2012 Election Thread

[rowjimmy]

Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.

You mean like dumping millions of dollars into campaigns to prevent equal rights for homosexuals?

Someone needs to point out during this campaign that Romney donates millions to the Mormon church (and gets a tax benefit for doing so), which then turns around and spends some of that money on shit like defeating Prop 8. Someone should ask Romney if he thinks intolerance should be tax-deductible.

Bill Maher points it out all the time.

[VDB]

Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.

You mean like dumping millions of dollars into campaigns to prevent equal rights for homosexuals?

Someone needs to point out during this campaign that Romney donates millions to the Mormon church (and gets a tax benefit for doing so), which then turns around and spends some of that money on shit like defeating Prop 8. Someone should ask Romney if he thinks intolerance should be tax-deductible.

Bill Maher points it out all the time.

Well yes (I love me some Bill Maher re: religion) but I was hoping more like Obama himself (ain't gonna happen) or a debate moderator (too scared)...

[rowjimmy]

Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.

You mean like dumping millions of dollars into campaigns to prevent equal rights for homosexuals?

Someone needs to point out during this campaign that Romney donates millions to the Mormon church (and gets a tax benefit for doing so), which then turns around and spends some of that money on shit like defeating Prop 8. Someone should ask Romney if he thinks intolerance should be tax-deductible.

Bill Maher points it out all the time.

Well yes (I love me some Bill Maher re: religion) but I was hoping more like Obama himself (ain't gonna happen) or a debate moderator (too scared)...

Most are too scared to open that can of worms.

[ytowndan]

George Bush won because the god fearing, flag waiving, religious right turned out in droves.
Mitt Romney will lose for the same reason.
Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.
That being said, the GOP voters as a whole will feel very differently I'm sure.
There is NO WAY Condi hops on this ticket IMHO. If she does, I could feel differently. Until then, it's Obama's to lose.

I don't believe this election hangs in the hands of the religous right.  These kinds of Evangelicals are, ironically, some of the most judgemental people you'll ever meet, and they certainly have their issues with people that worship the "wrong" flavor of Christ.  But, while they probably won't be enthusiastic about Romney himself, they'll be totally enthuastic about anyone but Obama. 

Think like one of them for a second.  Do you want to vote for a Morman?  Or do you want to stay home and let another vote go to Obama?  I mean, Obama is the guy who allows gays to serve in the military, vowed to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act and, personally, supports same-sex marriage.  He not only supports Roe v Wade, but he also wants employers to cockblock God by providing birth control (via "socialist healthcare") to good, God fearing, taxpayers.  And, of course, please don't forget his homeboy Jeremiah Wright, and the "fact" that his second term is all about taking away your guns and holy books (which is "proven" because he hasn't done it yet).

When it comes down to Romney vs. Obama, there's no question about it.  They're gonna side with the guy who thinks Jesus is from Missouri faster than you can say "Don't Ask Don't Tell". 

This is relevant, and I honestly hadn't thought about it like that. I do think it makes the Evangelistic Righy far less likely to be excited. In the end they may end up sucking it up, and begrudgingly voting for
Romney, but I just don't see the high motivation onthe part of the GOTV campaign that they were fired up and ready to lead for GWB.

I definitely see where you're coming from.  My only point is that, in this next election, many social issues hang in the balance.  Far too many for them to get apathetic in November. 

You mentioned their big enthusiasm for Bush, well, don't forget that a huge part of that GOTV campaign in Nov. 2004 was, in part, due to a total of 11 states that had referendums defining marriage.  All eleven states gave a resounding "HELL NO!" to gay marriage.  Ohio, the state that single-handedly decided the election by a measly two points, was one of them.  A huge part of that massive GOTV campaign from the religious right was to "protect the sanctity of marriage" (. . . and while you're there, vote for "the good guy").  I see the same thing happening again on the religious right.  This time the threat won't be widespread marriage referendums, it'll be about defeating the man who wants to destroy America's Christian values.  I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I have a feeling they'll be out in full force.

