Rand Paul;Disgusting jellyfish SLAMS voter ID law as "OFFENSIVE"

[JoeB131]

Bush got 62 Million votes and Romney got 57 million because Bush won and Romney lost. The 5 million votes you are talking about are moderates and independents who voted Democratic because Republicans chased them away

The effective distribution of independent and moderate votes was about the same. In fact, in the case of Al Gore, he actually got more of the independent and moderate votes. It wasn't bailing indies and mods who cost the GOP in '08 and '12, it was failure of the base to show up. This will continue to be a problem if the establishment moderates in the GOP don't wise up fast.

Bush didn't win because he was a moderate. He won because he was a social conservative and the Christian coalition is the largest single voting block in America. The GOP needs to realize the moderate/independents do not matter, they represent a tiny number and are not worth the effort to cater to. You're going to win a percentage of them and the opposition will win a percentage, and in the end, their votes will not determine the winner.

Basically, there are three groups the GOP should concern itself with... Moderate establishment types, Tea Party Conservative types, and Social/Religious Conservatives. If you appeal to two of the three, you will win elections. If you appeal to the later two, or all three, you will win elections in landslides.

Not really.

first, you have to deal with the final numbers.

Bush got 61 million votes.
McCain got 59 million votes.
Romney got 60 million votes.

compared to.

Kerry got 59 million votes.
Obama got 69 million votes in 2008.
He got 66 million votes in 2012.

Most of Obama's dropoff was in states that were not in contention.

Now, for conservatives. Bush got 84% of the conservative vote compared to Romney's 82%. Long story short, they did about the same in this area. Not enough to swing the election. Bush also got 45% of the moderate vote (compared to Romney's 41) and 13% of the liberal vote (compared to 11% for Romney.)

Now here's the key point to Bush's victory. America has never thrown out a president in the middle of a war.

No, what really killed Romney at the end of the day was that he could not appeal to the non-white sector of the electorate. While Bush got 44% of the Hispanic electorate by mostly being somewhat sane on immigration, Romney went full out Nativist and got 27% of the Hispanic vote. Bush made some attempts to appeal to blacks and got 11% of the black vote. Romney decided to make Birther jokes and got 6% of the black vote.

Not that they are big slice of the electorate, but Asians went 44% for Bush. They went 26% for the Weird Mormon Robot.

 

[Nosmo King]

Do you need to show ID to get Obamacare? How about a welfare check? SNAP? Section 8?

Yes you do. But those are entitlements, not constitutional rights. Would you tolerate entitlements distributed without ID? If rights scheduled in the constitution are what your politics are about, why suppress them for political gain? Voter ID laws do not stop voter fraud because, there essentially is no voter fraud. At least not enough to suppress the constitutional rights to any American citizens.

Look to the vigorous defense of gun rights by the Right as your paradigm preserving freedoms.

 

[Jughead]

Forbes also confirms the 57 million figure.



After Election Night, A House Still Divided In Washington - Forbes

You should try finding a source beyond the day after the election when all of the votes weren't counted. Obama ended up with just shy of 66 million votes.

United States presidential election, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2012/federalelections2012.pdf

Thanks, Ace.

Here's the problem Republicans have.

Bush won in 2004 with 61 million votes. This is the high-water point for GOP candidates.

McCain got 59 million votes, presumably most of them had voted for Bush. But Obama got 69 million votes, 10 million more than Kerry had gotten in 2004. People who had not previously been involved decided to get involved. 2008 was just that important to them after Bush had fouled up the war and the economy.

Incidentally, I voted for McCain. I think he had more experience and understood the mistakes his party had made.

In 2012, Mitt Romney got 60 million votes. A million more than McCain, but a Million less than Bush. The GOP turnout has stabilized.

Which brings us to- Obama. Obama got 66 million votes in 2012. 3 million less than he got in 2008, but most of that dropoff was in states that were not in doubt. Voter Participation INCREASED in states that were classified as "Swing States", and Obama won in 11 of 12 of those. (He only lost North Carolina)

Demographics is not the GOP's friend. They have to expand beyond the base they have now.

