Reply With Quote
None, for the same reason Republicans don't lose any of their base for the against-the-grain things they do. The base is the base, and will support that side blindly to the end. Look in the mirror for an example.
How much of his base does Obama lose over his, arguably, extra-cons utional killing of al Awlaki and his crackdown on medical marijuana?
It doesn't seem he's appealing to anyone right now.
None, for the same reason Republicans don't lose any of their base for the against-the-grain things they do. The base is the base, and will support that side blindly to the end. Look in the mirror for an example.
So, you're saying, political bases weigh the things their ideological representatives do as being either significant enough to lose my support or too insignificant to worry about?
I can buy that.
After all, I was a vocal critic of Bush's continuation of the idiotic "War on Drugs" and of his decision to sign the TARP legislation. But, I believed in enough of his policies that it didn't make the opposition any more attractive. After all, apparently, his opponent was in agreement with both of those ideologies anyway.
So, the left's hyperventilating over Bush's alleged extra-cons utional actions was just political posturing? They weren't really that upset?
Thanks for clarifying.
I don't think he will lose his base when it comes to polling, but I think it will reduce their participation come Nov 2012.
So, if his base loses their enthusiasm, what is the attraction for the center, moderates, and independents to stay with an Obama candidacy for a second term?
I agree with WC. Some of his base will just stay home, unless some unknown
motivational factor rears it's head along the way.
I think also, that if Cain is chosen as the Republican nominee that Obama will lost
a pretty good portion of the black vote, since it will give them the cover of voting
for a "different" black man.
I think you are seeing the worry on the left of this happening by the attacks being
made on Cain about him not being part of the equal rights movement and marching
with King. As if Barry was....
I would classify it as desperation instead of worry.
In Barry's defense, he was involved in the Civil Rights Movement, such as it existed, when he came of age.
Unfortunately, by then, it had morphed into a movement Martin Luther King, Jr. would have abhorred; it was less about equality than about preferential treatment. Hence, his involvement in community organizing and ACORN, to win preferential treatment for blacks and minorities.
I don't agree how much of his base he loses. Not much, but it is very much something his base is against.
Translation: I don't like anything that Bush did but as soon as a I saw GOP on that ballot, I was in love.
Nope. Do you agree with every position espoused by the politicians for which you vote?
My voting policy for the past decade or so has been to vote for whoever does not have a party affiliation next to their name. My political will is all about eliminating the two party system and everything else is ancillary. There are very few candidates with that platform.
Quite often I don't vote for anyone at all despite showing at the polling station. My voting has a goal and its not to get anyone particular elected at this point and has not been for a very long time. So that question really has little meaning in that context.
When you get a ballot say for RR commissioner and if you have no idea who the candidate is do you vote GOP anyway? Have you hit the 'all the party's candidates' lever?
That's a winning strategy. How's it working out?
And, zero that are electable.
Well, carry on then.
Nope. I've never voted a straight party ticket and, in fact, have voted, primarily, for Libertarian candidates, where they exist.
I will leave a ballot blank if I don't know the candidates or the their positions -- unless there is a Libertarian candidate on that race (It's unlikely I wouldn't know the Libertarian candidate and their positions).
I can't think of a Democrat for whom I've ever voted but, it wouldn't surprise me if I had, at some time, in my past. I'm not the GOP cheerleader you believe and, like you purport, tend to vote for candidates and their positions, not party affiliations.
Who said voters 'win' or 'lose' by voting? Oh wait, you're a team player.
Agree with this. Also important to state, IMO, that neither base win an election on their own.
Quite well, actually. The Obama Administration with its election campaign of change and its subsequent lack thereof has begun to open a lot of eyes. Party identification is ever diminishing especially amongst the newer voters.
This upcoming election looks to see more losses by in bents than ever before and when the 'challengers' end up being more of the same it will demonstrate my agenda even more.
Politically, I am looking forward to the next four years because I believe its going to be an amazing time of opportunity within the landscape as more and more people feel disenfranchised.
You think people are mad now? Wait until the vote out an entire in bency and nothing changes.
It's making no difference. Those people aren't even real, it's probably photoshopped. And if they are real, they're probably just a bunch of uneducated idiots who don't matter. But do continue to plug your ears, close your eyes, and bleet about the latest thing that the GOP is telling you to say.
They can get together, chant anarchist slogans and crap on police cars and you call that making a difference?
It's making no difference. Those people aren't even real, it's probably photoshopped. And if they are real, they're probably just a bunch of uneducated idiots who don't matter. But do continue to plug your ears, close your eyes, and bleet about the latest thing that the GOP is telling you to say.
Who is going to be there presidential candidate? Who are their congressional and Senatorial candidates? What's the end game? How, exactly, are we going to measure whether or not the "Occupiers" made a difference. I'd like for someone to declare that up front.
When they have the impact the Tea Party had in the 2010 elections, I'll believe they're capable of making a difference. Until then, I think they'll probably go the way of ... what was the last iteration of liberal nonsense... oh yeah, "The Coffee Party." Remember them?
Well, the last remaining member of that party is now hanging with the "Occupiers."
I don't know how many attempts the left has now made to recreate the success of the Tea Party but, it's getting pretty pathetic.
Getting Harry Reid re-elected?
He's pretty much lost me. But Republicans aren't any better on civil liberties, excepting a few like Ron Paul.
Yeah, exactly.
I suggest you ask Nancy Pelosi if the Tea Party had an impact in 2010.
Why ask Pelosi if we can ask Reid
Ask Reid then. He would tell you he lost six Senate seats to Republicans and that he was left with a shaky majority, comprised of 50 Democrats and two recalcitrant Independents, that is all but lost in 2012 because he's got to defend 25 Democrat Senate seats while Republicans only have 10 up for re-election.Why ask Pelosi if we can ask Reid
That's what he'd tell you. Give him a call.
So the Tea Party couldn't even win over both the House and the Senate?
, even the Dems featuring Pelosi in 2006 were able to sweep with both...
Frankly, the 10% approval rating for this Congress speaks volumes of BOTH parties... including the Tea Potties.
that Lawrence O'Donnell interview was a disgrace. in that same interview O'Donnell also claimed that Cain dodged the draft of Vietnam. that was one of the worst most biased interviews i've ever seen.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
