Why Mitt Romney Lost,, from Newsmax

Werbung:
We gather over here in Britain that the current extremism of the Republican Party members meant that governor Romney had to adopt positions to get himself chosen that were incompatible with winning the Presidential election, antagonising vast groups of people left right and centre to get money and support. If you start saying that half the population are layabouts it seems silly also to antagonise women and Latin-Americans, certainly. Still, even your Democrats seem extreme-right-wing to us, and though it's a fact that you've got less social mobility than any European country other than Italy and (to our shame) the UK , it would seem that myth is still stronger than experience. We have the same problem: it is a sign or a cause of decadence, I fear. It is hard to understand other countries.

or perhaps that given an automatic 47 % it was easy enough to buy 4 more %
 
This is a very old lie that has been debunked several times. Only stupid people who cannot read or dishonest people who purposely want to spread fear mongering are still spreading this 2010 lies! Which are you?

This diatribe--from a person in a country that is doomed financially--and actually is aware of it and afraid to acknowledge it.
Greece, Spain, Italy, France then Britain. Cheerio!
And--they aren't even Euro-philes!
 
We gather over here in Britain that the current extremism of the Republican Party members meant that governor Romney had to adopt positions to get himself chosen that were incompatible with winning the Presidential election,.

We only have two viable parites. The problem with the Republican party is they are a wide spectrum of one side of the equation. Not group thinkers like those on the left side. It's hard to put forward a candidate that appeals to everyone on the right and also pick-up Independents. Neither party can win without some of them.
 
Romney lost because he ran a shitty campaign. He refused to go after BO hard and explain why BO's policies fail.

Romney is a progressive, which may explain why he refused to inform the American people of the unsustainable socialist track we are on.

I suspect Mitt thought since the economy is so bad, he would win. He thought wrong.
 
Confiscators just TAKE your money.
Better hide it.

I don't think you understand that the dems have been taking your money for four years now in the form of quantitative easing and there is no hiding to be done.

Quantitiative easing devalues the dollar so that everything costs more for us but gov gets all the benefits of just printing and spending as much money as they want. And for those dems that read this lets remember that the only other people who benefit from QE are rich people - our politicians are not just aware of this they are "banking" on it.
 
We only have two viable parites. The problem with the Republican party is they are a wide spectrum of one side of the equation. Not group thinkers like those on the left side. It's hard to put forward a candidate that appeals to everyone on the right and also pick-up Independents. Neither party can win without some of them.

I think that both parties have large umbrellas, i.e. many diverse groups. The left coerces its various groups into agreeing.

The right needs to focus on the fundamentals of what they agree on and let the areas of disagreement lay in wait until later. Prayer in school is something that just needs to be dropped while following constitutional principles is largely ignored but needs to be front and center. IN fact, romney ignored too many issues that could have united not only the pub party but many more americans.
 
Some of the Republican posts above certainly suggest that no-one they support could possibly win an election in a civilized country. They are an extremely self-indulgent lot, aren't they?
 
No, they won

Romney is in the whitehouse

Ask Bigrob

I challenge you to point out where I have said anything of the kind....you of course will not be able to -- since, as with basically everything you post, you have simply made it up.
 
Nope,,, The RNC didnt put a good candidate up. Now if Newt Gingrich would been selected by the deligates republicans might had won. Newt would been talking about taking responsibilty but Mitt didnt bring up about taking responsibilty in his campaign. If Sarah Palin would had jumped in as 3rd Party she might had won instead of those 2 other dumbasses.
 
Werbung:
Continued talk about socialism in the US is a demonstration of the utter stupidity of the right.

The retardlican party has demonised the term so that the mere use of it to describe anything gets its supporters squealing like a stuck pig.

You don't have socialism in the US. The US is one of the most right wing nations on earth

The reason it is in the financial shit is because the bankers stole huge amounts of money under Bush and it started two hugely expensive and illegal wars under the same retard who also gave massive tax breaks to the rich.

This created the biggest deficit in history and the democrats had to pick up the mess

The retardlicans have scuppered almost all efforts to fix it.

This is because they don't give a fuck about the US or its citizens

They just care about the rich

And they sell this shit to the morons who support them by creating bete noirs such as socialism and individual responsibility.

The fact that their supporters buy this demonstrates their epic levels of ignorance and stupidity.

But then most of them believe in creation and don't believe in climate change so it shouldn't come as much of a surprise.

BTW all the US needs to do to get the deficit down is stop attacking other countries and stop spending on arms
 
Back
Top