
|
Quoted:
I have to agree. I have no problem with honest people taking assistance in any form they choose if they actually need it. I can't stand the people who choose to not work, not actively find work, not better themselves, and just sit back and let the rest of us pay their way. And reproduce children who are willing to carry on their parents legacy.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just once I would like to hear one of them asked 'if a woman is nine months pregnant and has a perfectly healthy baby inside of her, is she allowed to kill it?' or 'is abortion okay if it is solely for sex selective purposes?' These questions are never asked because the media is so liberal. Its not asked because for the most part those questions have been settled. Sex selective abortions are happening as we speak. Obama doesn't think there should be any restrictions on abortion. |
|
Yep we are returning to our roots as a European Socialist Government, that of which our founders were fleeing from. It's a shame and while life will go on it is obvious that the republic is lost........... It's really our faults as we sat back and let it happen over the last 20yrs or more.....
|
|
Very sadly, I agree...
I had so much hope that the American people would do the right thing. I believed we all did what we could and that Romney ran a good campaign but it just came down to sheer numbers. The takers now out number the producers and quote about being bribed by your own money holds true. Much more true than I ever imagined... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. If you add up the payments for all of the welfare programs, they easily add up to what would be a working class paycheck And THAT people is the problem.
|
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I still on't get it. I have talked to people on "Unemployment". They can get a job at Lowes, making a little more than their unemployment benefits. I asked them why they didn't take the job. Their answer: "It is only a little more than I am getting now for doing nothing. I might as well just take it easy." The "shame" of being on welfare has disappeared in America. |
|
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. You haven't given up. Think about it, people like you describe have already given up on the idea of ever having wealth. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I still on't get it. I have talked to people on "Unemployment". They can get a job at Lowes, making a little more than their unemployment benefits. I asked them why they didn't take the job. Their answer: "It is only a little more than I am getting now for doing nothing. I might as well just take it easy." The "shame" of being on welfare has disappeared in America. Yes it has and we are in deep, DEEP trouble because of it. I simply don't see a solution that isn't draconian. I hope and pray I am wrong but I don't see how I can be.
|
|
Quoted:
The only answer is more education. Let people know that the government cannot tax us in to prosperity or borrow our way out of this problem. We've allowed ourselves to be divided: haves vs. have nots, and the have nots love it. This is a multi-pronged approach, divisiveness combined with early indoctrination into nanny-statism via the public schools* spell the beginning of the end. *every younger person I know- and obviously the older liberals- is very comfortable allowing government make decisions of all kinds for them. It's sad because they paradoxically feel strong and intelligent even as they give up more and more.
And we are at their mercy. The majority of people don't want to be educated. ESPECIALLY if they are getting handouts. We can't win by educating anyone. |
|
Quoted: That is because shame must come from society and cannot be legislated into existence. We have long subsidized the birthrates and indoctrination of a class of people that does not work and has no shame in not doing so. Quoted: It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I still on't get it. I have talked to people on "Unemployment". They can get a job at Lowes, making a little more than their unemployment benefits. I asked them why they didn't take the job. Their answer: "It is only a little more than I am getting now for doing nothing. I might as well just take it easy." The "shame" of being on welfare has disappeared in America. |
|
Quoted: It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I sill on't get it. Look at it this way: How much money would the Govt have to give you for you to decide to stay home, not work, and vote Dem? $10K? $25K? $100K? Everybody has a number. The FSA is lower than you or me.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I still on't get it. I have talked to people on "Unemployment". They can get a job at Lowes, making a little more than their unemployment benefits. I asked them why they didn't take the job. Their answer: "It is only a little more than I am getting now for doing nothing. I might as well just take it easy." The "shame" of being on welfare has disappeared in America. this X1000 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
That is because shame must come from society and cannot be legislated into existence. We have long subsidized the birthrates and indoctrination of a class of people that does not work and has no shame in not doing so.
Quoted:
It doesn't make sense to me. I make way more money with a job thn I would on The Dole. So why would I vote to impoverish myself? I still on't get it. I have talked to people on "Unemployment". They can get a job at Lowes, making a little more than their unemployment benefits. I asked them why they didn't take the job. Their answer: "It is only a little more than I am getting now for doing nothing. I might as well just take it easy." The "shame" of being on welfare has disappeared in America. Not only that, they relish in it.
|
|
The answer is:
1) Abandon social conservatism. 2) Devise a strategy to convince minorities that conservative economic policies will be a benefit to THEM. 3) Aggressively promote 2). That's it. If we can't convince a substantial number of Blacks and Latinos that conservative economic policies will benefit them, then we're screwed. So far, the GOP has been pushing a "Southern Strategy" and focusing on the white vote. The days that approach can successful are very nearly over (idf they aren't already). |