I think this election is in the hands of the "swing voters" whose number one priority is how the economy should be handled, and whether the young voters are apathetic or enthusiastic.   

[aphineday]

George Bush won because the god fearing, flag waiving, religious right turned out in droves.
Mitt Romney will lose for the same reason.
Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.
That being said, the GOP voters as a whole will feel very differently I'm sure.
There is NO WAY Condi hops on this ticket IMHO. If she does, I could feel differently. Until then, it's Obama's to lose.

I don't believe this election hangs in the hands of the religous right.  These kinds of Evangelicals are, ironically, some of the most judgemental people you'll ever meet, and they certainly have their issues with people that worship the "wrong" flavor of Christ.  But, while they probably won't be enthusiastic about Romney himself, they'll be totally enthuastic about anyone but Obama. 

Think like one of them for a second.  Do you want to vote for a Morman?  Or do you want to stay home and let another vote go to Obama?  I mean, Obama is the guy who allows gays to serve in the military, vowed to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act and, personally, supports same-sex marriage.  He not only supports Roe v Wade, but he also wants employers to cockblock God by providing birth control (via "socialist healthcare") to good, God fearing, taxpayers.  And, of course, please don't forget his homeboy Jeremiah Wright, and the "fact" that his second term is all about taking away your guns and holy books (which is "proven" because he hasn't done it yet).

When it comes down to Romney vs. Obama, there's no question about it.  They're gonna side with the guy who thinks Jesus is from Missouri faster than you can say "Don't Ask Don't Tell". 

This is relevant, and I honestly hadn't thought about it like that. I do think it makes the Evangelistic Righy far less likely to be excited. In the end they may end up sucking it up, and begrudgingly voting for
Romney, but I just don't see the high motivation onthe part of the GOTV campaign that they were fired up and ready to lead for GWB.

I definitely see where you're coming from.  My only point is that, in this next election, many social issues hang in the balance.  Far too many for them to get apathetic in November. 

You mentioned their big enthusiasm for Bush, well, don't forget that a huge part of that GOTV campaign in Nov. 2004 was, in part, due to a total of 11 states that had referendums defining marriage.  All eleven states gave a resounding "HELL NO!" to gay marriage.  Ohio, the state that single-handedly decided the election by a measly two points, was one of them.  A huge part of that massive GOTV campaign from the religious right was to "protect the sanctity of marriage" (. . . and while you're there, vote for "the good guy").  I see the same thing happening again on the religious right.  This time the threat won't be widespread marriage referendums, it'll be about defeating the man who wants to destroy America's Christian values.  I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I have a feeling they'll be out in full force.

I think this election is in the hands of the "swing voters" whose number one priority is how the economy should be handled, and whether the young voters are apathetic or enthusiastic.   

It's a very interesting point that you're making here, and I certainly understand where you are coming from. I guess the possibility of there being enough close minded nut jobs out there that really can't deal with some of these social issues. If that is THE sole motivating factor, Obama might be in trouble. I guess I'm just cautiously optimistic that peole will be swayed by the fact that he's not an offering paying member of their club. I hope I'm right too, but you're assessment is (unfortunately) a very real possibility as well.

[kellerb]

George Bush won because the god fearing, flag waiving, religious right turned out in droves.
Mitt Romney will lose for the same reason.
Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.
That being said, the GOP voters as a whole will feel very differently I'm sure.
There is NO WAY Condi hops on this ticket IMHO. If she does, I could feel differently. Until then, it's Obama's to lose.

I don't believe this election hangs in the hands of the religous right.  These kinds of Evangelicals are, ironically, some of the most judgemental people you'll ever meet, and they certainly have their issues with people that worship the "wrong" flavor of Christ.  But, while they probably won't be enthusiastic about Romney himself, they'll be totally enthuastic about anyone but Obama. 

