In response to:

Obama Wins by Going Negative and Turning Out Base

DHE Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 6:54 AM
I like Michael Barone. He deserves to be lauded. But, he's embarrassed that he bought into the partisan narrative and is making excuses. Obama won. Despite all the conservative pundit articles and hosts telling us Romney was going to kill and my conservative friends so sure of it they were snickering - "Oh, boy, I can't wait," Obama won. He won. And though Rush Limbaugh, his brother and Mr. Barone are all trying to figure it out - they just don't want to look in the mirror. You lost, though you had the better economic argument - and that should have controlled - not just b/c of some Moronic statements about rape (Krauthammer) or b/c he got out the vote (Barone), but b/c of the Republican position on gay marriage and b/c of the attacks by
DHE Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 6:58 AM
Gingrich and Perry on Bain, and because Mitt Romney had to pretend to be more conservative than we all know he really is. Yes, Obama is a bad president. Doesn't matter. Yes, you won independents - but not by enough. And, you chased just enough away with the gay bashing and war on Christmas nonsense, that a guy who should not possibly have won, did so anyway. I have written here for months if Romney loses it is the fault of conservatives and I stick with it. You blew it and now we all have four more years.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 7:13 AM
LOL

You moderates are a joke.

You nominate your dream candidate, everything you ever hoped and prayed for in a nominee over the objections of conservatives, a northeast, blue state, Massachusetts center-left clown who went out of his way to avoid social issues like the plague, even going so far as to say "its not part of my campaign" when millions of Americans were standing in line for a chicken sandwich to make a statement about real tolerance and stand against the repressive tolerance of PC, a Marxist construct and the liberal elites, the ultimate orgasmic candidate for "moderate" (i.e. liberal) Republicans like Jen Rubin and company, he promptly got his fanny kicked ... and conservatives are to blame.

Are you on dope?
DHE Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 7:45 AM
That would all make sense except ROMNEY LOST. Dream candidate? Hardly. I would have preferred Mitch Daniels or Christie or others, but who did Conservatives field - people like Gingrich, who just makes up nonsense, and other uber-conservatives who just attacked him, though he was the only one who had a chance. I would have preferred Ron Paull, who is very conservative, but doesn't get caught up in the War on Christmas nonsense far as I know and was the only one who would have really cut spending - which conservatives supposedly want. Mock me when you win one, would you? As far as I'm concerned, you as good as elected Obama.
Black and White Brian Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 8:17 AM
Isn't "electibility" a wonderful word?

And "East-Coast Establishment" and RINO and Rove and "republican" potty are not bad, too.

American politics is like Shakespeare's Globe's actors.

Except back then the men played the men and the girlyboys played the women.

And nowadays the one play the "Democrats" and the other, the "republicans."

Bring back President-elect Sarah Louise Ronald Wilson Reagan Heath Palin!
Lukewarm. That's the feeling I get from the election numbers.

Turnout was apparently down, at least as a percentage of eligible voters. The president was re-elected by a reduced margin. The challenger didn't inspire the turnout surge he needed.

Every re-elected president since Andrew Jackson has won with an increased popular vote percentage. Barack Obama didn't. He won 53 percent to 46 percent in 2008. His numbers as I write are 50 percent to 48 percent over Mitt Romney. That could go up to 51 percent to 48 percent when California finishes its count, which took five weeks in 2008.

Obama owes most...