- Joined
- Jul 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,189
- Reaction score
- 1,932
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Exactly. The Democrats had 2,000,000 dead people vote so Obama would be declared the winner.
Did you count them all?
Exactly. The Democrats had 2,000,000 dead people vote so Obama would be declared the winner.
Cut the B.S. denials. The Left stole the election, end of story.
You cheated your way into power... Fine.
You have the control of the country for the next four years.
We will stand aside and let you do ANYTHING at all that you want. ANYTHING!
But in four years, when the majority of people in America are far, far more unhappy, in poverty, and going without due to the inherent failures of your ideaology, it won't be "Dubya's Fault".
We will simply stand out of the way, and let you fail, so that the majority of the American People will rise up against the idiocy of the "Neo-Liberal" ethnic socialist, faux-enviromentalist radical agenda.
You can steal an election, but with your intrinsically flawed agenda, you can't govern.
-
I think there have been enough complaints in enough places that we need to scrap the touchscreen machines in every state.
It's funny when the left brought this up in 2004, conservatives called the left crazy and now that the righty candidate lost, people on the right "suddenly" believe electronic voting machines to be "faulty".
Don't get me wrong, I actually agree with you in that we should do paper ballot only. However, it is amusing watching all the so called "voter fraud" threads when the righty candidate lost.
Definitely sour grapes on the rights part. They can't admit that their candidate lost, so it MUST be voter fraud.
That is not going to happen with the republican controlled house. Obama is reliant on congress to pass the bills before he can sign them into law. I think you are overreacting a whole lot. As amusing as the meltdown is, you are loosing a grip on reality. I know you are dissapointed, and i hope this is just a tantrum that will go away, but if it continues you really should consider some therapy or something. Just for the fact it is not fun to live for long periods in this sort of fear and delusional misery. It is just not that bad.
Ohhh, I see. So you beleive that the Left does now have a MANDATE.
The Democrats are now in charge and can pass whatever they want? Is that it?
To be fair the drumbeat of them being crapy, some designs more than others, has been building for awhile across the political spectrum. Just not so much in the loudest corners that it is right now, and they are somewhat behind the curve as there are already counties that have been getting rid of the POS machines (and more that wish they had the ready resources to do so).It's funny when the left brought this up in 2004, conservatives called the left crazy and now that the righty candidate lost, people on the right "suddenly" believe electronic voting machines to be "faulty".
Uh, no, not really. What we have is in effect a two man dictatorship. Harry Reid blocks anything coming up from the House he doesn't want and Obama passes what he wants with executive order. So Congress has pretty much been nullified. I'd like to see THAT change. Obviously there will be contention within and between the houses, but that was designed that way for a reason. Until we go back to this you will see the divide between the two sides get wider and wider.
I think part of the problem is exactly what we saw in the election. It's not that the Republicans have gone too far right (I would argue they are more centrist today than in years past), it's that the electorate has moved further left. In a world where individuals see themselves as the center of the universe which has shrunk to the size of their smart phone or tablet screen, everything is instant. Congress is no more obstructed than it has ever been (with the exception of super majorities, and even then when Obama had one his first two years he struck out on many of his plans) it's just that people want what they want and they want it NOW.
Executive order does not work that way and you know it. If you don't you should probably learn a bit before dabbling in any political discussion.
You really have no clue do you. America does not want the extreme right position the republicans are pushing. Not because they have gone left, but because republicans have gone fascist. They want america to be a christian nation where biblical law is the law of the land. they want to tell people who can marry and who can have sex with each other. They want to tell you who you can talk to and how you are supposed to be in every aspect of your life, and people are damned sick and tired of it. We are not a christian nation though we have a lot of christians in our nation. Gay marriage is OK as long as it is between consenting adults. If you think abortion is a sin then you don't have one, but it should be a choice for other people. You don't get to make choices for their lives. It is called freedom and you have to start accepting it. You are not entitled to walk outside and only see things you like. Some things will bother you and you will have to suck it up and deal. you do not have the right to be not offended. People have the right to handle their lives and health the way they see fit, and you are not a part of that decision because it does not effect you. Yes, people actually want their government to do things because despite it's failing at times it does a far better job than private industry at many things. We want a government that runs efficiently and one that does provide things for us. Yes, we are willing to pay taxes for that because we either pay taxes or we pay for it in the private sector. Either way we get to pay for it, so in some cases it is good to have the government handle it considering the lowlife slimeballs like Mittens who would take every little bit of profit they could and give you as little as possible.