Think like one of them for a second.  Do you want to vote for a Morman?  Or do you want to stay home and let another vote go to Obama?  I mean, Obama is the guy who allows gays to serve in the military, vowed to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act and, personally, supports same-sex marriage.  He not only supports Roe v Wade, but he also wants employers to cockblock God by providing birth control (via "socialist healthcare") to good, God fearing, taxpayers.  And, of course, please don't forget his homeboy Jeremiah Wright, and the "fact" that his second term is all about taking away your guns and holy books (which is "proven" because he hasn't done it yet).

When it comes down to Romney vs. Obama, there's no question about it.  They're gonna side with the guy who thinks Jesus is from Missouri faster than you can say "Don't Ask Don't Tell". 

This is relevant, and I honestly hadn't thought about it like that. I do think it makes the Evangelistic Righy far less likely to be excited. In the end they may end up sucking it up, and begrudgingly voting for
Romney, but I just don't see the high motivation onthe part of the GOTV campaign that they were fired up and ready to lead for GWB.

I definitely see where you're coming from.  My only point is that, in this next election, many social issues hang in the balance.  Far too many for them to get apathetic in November. 

You mentioned their big enthusiasm for Bush, well, don't forget that a huge part of that GOTV campaign in Nov. 2004 was, in part, due to a total of 11 states that had referendums defining marriage.  All eleven states gave a resounding "HELL NO!" to gay marriage.  Ohio, the state that single-handedly decided the election by a measly two points, was one of them.  A huge part of that massive GOTV campaign from the religious right was to "protect the sanctity of marriage" (. . . and while you're there, vote for "the good guy").  I see the same thing happening again on the religious right.  This time the threat won't be widespread marriage referendums, it'll be about defeating the man who wants to destroy America's Christian values.  I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I have a feeling they'll be out in full force.

I think this election is in the hands of the "swing voters" whose number one priority is how the economy should be handled, and whether the young voters are apathetic or enthusiastic.   

It's a very interesting point that you're making here, and I certainly understand where you are coming from. I guess the possibility of there being enough close minded nut jobs out there that really can't deal with some of these social issues. If that is THE sole motivating factor, Obama might be in trouble. I guess I'm just cautiously optimistic that peole will be swayed by the fact that he's not an offering paying member of their club. I hope I'm right too, but you're assessment is (unfortunately) a very real possibility as well.

I agree with you, but for this reason:  Evangelical Christians don't believe Romney is on their "correct-Jesus" side, so they don't trust him 100% on those social issues they vote on.  GWB, they totally trusted about that shit.  Romney believes in a different, incorrect jesus, so he's not to be 100% trusted to hate the gays, stomp on the minority-poor (only minorities exploit the welfare), and only enact Literal-Translation-of-the-Bible-approved laws. 

This will cause a drop-off in voters.  Not "swing" voters as much as "Maybe I vote, maybe I don't vote this year" republican voters.

Obama, on the other hand, will have to deal with the same "Maybe I vote, Maybe I don't" issue on the Democrat side, which is a big unknown, because he got those voters to the polls in 2008 bigtime.

I honestly don't think there's much in the way of swing voters this election, just a huge amount of "I might not bother to vote"r's.

[sls.stormyrider]

George Bush won because the god fearing, flag waiving, religious right turned out in droves.
Mitt Romney will lose for the same reason.
Personally, I don't have anything against the Mormons (I don't necessarily believe the same things they do, but to each their own), and in fact they've done some really great things humanitarian wise over the years.
That being said, the GOP voters as a whole will feel very differently I'm sure.
There is NO WAY Condi hops on this ticket IMHO. If she does, I could feel differently. Until then, it's Obama's to lose.

I don't believe this election hangs in the hands of the religous right.  These kinds of Evangelicals are, ironically, some of the most judgemental people you'll ever meet, and they certainly have their issues with people that worship the "wrong" flavor of Christ.  But, while they probably won't be enthusiastic about Romney himself, they'll be totally enthuastic about anyone but Obama. 

