Doug4749 Wrote:
Nov 10, 2012 8:10 PM
Mitt was a much better candidate than John McCain, and an infinitely bettercandidate/person/leader than zero. As far as getting fewer votes, in places like NY, CN, CA, and MI it's a waste of time to even go to the polls because it's a foregone conclusion that the electoral votes will be going to zero. If that wasn't the case (electoral college skewed toward a one-candidate-takes-all outcome), I'm sure the turnout would have been a LOT different. Don't blame Mitt, or even the Republican party. We owe it all to the gimme-gimme's with their hand-out, the 47%, who are going to vote for whomever will give them the most. They don't care if the taxes go up - they're not paying taxes in the first place.