Bachmanmania!

The Tariff King

The Tariff King

Trade War Deadline Winner
Staff member
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/201...won-because-hes-black-and-america-felt-guilty

In an interview published Wednesday, Bachmann said that Barack Obama won the presidency because white people felt too guilty about past racial injustices. "I think there was a cachet about having an African-American president because of guilt," she said in an interview with Cal Thomas, a syndicated conservative columnist.
Click to expand...

No Michele... they voted for Obama because they looked at the alternatives in your party and said... yeaaaaaahhhh. no.
 
Don't make me post my picture of me with Michelle when she served in the Minnesota Legislature. I hesitate to post it because I was about 20 pounds heavier ten years ago and Patty Hearst was hiding out in my jowls.
 
sturg33 said:
Bachman has always been a fool. I loved it when Ron Paul humiliated her about Iran on national television
Click to expand...

Oh let me tell you from close proximity, you can tell it's not an act. I have seen these baby blues from less than five feet away. Crazy, crazy, crazy eyes.

MBachmannNewsweek.jpg
 
She's another one who is just delusional about the state of her party, which is that of a joke.
 
yeezus said:
She's another one who is just delusional about the state of her party, which is that of a joke.
Click to expand...

I wonder what Repubs say about the big 3 (Palin, Bachmann, and Cruz) when nobody's around or maybe in small groups (away from discussion forums). Any one conservative on this forum has more IQ points than those 3 wastes of DNA put together. I loathe Pelosi, Reed, and Biden, but as dumbarsed as they are they leave the TEA party darlings in the dust and what's worse for Repubs, the fourth horse's arse of the apocalypse is now joining them officially, give it up folks for the Motor City Madman, Mr. Ted Nugent. I guess the end times can now ensue.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I wonder what Repubs say about the big 3 (Palin, Bachmann, and Cruz) when nobody's around or maybe in small groups (away from discussion forums). Any one conservative on this forum has more IQ points than those 3 wastes of DNA put together. I loathe Pelosi, Reed, and Biden, but as dumbarsed as they are they leave the TEA party darlings in the dust and what's worse for Repubs, the fourth horse's arse of the apocalypse is now joining them officially, give it up folks for the Motor City Madman, Mr. Ted Nugent. I guess the end times can now ensue.
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious that the decision makers in the republican party don't like "the big 3". They keep pushing moderate candidates, the type the dems keep begging for and of course when they run they hate them and make them seem ultra conservative.
 
weso1 said:
It's pretty obvious that the decision makers in the republican party don't like "the big 3". They keep pushing moderate candidates, the type the dems keep begging for and of course when they run they hate them and make them seem ultra conservative.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think the Republican Party is just going through a "dry spell" right now, much as the Dems did back in the Mondale/Dukakis/Gore period. Right now the Repubs are IMO too fragmented, between the supposed religious right and the TEA partiers, the Talk-Radio/Fox types and the bulk of actual conservative human beings who most likely feel deserted by their party (trust me, I've been there and done that) and right now they just don't have a voice. Personally I think the reason the party overall nominates the so-called "moderates" they do is more of a compromise to find somebody that as many different elements of the base can stomach (not necessarily like) and they wind up with somebody nobody can really get excited about.

I also think that if the party leaders don't get the religious fanatics (not saying real Christians here, but those who pick up the banner of Christianity and carry it with them to the brothels and flag burnings), extreme Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter/Malkin types and the TEA moron types like Palin/Cruz/Bachmann, they're gonna just continue to lose votes and states and support or at best just have to hope the Dems get drunk of success and drive off a cliff, in other words you finally win a Super Bowl because the other team's plane crashes. The danger in purging what desperately needs to be purged is you take a chance on losing those votes in the short run and that's something nobody wants to take a chance on.
 
Not sure if I agree with it being a dry spell.

It has more to do with issues IMO. Republicans have been extremely anti-***, using abortion over and over, and because people naturally assume Republicans are the rich whites, they also blame the GOP for the housing crisis recession.

I think McCain had a legitimate chance to win, it was selecting Palin that put the dagger in his campaign.

Romney would've been better off not selecting Paul Ryan.

Nobody saying Democrats are better, but they just seem to be the anti-loudmouth shove opinion down your throat.
 
Palin gave McCain a chance to win. It turns out she was an idiot. Romney had an opportunity after Obama ****ed up the first debate, but he couldn't capitalize.
 
The problem with the Rs is they basically have to hope for voter suppression. Because of their religious aspect they alienate many voters. Even the religious folks don't always agree with them. I think any presidential candidate out there should not ever even bring up Abortion or *** rights. Use politician speak to get around it. Romney had a better shot of winning than McCain because McCain didn't campaign against Bush, which Obama did and Bush was hated. Romney had bad Obama. His problem was he was Mormon. I'ts really quite simple, that alone made him unelectable on the national stage. Considering how much people didn't like Obama going into the last election and really aside from the Mormon thing and the 48% thing what really did he have against him? I don't think the last one was enough to lose him the election.
 
Doubt Mormonism was the reason he didn't get elected.

The 47% thing hurt him the most. The hotel video is when his ratings started going down until the first debate. Also I think the night Benghazi happened when Romney's camp hit Obama's camp hard while the facts were still coming out.
 
Fact that Romney was Mormon had no effect on his outcome. No republican would had beat Obama.

Romney was to passive. He should had attacked Obama on Benghazi. That's Why many like Christie. He's not a wuss
 
Krgrecw said:
Romney was to passive. He should had attacked Obama on Benghazi. That's Why many like Christie. He's not a wuss
Click to expand...

Which is sad actually, because if that's what it would have taken for Romney to win against Obama then I feel more sorry for the country if that's what we've been relegated to.
 
look at yall debate about the "republican" party and why they didn't/don't win on the national level anymore

they are nothing more than a regional party for the most part and have to gimmick it to make sure they have enough seats in congress to make sure nothing really happens anymore

their platform is a way of the past and it is thankfully dying

dying too slow imo but whatever

it is pathetic to watch their base of so called christians grasp at straws on issues while playing the victim of religious persecution while doing everything in their power to pass laws based on their so called religious views

they can give up on the white house and you can act like it is cause they are mormon or too passive etc (i am sure some dumbass will say, cause one side just gives **** away so they don't work) but it is cause their are holding on too dying ideas and the people in the center (where elections are won) don't want to be part of the religion party (actual religion and the religion of protecting rich people) that holds the country back
 
Obama won in 2008 because of the state of the country (war fatigue and economic crisis) and he won in 2012 as a result of his ground game (organized get out the vote effort). I don't think Romney ever recovered from his 47% comments.

Nationally, I think the Dems simply command the middle a bit better than the Republicans right now and as much as both the active right and the active left want to spin it, America is not an ideologically-driven nation.

But let's get back to Bachmann!
 
'
Krgrecw said:
Fact that Romney was Mormon had no effect on his outcome.
Click to expand...

That is very naive thinking by you. While many people won't outright say they didn't vote for Romney because he's Mormon it for sure was a reason for doubt and not voting for many people. There were more than just that of course, but if you don't think that he lost votes for being a Mormon then you're crazy. Unfortunately I don't think he added voters that he lost like Obama did with people who wouldn't vote for him because he's black by bringing in the youth vote to higher levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top