Think like one of them for a second.  Do you want to vote for a Morman?  Or do you want to stay home and let another vote go to Obama?  I mean, Obama is the guy who allows gays to serve in the military, vowed to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act and, personally, supports same-sex marriage.  He not only supports Roe v Wade, but he also wants employers to cockblock God by providing birth control (via "socialist healthcare") to good, God fearing, taxpayers.  And, of course, please don't forget his homeboy Jeremiah Wright, and the "fact" that his second term is all about taking away your guns and holy books (which is "proven" because he hasn't done it yet).

When it comes down to Romney vs. Obama, there's no question about it.  They're gonna side with the guy who thinks Jesus is from Missouri faster than you can say "Don't Ask Don't Tell". 

This is relevant, and I honestly hadn't thought about it like that. I do think it makes the Evangelistic Righy far less likely to be excited. In the end they may end up sucking it up, and begrudgingly voting for
Romney, but I just don't see the high motivation onthe part of the GOTV campaign that they were fired up and ready to lead for GWB.

I definitely see where you're coming from.  My only point is that, in this next election, many social issues hang in the balance.  Far too many for them to get apathetic in November. 

You mentioned their big enthusiasm for Bush, well, don't forget that a huge part of that GOTV campaign in Nov. 2004 was, in part, due to a total of 11 states that had referendums defining marriage.  All eleven states gave a resounding "HELL NO!" to gay marriage.  Ohio, the state that single-handedly decided the election by a measly two points, was one of them.  A huge part of that massive GOTV campaign from the religious right was to "protect the sanctity of marriage" (. . . and while you're there, vote for "the good guy").  I see the same thing happening again on the religious right.  This time the threat won't be widespread marriage referendums, it'll be about defeating the man who wants to destroy America's Christian values.  I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I have a feeling they'll be out in full force.

I think this election is in the hands of the "swing voters" whose number one priority is how the economy should be handled, and whether the young voters are apathetic or enthusiastic.   

It's a very interesting point that you're making here, and I certainly understand where you are coming from. I guess the possibility of there being enough close minded nut jobs out there that really can't deal with some of these social issues. If that is THE sole motivating factor, Obama might be in trouble. I guess I'm just cautiously optimistic that peole will be swayed by the fact that he's not an offering paying member of their club. I hope I'm right too, but you're assessment is (unfortunately) a very real possibility as well.

I agree with you, but for this reason:  Evangelical Christians don't believe Romney is on their "correct-Jesus" side, so they don't trust him 100% on those social issues they vote on.  GWB, they totally trusted about that shit.  Romney believes in a different, incorrect jesus, so he's not to be 100% trusted to hate the gays, stomp on the minority-poor (only minorities exploit the welfare), and only enact Literal-Translation-of-the-Bible-approved laws. 

This will cause a drop-off in voters.  Not "swing" voters as much as "Maybe I vote, maybe I don't vote this year" republican voters.

Obama, on the other hand, will have to deal with the same "Maybe I vote, Maybe I don't" issue on the Democrat side, which is a big unknown, because he got those voters to the polls in 2008 bigtime.

I honestly don't think there's much in the way of swing voters this election, just a huge amount of "I might not bother to vote"r's.

yep - I don't think Obama will get people excited the way he did 4 years ago, and the only people who Romney will get excited are the ones who really hate Obama.
the bottom line, imo, is how the economy is doing, or how people think the economy is doing.
the first thing that happens to a losing team is the coach gets fired.

[runawayjimbo]

I agree with you guys that born-agains don't trust Romney, but I'm not convinced they'll matter much since most of the states where Evangelicals make a difference are already solidly red (OH, FL, IA and VA notwithstanding). Turnout is definitely the key in a low enthusiasm election, and that usually favors the incumbent.

the bottom line, imo, is how the economy is doing, or how people think the economy is doing. 
the first thing that happens to a losing team is the coach gets fired.

