|Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Proof the Republican Party is Insane|
Proof the Republican Party is Insane
Posted - 12/5/2012 3:07:18 PM | show profile | flag this post
The old saying goes: "Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result."
Well, just look at some of the news today, compared to some of the stuff from before the GOP's resounding election defeat:
Before the election: "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them...." --Mitt Romney
After the election: "John Sununu: Democrats Won Thanks To Voters Dependent On Government"
Before the election: Sheldon Adelson spends $150 million on eight candidates -- seven lose.
After the election: Sheldon Adelson plans to spend $300 million in 2016 on Republican candidates.
Let's just hope Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum run exactly like they did this year!
Posted - 12/5/2012 3:32:53 PM | show profile | flag this post
After another four years of Obama
the GOP could run Alfred E. Newman and win.
Posted - 12/5/2012 4:12:42 PM | show profile | flag this post
They sure couldn't win with Richie Rich....
after four years!
Face it, cruzo. The Republican Party is out of touch with the American people.
You and your TEA Party buddies keep saying, "If we just kick some more people out of our big tent, we'll win!"
You've kicked women, gays, blacks, hispanics, Asians, young people, veterans, homeowners, Social Security recipients and who knows who else out. Now, you want to purge the party of any moderates.
Y'all couldn't do the math before the election and swore Romney would win in a landslide.
I don't know how you're supposed to get to a higher number of voters by subtracting people.
But keep doing exactly what you did last time and Democrats will take back the House in 2014 and Democrats will keep the White House in 2016.
Posted - 12/5/2012 4:57:21 PM | show profile | flag this post
Well it's nice to see
We've jumped to the "acceptance" stage of grief...
"After another four years of Obama the GOP could run Alfred E. Newman and win."
I swear to God you people don't listen to yourselves. After the FIRST four years of that Commie/Socialist/Kenyan/Mao-Hitler like monarchy...you people were convinced you had this election in thbag. How oh how could you possibly lose against that dread black guy in the WH with high unemployment?? ALL the experts (here and elsewhere) said it was going to be a friggin LANDSLIDE donchaknow...
Well...you managed to do it. Lose to Satan himself. But now--cruise is looking forward to four years from now!! "After another four years of Obama the GOP could run Alfred E. Newman and win." That just cracks me up.
Without even acknowleding your horrible loss--we're already moving on to four years from now--and you next devastating loss. Go ahead cruise--Let the betting begin!!
Posted - 12/5/2012 6:33:20 PM | show profile | flag this post
I acknowledged the facts of Obama's improbably win
but I also recall that his approval rating was much lower than that of any Democrat who's ever won a second term. I don't see anything he proposes that will improve his rating...certainly not when the American public sees the full impact of what's on tap for them. Therefore, in 2016 the GOP could run Alfred E. Newman and win. Make book on that.
Posted - 12/5/2012 9:07:22 PM | show profile | flag this post
Calm down cruise;
Your'e still coming to grips with "Your side lost". Hey. Been there. Doesn't mean the issues change, or facts are altered.
"I acknowledged the facts of Obama's improbably win"
Okay, that's not even a sentence.
"but I also recall that his approval rating was much lower than that of any Democrat who's ever won a second term"
Okay, that doesn't make any sense either. Obama's approval rating is just fine, thank you very much,
And besides that: here's a clue about the presidents approval rating; HE WON. Despite all your political expertise, and your 'in depth research' 'from various sources [includibng the local library] and all the 'Romney in a landslide' bullshit--You were WRONG. HE WON.
"Therefore, in 2016 the GOP could run Alfred E. Newman and win. Make book on that."
Ooooooo. So scared. Let's start already thinking of a 'Hillary v Santorum' contest. Yea. That will work out so well for ya. (If we get those 'unskewed poll sites" working out for ya.) You believed in them so much last time, what could go wrong??
Posted - 12/6/2012 1:29:28 AM | show profile | flag this post
No matter how hard
you try to puff it up, it was a NARROW victory.
