In response to:

Obama's Numbers Went Down, but Romney Never Inspired Voters to Vote

SMyles Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 7:58 PM
Maybe smarty pants is smarter than you. Maybe smarty pants didn't want another big government republican as president. Apparently you would have been fine with it. The RNC has no credibility. Why be one of the sheeple?
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 30, 2012 10:47 PM
Oops!! I see the neocon is in my post. Would you believe that I didn't write that word?!?!??!
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 2:29 PM
I did not write that Obama was a Neocon???
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 2:20 PM
Okay, I'll word it in a more simple way. I'm not your sister, Bub!! You have Democrats and you have Republicans, Other, and Non Voters. The Democrats will vote the party line, because someone in their family has always done so and because their union tells them to, and they don't read the papers anyway. If you have 13 voters and 6 vote Democrat, 4 vote Republican (which at this point is the only other party) 2 vote Other and 1 does not vote, the Democrat wins. If you wanted Obama to win, then you did the right thing by staying home.
Wooster Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 11:34 AM
> If we want a Libertarian candidate in the future, let's start promoting that person and the ideal NOW... <

Wow, what a thought! Hey, here's another one. Maybe we could elect like minded representatives to the convention so we could influence the party platform to!

Oh wait....
Wooster Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 11:32 AM
You don't get it, sister.

I am not "diluting the Republican vote" because I am not part of "the Republican vote". My vote is not something that Romney was entitled to simply because I share a some beliefs with the Republican party; it's not something I stole from him by staying home.

Obama a "neocon" ? You've really lost it...
Wooster Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 11:20 AM
> Now we are stuck with a Marxist, Big Gov't Democrat. <

Damn! And I was so hoping for the socialist big-government Republican.

Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain, Romney - they all represent the RNC. The "National Committee" is not above throwing out elected representatives and appointing their own. You really think they left these primary "elections" up to chance? In most primaries they've declares winners before my state even voted.

Enough is enough.
RyanM Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 9:59 PM
"At least Romney loved this country."

Well, if he did, he had a funny way of showing it.

As far as I'm concern there was little difference between Obama and Romney though, I think Romney is a bigger warmonger by his sucking up to Sheldon Adleson. Both are business as usual for their inner circle of supporters.
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 9:51 PM
The Republican party is in deep doo doo, if there is so much disagreement on a Conservative website. Let's all continue to disagree and we'll keep the Marxist in power forever.

If we want a Libertarian candidate in the future, let's start promoting that person and the ideal NOW, not during the election year.
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 9:46 PM
At least Romney loved this country. You don't seem to get it. You supported the biggest gov't neocon of all (Obama) by diluting the Republican vote.
RyanM Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 9:13 PM

You got the president you deserved. There isn't much difference between "a Marxist, Big Gov't Democrat" and a corporatist, statist Republican. They both suck.
SMyles Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 8:46 PM
Perfect candidate? What good is winning if the result is more government and less freedom? Which is exactly what we got with Bush. I won't support a big government neocon. I don't care what letter they put next to their name.
kathybgc Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 8:36 PM
Sure lets vote all over the map. I'll take Gingrich. You take Ron Paul. Someone else takes Romney and we won't be able to gather enough collective votes to win. Lets all shoot arrows at each other while the Democrats sit back and laugh. When we finally get a candidate, we should not coelesce around him like the Democrats did with Obama. On election day,let us sit around and pout and refuse to vote for anyone who is not our perfect candidate. We certainly do not want another Big Gov't Republican. Now we are stuck with a Marxist, Big Gov't Democrat. Thank you very much.
In combing through the results of the 2012 election -- apparently finally complete, nearly two months after the fact -- I continue to find many similarities between 2012 and 2004, and one enormous difference.

Both of the elections involved incumbent presidents with approval ratings hovering around or just under 50 percent facing challengers who were rich men from Massachusetts (though one made his money and the other married it).

In both cases, the challenger and his campaign seemed confident he was going to win -- and had reasonable grounds to believe so.

In both elections, the incumbent started running a barrage...