The more they expand, the more they continue losing their conservative base. Conservatives are still the largest ideological group in the country, and the GOP needs to focus on getting them out to vote. They won't do it with a moderate for a candidate.

Yet Romney lost because several million conservative Republicans, who normally vote, did not vote.

I believe there are two main reasons why Romney lost. First, Romney failed to convince a substantial percentage of blue-collar and lower income white-collar conservatives that he was a dependable conservative who would not wobble on issues like immigration and “affirmative” action (racial preferences), which are affecting their incomes and job prospects, and media-driven social radicalism and political correctness, which are threatening their children’s understanding of their religious and family values. Millions of them did not feel compelled to vote. Second, Obama was able to quietly exploit the Mormon issue to overcome the objections of black Evangelicals to his radical social policies.

Why Romney lost: election not just about economy | The Tribune Papers

 

[Boss]

Do you need to show ID to get Obamacare? How about a welfare check? SNAP? Section 8?

Yes you do. But those are entitlements, not constitutional rights. Would you tolerate entitlements distributed without ID? If rights scheduled in the constitution are what your politics are about, why suppress them for political gain? Voter ID laws do not stop voter fraud because, there essentially is no voter fraud. At least not enough to suppress the constitutional rights to any American citizens.

Look to the vigorous defense of gun rights by the Right as your paradigm preserving freedoms.

Okay... So hypothetically, let's say the Koch Brothers decide to compile a group of 100k rich republicans to jet around the country and cast votes in as many states as they can hit on election day, you're cool with that? Because, you can't check their ID and you can't deny them the right to vote, they should be allowed to influence as many elections as possible, correct? And these Tea Party groups all over the country, they can rent some buses and run their members up and down the highways to every voting precinct to cast their votes, because you can't check their ID or deny them the right to vote... that's cool too, right?

 

[Avorysuds]

What a dumb thread.

 

[S.J.]

Rand Paul;Disgusting jellyfish SLAMS voter ID law as "OFFENSIVE"

Looks like Rand Paul is catering to the left. Conservatives will start distancing themselves from him. Ted Cruz is one of the few potential candidates who will not compromise on his views, I cannot picture Cruz ever turning RINO.

Ted Cruz isn't eligible to run. He isn't a natural born citizen.

You forfeited that argument 6 years ago.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The effective distribution of independent and moderate votes was about the same. In fact, in the case of Al Gore, he actually got more of the independent and moderate votes. It wasn't bailing indies and mods who cost the GOP in '08 and '12, it was failure of the base to show up. This will continue to be a problem if the establishment moderates in the GOP don't wise up fast.

Bush didn't win because he was a moderate. He won because he was a social conservative and the Christian coalition is the largest single voting block in America. The GOP needs to realize the moderate/independents do not matter, they represent a tiny number and are not worth the effort to cater to. You're going to win a percentage of them and the opposition will win a percentage, and in the end, their votes will not determine the winner.

Basically, there are three groups the GOP should concern itself with... Moderate establishment types, Tea Party Conservative types, and Social/Religious Conservatives. If you appeal to two of the three, you will win elections. If you appeal to the later two, or all three, you will win elections in landslides.

Yes.....focus on social issues. That is the path to electoral victory! Santorum is your guy!

Except that's not what I said, is it? Hey, Santorum was last man standing against Romney last time. A testament to how strong the Social Conservative group is. Romney won because he had been campaigning for president for 6 years.

Now... I think what the GOP should do is couch ALL the social issues under the Federalist banner. It's not up to the government to decide those things for a free society. You want to legalize Pot, Abortion, Gambling, Prostitution, Gay Marriage... you should have the right in your state to do so. You render these "wedge" issues benign and take them off the table.

You want one of the keys to victory to be rendered benign? I think you don't know what you are saying. But....you sure are saying it anyway.

