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.
You might have forgotten that NH was the only state that he carried in 2000 but lost in 2004. His margin of victory in 2000 was less than the number of votes received by Ralph Nader. At any rate, you could make the same claim for any number of states. It's pointless.
Other states are filled with people voting against their own best interests, but their citizens are not as intelligent and affluent as those in NH. NH should know better and be a solid blue state, but it insists upon being a swing state, and I singlehandedly blame NH for 8 years of Bush. It really shoulda known better and it's pathetic that they're almost dying to make the same mistake in 2012 to maintain their "independence" or whatever.
Since when did affluence correlate with Democratic voting? It does not.
I'm not a conservative, but I find your comments incredibly nearsighted. There is no collective agreement among NHites that we must "maintain our independence." The state is a swing state because of its demographics - plain and simple.
How is NH singlehandedly responsible for 8 years of Bush? That's alot of power for one little rural state... And why should NH be a solid blue state--just because we're surrounded by blue states, we should become one as well? Isn't it better to be a PURPLE state, with people that vote based on their beliefs instead of dumbly voting down the party line just because of the D or the R next to a candidates name?
I'd like to know where the 4th option in the poll is, the one that says:
NH people are the most ethical of any throughout the USA.
1
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter
Other states are filled with people voting against their own best interests, but their citizens are not as intelligent and affluent as those in NH. NH should know better and be a solid blue state, but it insists upon being a swing state, and I singlehandedly blame NH for 8 years of Bush. It really shoulda known better and it's pathetic that they're almost dying to make the same mistake in 2012 to maintain their "independence" or whatever.
How is NH singlehandedly responsible for 8 years of Bush? That's alot of power for one little rural state... And why should NH be a solid blue state--just because we're surrounded by blue states, we should become one as well? Isn't it better to be a PURPLE state, with people that vote based on their beliefs instead of dumbly voting down the party line just because of the D or the R next to a candidates name?
I'd like to know where the 4th option in the poll is, the one that says:
NH people are the most ethical of any throughout the USA.
1
Because the earth isn't 5000 years old, condoms are ok because sperm isn't a human, and Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. And the state that includes Dartmouth College should be smart enough to realize these things and be appalled by anyone suggesting otherwise.
NH shared in on the liberal contempt for Bush and ignored its own responsibility in electing him when it should have known better. NH even switched to Kerry in 2004. But NH doesn't get to be a part of the "make fun of dumbass Republicans" club when it does this same swing state bull**** again. I equate NH to an alcoholic who swears it has changed only to do the same **** again.
For every soldier who died in Iraq, every NH citizen who did not vote Gore in 2000 wrote his or her obituary.
juppiter, you seem intent on turning this thread into a political debate with little or no room for discussion. While I understand some of your objections to the GOP, you're doing a disservice to your cause by presenting your opinions in such inflammatory and hyperbolic terms.
I know you're eventually going to invite some vitriolic responses, but I hope our NH posters will show the restraint needed to prevent this thread from going in that ugly direction. Unfortunately, given the accusatory tone of the original post, I'm not too optimistic. There's really no direction for this thread to go other than an aggressive shouting contest better suited for the Politics forum.
I will make one point, however: you act as if states vote in uniformity. New Hampshire did not vote for Bush in 2000: 48% of the voters in New Hampshire did. New Hampshire did not switch to Kerry in 2004: 50% of the voters in New Hampshire voted for him. You can't speak in such black-and-white terms. The reality is much more nuanced.
That's one of the reasons why the whole idiotic "red state, blue state" concept is so polarizing and damaging to the political discourse: it completely obscures the complex reality that we are, for the most part, a purple nation.
I have been paying attention to NH politics for since I moved here 25 years ago. On the Federal election level we play both sides for whatever they are worth. The first in the nation primary is brings a lot of money into this, with the exception of the southern tier, poor deindustrialized State.
IMHO the biggest problem with our unpaid legislature is the fact that it is unpaid. This limits the participation to people that can afford to give time and money to the position. People that need to work for a living, even if their bosses gave them the time, could not afford the loss of income. The result is recruiting candidates, particularly for Democrats, is very difficult. We do not have enough retired, self employed or self financed people that can participate. The result is the legislature is dominated by the retired, self employed or self financed people that can afford to participate. I do not see the Republicans ever giving up this advantage.
Since 2008 there has been a massive influx of the deluded racist Tea Party fools that have made the NH Legislature a running bad joke. I now refer to it as the place the Ship of Fools ran aground.
I do not question the Integrity of the people of New Hampshire but I have no delusion about the Integrity of the politics. There is none. That is a fixed deal as always has been.
Other states are filled with people voting against their own best interests, but their citizens are not as intelligent and affluent as those in NH. NH should know better and be a solid blue state, but it insists upon being a swing state, and I singlehandedly blame NH for 8 years of Bush. It really shoulda known better and it's pathetic that they're almost dying to make the same mistake in 2012 to maintain their "independence" or whatever.
I dont know why you would blame us. Dubs only won in 2000 by 51%-49% and in 04 Kerry won 51%-49% . If you want to blame anyone , blame dems for not being able to come up with a better candidate then ole horse face.
Amazing that folks will scream Bush was a mistake, yet won't pony up to the fact that Obama was a bigger one
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.
