The Romney/Republican Excuse Thread

Rush Limbaugh put it best:

"It's hard to run against Santa Claus."

Dear republican party;

Next time could you please find someone who isn't very religious, thinks women and homosexuals are people too, likes the military and guns, and has a science education?

Thanks.

Most of this.

The chances of that happening are about the same as the chances of Baba becoming king of Mars.

In 2016 the Republican party will either nominate a completely crazy person or will go with the dim-witted pretty-crazy-but-not-quite-as-crazy token Hispanic from Florida because they think that they can stave off demographics that way. The nominee will certainly be very religious in his public persona, will be against birth control and equal pay and in favor of discrimination against homosexuals, and will either outright reject science or simply fail to understand what science is.

Sadly, finding someone who isn't very religious is unlikely to happen on either side of the aisle. At least, in my understanding of the term. It would be pretty suicidal to run as anything less than a Christian who goes to church on a semi-regular+ basis in either party.

If someone were to take the stance of "Not only do I think federal government's grown too big, so are the number of issues that it's wrapped up in. Therefore, I will only discuss those issues as they relate to the federal government. For the most part, I'm taking such things as abortion, gay rights, gun rights and such off the discussion table, except in so far as they relate to the role of the federal government," I would applaud that move.

Free stuff vs Work for stuff.

So you're against inherited wealth.

Add that together with the fact that the Republicans decided they could run the worst possible candidate and still have a chance, and you pretty much have a winning combination.

That's my prediction. I think we're going to see the first salvos in a split within the GOP very soon. The lunatics will throw Romney under the bus for not being one of them, and moderates will blame said lunatics for blowing a very winnable election.

The country at large made it clear last night that they want nothing to do with rape apology, institutional racism, denial of equality or legislated morality cloaked in the guise of small government. And if the GOP bigwigs don't understand this, then they never will.

Weird, I keep hearing about all this free stuff I'm supposed to get, yet I haven't gotten any. Where and what exactly is it?

It's the free stuff that people like Donald Trump get from their daddies.

There aren't enough moderates left in the Republican party to field a football team. Or a baseball team. Or a basketball team. Maybe a tennis team if they don't play doubles.

The war is already being fought on the State and local levels.

Trust me I'll change things worked for Obama the last time around.

You're right. Nothing's changed. No ACA, troops still in Iraq, no draw-down in Afghanistan, bin Laden still on the loose, DJI hovering around 8,000, auto industry inevitably downspiraled into bankruptcy, banks still handing out subprime mortgages like candy...

And again, always amazed by the way you justify your support for someone who doesn't give a shit about civil liberties.

Not as amazed as I am at your ability to .

So is your stance now "nothing has changed" or "I'm gonna hyperfocus on one thing and pretend nothing else has changed"? Let me know when you decide.

I wonder if that's true, or if they're out there and staying underground for fear of being shouted down by the loons.

I find it hard to believe that every conservative has the same insane views of rape as people like Akin and Mourdock.

Well, that rules out Mitt Romney. He got most of his wealth from daddy.

Which he donated in entirety to charity in 1994.

Nearly all of his wealth originated from his private equity company.

Thing is, they DID run (one of) the worst possible candidate(s), and got damn near half the people in the country to vote for him!

Half the voters. That's kind of pertinent here, I think.

I only focus on it to remind you of your hypocrisy, considering you loved to jump on everyone else when Bush destroyed civil liberties and made babies cry during his tenure.

But, but, but.....Obama has a MANDATE!

Then you weren't paying attention. My object to Bush was Iraq. Any other transgressions were just insult to injury.

It's pretty easy to run against Santa Claus, since a) he doesn't exist, and b) if he did exist, he would be easy to demonize.

"He claims to know who's been bad or good. But can we REALLY trust him? Santa Claus? More like Big Brother."

"Ask Santa Claus why he spends so much time with little kids on his lap. Ho. Ho. Ho."

Whatever you might criticize about Obama, you cannot reasonably say he did not provide details of various things he wanted to change. He certainly didn't do like Romney did and say, "I've got this plan to save the economy, to cut taxes, raise spending on the military and raise revenue, but I won't give you the details until I'm elected."

And Obama kicked his ass anyway.


Romney was Santa Claus, right? Because he promised everyone exactly what they wanted as long as they believed in him, and he couldn't explain how he was going to give it to them? And how the modern inoffensive image of Romney barely resembled the original religious version from the past?

Oh, and the whole "the voters are children" theme Rush is going with now is such a beautiful example of the Republican mindset of the last few years. I don't even know where to begin.

http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.ie/2012/11/the-dismal-future.html

The butthurt is strong with this one.

"America died. I can't stop crying".

http://wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2405898&postcount=45