 

[Boss]

You want one of the keys to victory to be rendered benign? I think you don't know what you are saying. But....you sure are saying it anyway.

I think Republicans getting tangled up in social issues where liberals can pick them apart with sound bytes and insinuation is an effective liberal strategy that has been working, which is why they continue to push these issues. Some republicans have tried to moderate or become more libertarian on these issues, but then they alienate the conservative base.

The solution is not to 'take the bait' and be crucified by the left, or to 'libertarianize' and alienate the base... It is to adopt a core principled conservative 'federalist' position... "It doesn't matter what I personally believe on this or that issue, that should be left up to YOU!"

 

[JoeB131]

[
The more they expand, the more they continue losing their conservative base. Conservatives are still the largest ideological group in the country, and the GOP needs to focus on getting them out to vote. They won't do it with a moderate for a candidate.

Yet Romney lost because several million conservative Republicans, who normally vote, did not vote.

I believe there are two main reasons why Romney lost. First, Romney failed to convince a substantial percentage of blue-collar and lower income white-collar conservatives that he was a dependable conservative who would not wobble on issues like immigration and “affirmative” action (racial preferences), which are affecting their incomes and job prospects, and media-driven social radicalism and political correctness, which are threatening their children’s understanding of their religious and family values. Millions of them did not feel compelled to vote. Second, Obama was able to quietly exploit the Mormon issue to overcome the objections of black Evangelicals to his radical social policies.

l]

I know this is what you guys REALLY need to believe, but it's horseshit.

There weren't some group of "conservatives" out there who stayed home and that's why Romney lost. Romney got as much of the "Conservative" vote as Bush had gotten. (82% vs. 84% for Bush). He actually did BETTER than Bush did with White people (59% vs. 58%.) and as much as Evangelicals carped about having to vote for a Mormon, Romney got 79% of the Evangelical vote, the same percentage of them that Bush got in 2004.

How the Faithful Voted: 2012 Preliminary Analysis | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project

Romney lost because he did worse than Bush with Asians (26% vs. 44 for Bush) and Hispanics (27% vs. 44% for Bush). He did worse than Bush did with women, getting 44% vs. 48% for Bush. He did worse among young voters- 37% vs. 45%.

 

[PratchettFan]

What RINOs need to remember is that conservatives still remain the largest ideological group in the US. Unless the GOP nominee is a conservative, you can bet that conservatives will stay home in large numbers in 2016.

Actually, no. They are just one of the loudest groups. They are the primary reason our current president is a democrat and will probably be the reason our next president will be as well. In fact, the folks who call themselves conservatives are not even vaguely conservative. What they are is just a remake of the old Dixie democrats.

Actually, yes.

Americans continue to be more likely to identify as conservatives (38%) than as liberals (23%)

Conservatives Largest Ideological Group in US - Gallup

You're math needs work. Even accepting your numbers that only comes to 61%, which puts 39% identifying with neither. The largest voting block of the group. If you push a candidate too far in either direction, that block goes the other way. Which is why despite a mediocre showing on the part of Obama for the first term, he still won.

But the numbers aren't really showing the picture. While I identify myself as conservative I do not identify with that portion of conservatives I think of as "bat-shit crazy". So a candidate trying to maintain their "bat-shit crazy" base is likely to push someone like me to the other candidate. While I may not agree with that candidate's positions on most things, at least he isn't either insane or toadying to the insane.

Neither the conservatives nor the liberals are monolithic. Thinking of them as such is how you lose elections.

 

[rightwinger]

Looks like Rand Paul is catering to the left. Conservatives will start distancing themselves from him. Ted Cruz is one of the few potential candidates who will not compromise on his views, I cannot picture Cruz ever turning RINO.

Ted Cruz isn't eligible to run. He isn't a natural born citizen.

See link ...

Cruz is Natural Born Citizen

He was a Canadian until a few months ago

He needs to listen to some Springsteen "Born in the USA"

 

[rightwinger]

Do you need to show ID to get Obamacare? How about a welfare check? SNAP? Section 8?