We are tired of hearing your bitching because you want to stop people from getting abortions, or stop two consenting adults from marrying because you read a book that said it was bad. Tough tittie that you don't like it. We are sick of your laws that do everything to try and hurt people who are not like you, and it is getting old and tired. We are not going further left we are getting more ticked off at bossy little snobs who think they know how to run everyone else's life yet they cannot get it together themselves. We are just sick of you. That is what you have to know. We don't need you to save our souls, we did not ask you to save our souls, and frankly unless we have asked we don't want you to save our souls. Work on yourself, because you need a lot of fixing.
It is not us, it is you who is wrong.
We see allot of Democrats Gloating and talking about all the things they're now going to do....
But it was a very close election, AND...
There is NO Mandate.
The Dems, with the help of the Courts blocking Voter ID, Can STEAL an Election, but they'll never Govern.
Ohhh, I see. So you beleive that the Left does now have a MANDATE.
The Democrats are now in charge and can pass whatever they want? Is that it?
Republicans declared Bush had a mandate in 2004 with a smaller popular vote margin and a smaller EC margin.
If Bush had one with those numbers, Obama has one with his. Using the arguments given by Republicans in 2004, Obama absolutely has a mandate.
I don't know what Republicans seriously thought Bush had a mandate in 04...Republicans declared Bush had a mandate in 2004 with a smaller popular vote margin and a smaller EC margin.
If Bush had one with those numbers, Obama has one with his. Using the arguments given by Republicans in 2004, Obama absolutely has a mandate.
They were wrong then just as those who claim an Obama mandate are now. I don't think anyone beyond pure party pundits thought Bush had a mandate in 2004. Same is true of Obama today.
I don't know what Republicans seriously thought Bush had a mandate in 04.
However, it should be said, that in 04, the Republicans also won the house and senate...
In this election, Republicans kept the house, extended their lead among governorships... Democrats kept the presidency and Senate...
and nearly every state in the union had their presidential election result lean more to the right... 48 out of 51, including DC...
That's not a mandate that Obama's way is the right way... that's Obama narrowly winning a popularity contest, with a highly unpopular guy who does the right thing most of the time... a sqaure... Well done Obama... beating the stiff old rich guy that no one likes in a popularity contest.
Nothing else changed...
You really need to start using Google.
Bennet, Kristol and Tucker Carlson openly declared it. Bush himself claimed a mandate.
That's your take on it. But that wasn't the arguments presented by the media, as well as the Bush administration on why they had a mandate.
That is true... This was a status quo election...Now that is true.
LMFAO @ the need to start using "google"... I'm sorry, since when did "Google" become synonimous with "knowledge"
That's ridiculous... Not only are there other search engines out there, that you don't have to buy into the google hype... but googling sites is a heavily flawed way of doing research, that only brings back website information which can be tampered with or adjusted on the fly
No college, court, or other official institution would accept a google search or website as proof of anything
Neither is what Tucker Carlson or William Kristol considered to be proof of anything but a partisan hack spouting off crap they like to hear themselves say.
No Democrat felt Bush had a mandate... and they all wanted Kerry to push for a recount, take it to the courts... and to start impeachment proceedings on Bush.
Go "Google" that aspect of it...
Funny now they are all turned 180 degrees and saying such behavior is wrong.
Oh, is that what it is? I thought it was the Capital of OHNo, Google is a method of finding information. Which you clearly have a problem here.
I'm not sure you have a clue how Google works, because Google puts emphasis on most popular, most searched for, nearest to you geographically, etc. Neither of those things is “most appropriate”, “most accurate”, “most respected within it’s field”, etc. (May also want to check that Santorum bit for grammatical sense, because I couldn’t find any)You clearly do not understand how Google's algorithm works. To actually mess with Google's data requires a huge endeavor. Getting Santorum to show what it shows rather then him took years to do. You are pushing this notion that anyone can quickly & deliberately mess with Google's search results. That is not possible.
I will be laughing about this comment for years with my former professors at Harvard, who also rarely have to consult “Google”, something most of them have little respect for as well…Did I say it was? My point about Google is using it to find information. You again have a problem with basic information, in getting it, understanding it & merging it with your arguments. Good arguments are based on proper, decent information. You need to fix how you do this as there is a massive gap in your current capacity.
LMFAO… Oh, did Bush say it, than it must be true… :roll:So the Bush Adminstration is a bunch of hacks too? I like how you just called Kristol a hack. Needless to say, you are wrong about your initial point. Unless you are calling Kristol, Carlson & Bennet liars. Not to mention Bush himself.
LMFAO! Actually, those quotes aren’t what you said… You just helped make my point!See what I mean about Google?
Paula Zahn, CNN host: "A president with a mandate, a 10-seat majority in the Senate, at least 25 seats in the House. So everything should be smooth sailing for Republicans, right? Well, maybe not."
