Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I cite SC as one state (of a few) in which it occured (you seem to want to harp on the one state... I can look up the polling #'s for the others if necessary, but I think you would get the point that SC is an example - of course is wasn't SC alone that made Hillary lose and BO win), but the fact remains if those folks who did not vote in prior years did not vote in 2008, BO would not be president.
I agree with you re: Bush II, the difference is those middle america folks told by their pastor to vote for Bush vote in every single election, that's the difference. They didn't decide to just vote in this one election because their savior was running.
Doesn't make a squat of difference to me, man. Fundies are stupid, dangerous and easily led. So the other side has some people who are stupid dangerous and easily led. That's America.
Doesn't make a squat of difference to me, man. Fundies are stupid, dangerous and easily led. So the other side has some people who are stupid dangerous and easily led. That's America.
To me it does - the fundies on the right have an ideology that they believe in and vote for every year. What happened in 2008 was a tragedy for Hillary and amounted to racism against her IMHO.
To me it does - the fundies on the right have an ideology that they believe in and vote for every year. What happened in 2008 was a tragedy for Hillary and amounted to racism against her IMHO.
I want this to get back on topic, but I had to jump in. First off the fundies on the right do not vote every year in the numbers they did when Bush was President. They do get out, and do vote heavily GOP, but it was even more so when Bush was President. Looking at how close 2000 was (in which he lost the PV) and 04 the increased fundie turnout had a direct result. Secondly, when you are looking at turnout in the 08 Primaries, you really have very little to compare it to, it was the first time a Primary was truly competitive after Iowa and New Hampshire so of course turnout is going to differ. Many people who haven't voted in past Primaries voted in this one because well it was the first time they voted in a Primary that was competitive.
To me it does - the fundies on the right have an ideology that they believe in and vote for every year. What happened in 2008 was a tragedy for Hillary and amounted to racism against her IMHO.
An ideology based on a distorted viewpoint derived from a fairy tale vs a bunch of people who see something historical about to happen and vote for someone based solely on that fact, not on his policies.
You think the former is somehow more legitimate than the latter, yet you don't want anyone to think that your own motivations for being mad have something to do with race? You are joking, right?
An ideology based on a distorted viewpoint derived from a fairy tale vs a bunch of people who see something historical about to happen and vote for someone based solely on that fact, not on his policies.
You think the former is somehow more legitimate than the latter, yet you don't want anyone to think that your own motivations for being mad have something to do with race? You are joking, right?
Huh? You make such logical leaps that it's difficult to keep up.
First of all, who said I was "mad"?
Second of all, this isn't anything racial. If women overwhelmingly voted for Hillary (which they did not - at least not to the extent blacks voted for BO) I would say the same thing. The fact is that Hillary's win would have been just as historic but did not happen.
Third, you call right wing ideology "fairy tales", but that's your own closed-mindedness. I don't agree with much that the religious far right espouses, but they have their convictions and I respect that. Just as I believe the far left have their convictions and I respect that. Folks coming out to vote for the sole reason of race is a complete disgrace.
Something tells me many of the tea party people who cheered on Schmitt will suddenly have a case of amnesia and forget to show up.
Political parties mean absolutely nothing to me. To me, I don't see any real difference between them other than Republicans are a bit more aggressive and arrogant, and can't deal with losing very well. I think both parties are totally crooked and corrupt with ulterior motives behind every move they make.
I am starting my own party,
it's called the "Whoop some political a$$ party"
Coming soon to a town hall near you!
In dman's world, so long as you vote with his viewpoint, your vote is valid. If you don't vote with his viewpoint, your vote is as invalid as someone who votes for the sole purpose of a candidate's race... yea, your ideology is bleeding through. I thought it was the sean hannity conservatives who were the sheep...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