Yes you do. But those are entitlements, not constitutional rights. Would you tolerate entitlements distributed without ID? If rights scheduled in the constitution are what your politics are about, why suppress them for political gain? Voter ID laws do not stop voter fraud because, there essentially is no voter fraud. At least not enough to suppress the constitutional rights to any American citizens.

Look to the vigorous defense of gun rights by the Right as your paradigm preserving freedoms.

Okay... So hypothetically, let's say the Koch Brothers decide to compile a group of 100k rich republicans to jet around the country and cast votes in as many states as they can hit on election day, you're cool with that? Because, you can't check their ID and you can't deny them the right to vote, they should be allowed to influence as many elections as possible, correct? And these Tea Party groups all over the country, they can rent some buses and run their members up and down the highways to every voting precinct to cast their votes, because you can't check their ID or deny them the right to vote... that's cool too, right?

I wish the Koch brothers would do that

They still have to be validated as residents by the county registrar in every location they wish to vote in. The sentences for intentional voter fraud can be pretty stiff. If they think potential jail time for one measily vote is worth the effort, I encourage them to try

 

[PratchettFan]

Looks like Rand Paul is catering to the left. Conservatives will start distancing themselves from him. Ted Cruz is one of the few potential candidates who will not compromise on his views, I cannot picture Cruz ever turning RINO.

Ted Cruz isn't eligible to run. He isn't a natural born citizen.

See link ...

Cruz is Natural Born Citizen

That was sarcasm. Pointing out the hilarious fact that the people who have been arguing that point for the last 6 years will not make a peep about Cruz. Even though every argument made about Obama's citizenship applies to Cruz without even having to make stuff up.

 

[Nosmo King]

Do you need to show ID to get Obamacare? How about a welfare check? SNAP? Section 8?

Yes you do. But those are entitlements, not constitutional rights. Would you tolerate entitlements distributed without ID? If rights scheduled in the constitution are what your politics are about, why suppress them for political gain? Voter ID laws do not stop voter fraud because, there essentially is no voter fraud. At least not enough to suppress the constitutional rights to any American citizens.

Look to the vigorous defense of gun rights by the Right as your paradigm preserving freedoms.

Okay... So hypothetically, let's say the Koch Brothers decide to compile a group of 100k rich republicans to jet around the country and cast votes in as many states as they can hit on election day, you're cool with that? Because, you can't check their ID and you can't deny them the right to vote, they should be allowed to influence as many elections as possible, correct? And these Tea Party groups all over the country, they can rent some buses and run their members up and down the highways to every voting precinct to cast their votes, because you can't check their ID or deny them the right to vote... that's cool too, right?

You still have to register to vote. Your signature still has to be verified by the poll worker. And many times, that poll worker knows you personally.

 

[Boss]

Yes you do. But those are entitlements, not constitutional rights. Would you tolerate entitlements distributed without ID? If rights scheduled in the constitution are what your politics are about, why suppress them for political gain? Voter ID laws do not stop voter fraud because, there essentially is no voter fraud. At least not enough to suppress the constitutional rights to any American citizens.

Look to the vigorous defense of gun rights by the Right as your paradigm preserving freedoms.

Okay... So hypothetically, let's say the Koch Brothers decide to compile a group of 100k rich republicans to jet around the country and cast votes in as many states as they can hit on election day, you're cool with that? Because, you can't check their ID and you can't deny them the right to vote, they should be allowed to influence as many elections as possible, correct? And these Tea Party groups all over the country, they can rent some buses and run their members up and down the highways to every voting precinct to cast their votes, because you can't check their ID or deny them the right to vote... that's cool too, right?

I wish the Koch brothers would do that

They still have to be validated as residents by the county registrar in every location they wish to vote in. The sentences for intentional voter fraud can be pretty stiff. If they think potential jail time for one measily vote is worth the effort, I encourage them to try

Validated as residents? What do you mean, and how can that be done without ANY identification? Do county registrars have special psychic abilities?