Posted - 12/6/2012 1:30:47 AM | show profile | flag this post
Sometimes, mp, you're fun to toy with
Other times you're just an assh*le.
Posted - 12/6/2012 9:44:08 AM | show profile | flag this post
An ELECTORAL LANDSLIDE, cruzo...
you should understand that.
Outside of Obama's 2008 popular vote win -- the biggest clear popular vote margin of victory in any election since 1988.
Oh, and BTW, if you want to talk about approval ratings -- Obama now has the highest approval since right after he announced the death of Osama bin Laden.
Accept the fact YOUR side lost the White House and seats in both the House and Senate. Accept the fact that despite all the GOP voter supression efforts, more people voted for Democrats for White House, House and Senate.
Posted - 12/6/2012 10:59:41 AM | show profile | flag this post
Keep telling yourself that
if it helps you get through the night.
Posted - 12/7/2012 10:19:34 AM | show profile | flag this post
I stick with facts, cruzo...
if I didn't, you would have challenged them.
You didn't because you couldn't.
Posted - 12/7/2012 12:54:47 PM | show profile | flag this post
*** Let's just hope Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum run exactly like they did this year! ***
Look at it this way: They're distributing Sheldon Adelson's wealth down the food chain.
Posted - 12/7/2012 1:08:53 PM | show profile | flag this post
Wait a minute...
We need proof?
Posted - 12/7/2012 2:36:38 PM | show profile | flag this post
"Okay, that's not even a sentence"
And you purport to be employed in a COMMUNICATIONS field??? Could you possibly be any more miscast???
It has a subject, a verb and a direct object...complete with a prepositional phrase.
Christ! Go ask your English teacher. She'll explain it to you...in words of one syllable, if necessary.
Posted - 12/7/2012 3:36:02 PM | show profile | flag this post
is not a "narrow" victory, cruzo.
And you, as the champion of the electoral college, should know that 62% of the electoral vote is by no means "narrow."
Posted - 12/7/2012 3:39:21 PM | show profile | flag this post
OF COURSE you won't address my last post
because you know you're egregiously wrong.
Posted - 12/7/2012 3:41:44 PM | show profile | flag this post
Your last post confirms...
the thesis of this thread -- that the Republican Party is insane.
You want me to comment your last post -- on the validity of a sentence you wrote with a typo?
Yes, cruzo, that IS insane.
Posted - 12/7/2012 3:43:40 PM | show profile | flag this post
I think we've seen the last of Cain, Newt, Rick Perry, Hunstman, (and Romney and Ron Paul for that matter). Bachmann and Santorum on the other hand are just crazy enough to give it another shot....
But I still see Rubio, Christie, Jindal, and even Ryan as the [very] early favorites.
(Note to cruise: Oh for chrissakes get over yourself. You probably meant to type 'improbable'. We have thousands of typos here all the time, no need to get defensive about it. Part of that "you're never wrong" problem we often see in you I guess.
btw--It's still not a correct sentence, and 'impropably' is an adverb, not a verb. You can't even lecture us correctly.)
Posted - 12/7/2012 3:45:24 PM | show profile | flag this post
Need more proof...
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) became apparently the first person in Senate history to filibuster a bill he introduced himself.
He proposed a plan on the debt ceiling hoping to embarrass the Democrats.
Harry Reid (D-NV) put it up for a vote.
McConnell realized how much power it'd give to President Obama...and had to filibuster to kill his own bill.
Posted - 12/7/2012 4:20:10 PM | show profile | flag this post
We knew Yertle McConnell
was always a "tad off"...but Holy Cow.
It was heart-breaking to watch a true American hero like Bob Dole--wheeled onto the floor he loved so much--just plain anguish while he his saw his own party vote AGAINST a disabilities proposal....AND this after they said NO to a Bill 'encouraging hiring Veterans coming home from the Bush Wars (Yea. An idea like that is pure tyranny donchaknow) And it was mind-boggling enough to realize the Party of NO has managed to break all records when it comes to blocking legislation--but--Jeez.