Chicago Tribune editorial board: "In trying to advance an ambitious second-term agenda, President Bush has made it clear he intends to make every use he can of the assets at his disposal, starting with the electoral mandate he got last week."
John Roberts, CBS News chief White House correspondent (now with CNN): "With the majority of the popular vote behind him [Bush], with the Electoral College win, with a mandate that perhaps many people didn't allow him to have in the first term, can he afford to be more magnanimous with the press?"
Andy Serwer, CNN host & Fortune magazine editor-at-large: "Interesting time for the president, obviously, he [Bush] seems to have a mandate from the people to go ahead &do what he wants to, his bidding. Where do you think this is going to take him?"
Christine Romans, CNN anchor: "When I talk to Democrats&people who watch the Democratic machine, they're furious that this was so close again& that now the president has a mandate."
Michele Kelemen, National Public Radio diplomatic correspondent: "Others doubt President Bush will change much given his election mandate&his strong convictions in foreign policy."
Carol Costello, CNN anchor & reporter: "To American politics now & the mandate. President Bush is promising to use his election mandate to push his agenda forward."
Ceci Connolly, Washington Post staff writer: "Well, I certainly think that there is a mandate [for Bush]. I think we have to go a little bit careful in terms of what specifically it is a mandate for. I mean as we've all agreed, a lot was discussed in this campaign. Interestingly, what you heard President Bush focus on was tax reform, Social Security changes, partial privatization. And continuing what he calls the war on terrorism."
David Sanger, New York Times White House correspondent: "But Mr. Bush no longer has to pretend that he possesses a clear electoral mandate. Because for the first time in his presidency, he can argue that he has the real thing." The New York Times, "Relaxed, Certainly, but Keeping One Eye on the Clock,"
Dan Chapman, Atlanta Journal-Constitution global economics & business reporter: "Bush, buoyed by a popular mandate & a more Republican Congress, will probably receive the financial & military wherewithal to fight the insurgency & rebuild Iraq." [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, "Bush gets voters' nod on Iraq, but outlook risky,"]
Keith Miller, NBC News correspondent: "Bush, who won by more than three & a half million votes, has a solid mandate that will force the attention of America's enemies & allies."
Rafael Lorente, Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) Washington bureau: " Americans not only gave President Bush a mandate, they also gave him the necessary tools in the form of more Republican House & Senate colleagues to push through his conservative agenda."
Doyle McManus & Janet Hook, Los Angeles Times staff writers: "Four years ago, George W. Bush won his first term with fewer votes than his opponent, but governed as if the nation had granted him a clear mandate to pursue conservative policies. This time, Bush can claim a solid mandate of 51% of the vote, which made him the first presidential candidate to win a clear majority since 1988 – a point Bush aides made repeatedly Wednesday." [Los Angeles Times, "Majority Win Could Make Second Term More Partisan," 11/4/04]
Tony Karon, Time magazine columnist & senior editor: "George W. Bush took the reins of power with the confidence & certainty of one who had carried a landslide mandate to implement his own agenda. This time, of course, his claim of a popular mandate is incontrovertible. His party has strengthened its grip on both branches of the legislature, & freed of any first-term restraints that might be thrown up by reelection concerns, President George W. Bush is well positioned to even more vigorously pursue his agenda." Time
Wolf Blitzer, CNN anchor: "My sense is that the president will see this as a mandate on his policies, because the Republicans also did very well in the House of Representatives, did very well in the U.S. Senate, picking up seats in both. He gets over 50 percent, 51 percent. And he's going to see this as a mandate in the next four years to try & move the country in the direction he wants it to move. He will try to bring the country together in the short term, but he's going to say, he's got a mandate from the American people, & by all accounts he does."
Renee Montagne, NPR host: "Well, as you say, the president's people are calling this a mandate. By any definition I think you could call this a mandate. How will he govern?"
Chris Matthews, MSNBC host: "Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews. & welcome to MSNBC's post-election coverage live from Democracy Plaza in New York's Rockefeller Plaza. Yesterday voters went to the polls & reelected President George Bush, giving him a mandate in his second term."
Oops Looks like you're wrong... again.
You mean like how all those quotes aren't what you said?
Seriously, start using Google, or frankly any search engine. Your information is so wrong it's not even funny.
Republicans declared Bush had a mandate in 2004 with a smaller popular vote margin and a smaller EC margin.
If Bush had one with those numbers, Obama has one with his. Using the arguments given by Republicans in 2004, Obama absolutely has a mandate.
Utter nonsense, he has nothing. He will be plagued by scandal the next 4 years.
Utter nonsense, he has nothing. He will be plagued by scandal the next 4 years.
It is utter nonsense the right believes, but they will try to ensure he has nothing. He will be plagued by obstructionist teabaggers for the next 4 years.