You still have to register to vote. Your signature still has to be verified by the poll worker. And many times, that poll worker knows you personally.

Ah... so, we don't need to check ID's because the poll workers know everyone and they can verify real people from fake people by looking at their signatures....

 

[rightwinger]

Okay... So hypothetically, let's say the Koch Brothers decide to compile a group of 100k rich republicans to jet around the country and cast votes in as many states as they can hit on election day, you're cool with that? Because, you can't check their ID and you can't deny them the right to vote, they should be allowed to influence as many elections as possible, correct? And these Tea Party groups all over the country, they can rent some buses and run their members up and down the highways to every voting precinct to cast their votes, because you can't check their ID or deny them the right to vote... that's cool too, right?

I wish the Koch brothers would do that

They still have to be validated as residents by the county registrar in every location they wish to vote in. The sentences for intentional voter fraud can be pretty stiff. If they think potential jail time for one measily vote is worth the effort, I encourage them to try

Validated as residents? What do you mean, and how can that be done without ANY identification? Do county registrars have special psychic abilities?

You still have to register to vote. Your signature still has to be verified by the poll worker. And many times, that poll worker knows you personally.

Ah... so, we don't need to check ID's because the poll workers know everyone and they can verify real people from fake people by looking at their signatures....

After a voter registration card is filled out, it is the responsibility of the county registrar to confirm the eligibility of that voter. They also keep a signature on file. Been working for over 200 years

 

[Dutch]

I've said it before..I can support a Ted Cruz Candidacy.. He took a lot of shit for standing up and saying, "NO MORE DEFICIT SPENDING, EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT shut down." He was right..

Ron & Rand Paul were against deficit spending way before the Republicans thought it was cool. Republicans were lock step starve the beast spenders causing massive inflation & job losses. All of the greatest economists who built our modern financial system & economy knew that peace, predictable taxes, markets, currency & prices created maximum employment & prosperity. Republicans are against all of this.

No one said anything about deficit spending.. try to stay on topic. RAND PAUL is against VOTER ID.. What's your opinion on that?

If you were really a conservative and cared about the constitution you would be against voter ID laws too.

 

[ClosedCaption]

do you need to show id to get obamacare? How about a welfare check? Snap? Section 8?

1 There is no "obamacare" - it's not an insurance provider - it's a law that all insurance companies need to adhere to.

2 You need an ID to cash a "welfare check" whatever that a wc is. (?)

3 Snap, well ... kids get it so, no, but I imagine you need some form of ID - BC, passport, etc.

Hold up now.... you're telling me that you need to show proof of identity to get health Insurance?? even though it was mandated by the law?? WTF? Proof to cash a gubmint check? HUH? You've got to prove identity to get a Section 8 apartment? OMFG!!

I'm appalled!! really I am.

Those things should be given to everyone, without the discriminatory practice of requiring proof of identity. Fucking racists.....It is so damn hard for anyone to prove they are "who they say they are" these days.

Sarcasm isnt a defense

 

[Boss]

After a voter registration card is filled out, it is the responsibility of the county registrar to confirm the eligibility of that voter. They also keep a signature on file. Been working for over 200 years

You making NO sense. How can ANYTHING be confirmed if there is no ID required? The county registrar cannot examine thousands of signatures and determine who is and isn't legitimate.

 

[PratchettFan]

After a voter registration card is filled out, it is the responsibility of the county registrar to confirm the eligibility of that voter. They also keep a signature on file. Been working for over 200 years

You making NO sense. How can ANYTHING be confirmed if there is no ID required? The county registrar cannot examine thousands of signatures and determine who is and isn't legitimate.

I doubt there is a single state where ID is not required and has not been required for many, many years. Where the problems have been arising is in the picking and choosing process. Things like removing a student ID from the list and adding a CCW permit to it. A lot of these changes are specifically directed at classes of people, to make it easier for some and harder for others.