(paraphrasing) Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) may have made United States senate history today when he beat up on his own legislation, blocking a straight up-or-down vote on a proposal that he, himself, offered for a vote Thursday morning. Huh?? He desperately tried to block himself???
I'm not the first one to think of it, but does this remind anyone of "Blazing Saddles"???
[the Johnsons load their guns and point them at Bart. Bart then points his own pistol at his head]
Bart: [low voice] Hold it! Next man makes a move, the nigger gets it!
Olson Johnson: Hold it, men. He's not bluffing.
Dr. Sam Johnson: Listen to him, men. He's just crazy enough to do it!
Bart: [low voice] Drop it! Or I swear I'll blow this nigger's head all over this town!
Bart: [high-pitched voice] Oh, lo'dy, lo'd, he's desp'it! Do what he sayyyy, do what he sayyyy!
[Townspeople drop their guns. Bart jams the gun into his neck and drags himself through the crowd towards the station]
Harriet Johnson: Isn't anybody going to help that poor man?
Dr. Sam Johnson: Hush, Harriet! That's a sure way to get him killed!
Bart: [high-pitched voice] Oooh! He'p me, he'p me! Somebody he'p me! He'p me! He'p me! He'p me!
Bart: [low voice] Shut up!
[Bart places his hand over his own mouth, then drags himself through the door into his office]
Bart: Ooh, baby, you are so talented!
[looks into the camera]
Bart: And they are so *dumb*!
Had to share that one.
Posted - 12/7/2012 4:34:24 PM | show profile | flag this post
Christie may be endearing himself to Obama and Democrats
but he's digging himself a HUGE hole with Republicans...and, as you know, it takes the conservative wing of the party to nominate. It AIN'T gonna happen for him.
Besides, after two miserable failures with so-called "moderate" candidates (three if you count Dole), it's time for Republicans to come home to the Reaganesque (read: conservative) side.
Posted - 12/7/2012 7:07:52 PM | show profile | flag this post
Now THAT was an interesting comment
...and one even I cannot dispute.
(Regarding Christie) "it takes the conservative wing of the party to nominate. It AIN'T gonna happen for him."
You may be absolutely correct in that. One look at how close Santorum got proves you right. But here's the problem--as Romney clearly demonstrated--A GOPer has to go far right for the primaries--and then tack to the middle in order to win the General...and then every far right position you took in the primaries comes back to haunt you.
Maybe--just maybe--the GOP has shot at the WH in 2016 IF...
A) Hillary doesn't run. If she does, it's hers.
B) Christie, Rubio, Jindal, etc?? Take the 'Romney playbook' and throw it in the dumpster where it belongs. If 2012 taught us anything--it is this: Take a stand. And stick to it. Etch-A-Sketch is no way to run a campaign--the voters will see through it. They're not as dumb as you think. These guys (so far) are dangerously going there.
Posted - 12/7/2012 7:25:37 PM | show profile | flag this post
"A GOPer has to go far right for the primaries--
and then tack to the middle in order to win the General"
And Democrats have to do the same thing in reverse. That's been going on for at LEAST as long as I've been following politics...and that's a LONG time.
Posted - 12/7/2012 9:27:34 PM | show profile | flag this post
okay, another good point;
(Why cant you be this rational all the time?)
YES. You are right...Dems do the same thing; tack to the left during the primaries and the go "centrist" for the General.
BUT if you remember four years ago; think Clinton v Edwards v Biden v Obama,...first of all, there weren't many of them (A huge collective sigh goes up) and they certainly weren't as well, nutsy? (Cain? Bachmann? Want to to watch some tape?)
But here was the problem with Romney--'moving towards the center' for the General election' sounded like a good idea--but it would have been a MUCH better idea if Romney stood for sometihng--anything--in the first place. When you stand atop of mountain of Jello-O, sooner or later you're going to sink.
Posted - 12/8/2012 12:14:57 AM | show profile | flag this post
"(Why cant you be this rational all the time?)"
I'm perfectly rational ALL the time. It's just that your partisanism prevents you from seeing that.