Agreed. If they can kick the status quo can for a couple of months, it's Obama's to lose. But it could turn around very quickly (and quite plausibly, IMO) if a things start breaking against him, beginning next week with the Supreme Court decision on the ACA, followed by a Eurozone/financial crisis, the "fiscal cliff" brouhaha, and another debt ceiling circus (i.e., continued Congressional dooshbaggery).

Also, my Libertarian guru, Nick Gillespe, is on Bill Maher tomorrow night. It was an appearance of his on the show last year that converted me from a frustrated in Obama but still Democratic-minded moderate into the right-wing, liberty obsessed, free market worshipper I am today. I can't wait to watch him smash Maddow.

[aphineday]

I agree with you guys that born-agains don't trust Romney, but I'm not convinced they'll matter much since most of the states where Evangelicals make a difference are already solidly red (OH, FL, IA and VA notwithstanding). Turnout is definitely the key in a low enthusiasm election, and that usually favors the incumbent.

Well I live in Iowa, and I really don't know that we are solidly red. I also don't know that Ohio is solidly red. I agree with you on the turnout though.

[ytowndan]

Paul Ryan Being Vetted for VP

I'm reliably informed that Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the Budget Committee chairman, has submitted paperwork to the Romney campaign. Sources confirm that he is being vetted for the vice-presidential nomination.

Ryan, one of the GOP's brightest young stars, is clearly a favorite of Romney allies. But some top Republican officials are wary of plucking him from the House, where he is the party's most influential voice on fiscal issues.

Earlier this week, Romney campaigned with Ryan in Janesville, Wis., Ryan's hometown. Ryan previously stumped for Romney in late March and early April, ahead of Wisconsin's Republican presidential primary.

[ytowndan]

Paul Ryan Being Vetted for VP

I'm reliably informed that Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the Budget Committee chairman, has submitted paperwork to the Romney campaign. Sources confirm that he is being vetted for the vice-presidential nomination.

Ryan, one of the GOP's brightest young stars, is clearly a favorite of Romney allies. But some top Republican officials are wary of plucking him from the House, where he is the party's most influential voice on fiscal issues.

Earlier this week, Romney campaigned with Ryan in Janesville, Wis., Ryan's hometown. Ryan previously stumped for Romney in late March and early April, ahead of Wisconsin's Republican presidential primary.

Looks like it's all but official.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mitt-romney-announce-vp-pick-saturday-032140054.html

[PIE-GUY]

Ryan scares me. His budget ideas are so far to the right Boehner has shunned them.

[runawayjimbo]

I think Ryan was the best choice from Romney's perspective. He had already endorsed the Ryan budget so Obama was gonna paint him as a right wing, grandma-hating penny pincher anyway. But Ryan is much more exciting to the base than someone like Portman or Pawlenty (although they probably meet the "do no harm" criteria of VP selection better than Ryan). Still, the debt/deficit is the #2 issue for independents so I think it helps Romney with them. He will likely lose FL, but Ryan helps him in OH, WI, and CO.

Also, not the VP debates matter, but Ryan will wipe the floor with Biden.

Ryan scares me. His budget ideas are so far to the right Boehner has shunned them.

I hear this a lot, but I've never heard why. I mean, the Ryan budget doesn't balance until 2040. That doesn't seem very extreme to me. The Medicare vouchers is the only "radical" difference and while it may not be perfect, it's the only attempt at changing a system that everyone readily admits is bankrupting us. But no one on the left is willing to put forth a credible plan to fix it. Like Tim Geithner to Ryan a couple months ago: "We're not coming before you to tell you we have a long term solution to fix the debt. What we are saying is we don't like yours."

[sls.stormyrider]

yea, this is Romney's way of reinforcing "It's the economy, Stupid"
personally, I thought that Romney had the folks who liked Ryan anyway.

[gah]

yea, this is Romney's way of reinforcing "It's the economy, Stupid"
personally, I thought that Romney had the folks who liked Ryan anyway.

Definitely. It wasn't a decision based on winning independents, that's for sure. It's the strategy of stating to the conservatives, no really, I'm with you. They realize getting the far right worked into a frenzy will drive those people to the polls.