Karl Rove on why Romney lost: Obama was 'suppressing the vote'

[hal2kilo]

Originally Posted by Ausm

You want to know who the biggest fucking moochers are in this country are the Corporate Elite and Wall Street who been ass raping Americans for last 30+ fucking years.

I don't get why giving tax breaks to people is any less of a "bribe" to voters than giving them benefits. I hear this constantly from the right. How are they any less takers? They want something and don't want to pay what it costs.

[mikeymikec]

Originally Posted by hal2kilo

I don't get why giving tax breaks to people is any less of a "bribe" to voters than giving them benefits.

Surely it depends on the intention for the tax break - giving tax breaks to some categories of people can stimulate the economy, or not. Pick a hundred people, give them a not-enormous sum of money each (relative to their earnings), some will save, some will spend.

[zinfamous]

Originally Posted by mikeymikec

Surely it depends on the intention for the tax break - giving tax breaks to some categories of people can stimulate the economy, or not. Pick a hundred people, give them a not-enormous sum of money each (relative to their earnings), some will save, some will spend, and some will deposit it offshore to avoid the IRS and siphon wealth to themselves, creating nothing.

[Fern]

Originally Posted by hal2kilo

It's the most discustingly hypocritical thing to come out of that asshole's mouth. He invented demonizing/defining politicians of the opposition i.e. Democrats.

Well, that's one explanation.

Looks to me like Rove is trying to 'explain' why his polling numbers were wrong. I'm guessing the lower-than-expected Repub turnout was where he obviously went wrong.

Also looks to me like he's laying the blame on the Romney campaign itself. I.e., Romney got busy and increased spending too late allowing the Obama campaign to paint it's picture of Romney, and Romney's campaign was never able to sufficiently overcome that.

He may be correct, but then again maybe not.

Before the election many wondered aloud if Romney's Mormon religion would hurt him. Would it keep the RR/social conservatives home and away from voting? I'll be looking forward to any polling info on this question. This and many other questions need be answered before the Repubs will know what went wrong and how to fix it.

Fern

[Ausm]

Originally Posted by fern

well, that's one explanation.

Looks to me like rove is trying to 'explain' why his polling numbers were wrong. i'm guessing the lower-than-expected repub turnout was where he obviously went wrong.

also looks to me like he's laying the blame on the romney campaign itself. I.e., romney got busy and increased spending too late allowing the obama campaign to paint it's picture of romney, and romney's campaign was never able to sufficiently overcome that.

He may be correct, but then again maybe not.

Before the election many wondered aloud if romney's mormon religion would hurt him. Would it keep the rr/social conservatives home and away from voting? I'll be looking forward to any polling info on this question. This and many other questions need be answered before the repubs will know what went wrong and how to fix it.

Fern

lmao ......

[Steeplerot]

Originally Posted by Incorruptible

He isn't a Kenyan communist

Of course not, he's cloned from Egyptian Commie Pharoh DNA by the USSR after Breshnav had a long night of drinking with the guy who looks after zombie Lenin's preserved corpse on the late shift.

Why do you think so many rightwingers call him messiah or "great leader"?

Glenn Beck says its true.

[Jhhnn]

Originally Posted by Fern

Well, that's one explanation.

Looks to me like Rove is trying to 'explain' why his polling numbers were wrong. I'm guessing the lower-than-expected Repub turnout was where he obviously went wrong.

Also looks to me like he's laying the blame on the Romney campaign itself. I.e., Romney got busy and increased spending too late allowing the Obama campaign to paint it's picture of Romney, and Romney's campaign was never able to sufficiently overcome that.

He may be correct, but then again maybe not.

Before the election many wondered aloud if Romney's Mormon religion would hurt him. Would it keep the RR/social conservatives home and away from voting? I'll be looking forward to any polling info on this question. This and many other questions need be answered before the Repubs will know what went wrong and how to fix it.

Fern

Rove's numbers were wrong because they had to be for him to get a slice off the top from Repub billionaires who were paying him to win the election for them. Do you think they'd have given him $300M+ for a lost cause?

As it played out, he ended up believing his own bullshit, like Hitler in his Berlin bunker.

Romney never really led, never had more than an outside chance, and even that was mostly due to brand loyalty. The gulf between the primary voting Repub base & the rest of the electorate is currently such that winning the nomination precludes winning the election. When and if Repub leaders can undo what they've taken 30 years to accomplish & de-radicalize that base, they'll be able to field a competitive candidate.

Fat chance of that when radical billionaire funders can channel their money around the RNC, fluff up the Tea Party, anchor the right flank of the Party somewhere out in La-la land.

Those who live by the sword shall perish by it, and in this case, not at the hands of their enemies, but rather their friends...

[Fern]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

Rove's numbers were wrong because they had to be for him to get a slice off the top from Repub billionaires who were paying him to win the election for them. Do you think they'd have given him $300M+ for a lost cause?
-snip-

Are you referring to the PAC he started or ran?

If so, he makes no money from it, it doesn't even reimburse him his associated business expenses.

Fern

[Athena]

Originally Posted by Fern

I'm guessing the lower-than-expected Repub turnout was where he obviously went wrong.

In other words, you can't imagine/accept that Obama's victory was because his was the winning position all along; you have to ascribe his win to something Romney did wrong.

I'm guessing that you subscribed to the notion that the election was for the Republicans to lose because [insert your favorite fallacy here] and that if only he had done [just one little thing], Romney would have won.

Obviously, we'll never know about the latter but the writing was on the wall all along that electorate at large did not expect that after 30-years of failed Republican policies, Obama would be some sort of superman to single-handedly dig us out.

Republicans, living in their bubble, over estimated support for their polices did and the underestimated the level of support for Obama. That's why Obama won and Romney lost.

[Fern]

Originally Posted by Athena

In other words, you can't imagine/accept that Obama's victory was because his was the winning position all along; you have to ascribe his win to something Romney did wrong.
-snip-

Uhhh, no.

You're confusing the two separate topics of "winning" and "Republican turnout". They're not remotely the same and I find it difficult to even address your remarks.

The thread title is "suppressing the vote" and Rove is remarking on the low Repub turnout.

I don't see how Obama's positions can be relevant unless we completely change the discussion to : "Republicans turnout but Romney looses because they voted for Obama".

But otherwise, yes, low Repub turnout could conceivable be blamed, partially or in full, on something Romney's campaign did or did not do, or even on Romney - the candidate - himself.

Again, the question is not about "winning", it's about lower-than-expected Repub turnout and Obama's polices are irrelevant to that.

Fern

[Jhhnn]

Originally Posted by Fern

Are you referring to the PAC he started or ran?

If so, he makes no money from it, it doesn't even reimburse him his associated business expenses.

Fern

Interesting assertion. Prove it.

I realize that, on paper, he made nothing, but influence peddlers always get paid, one way or another. If I hire your company to work for my PAC, and you hire me as a consultant, that's perfectly legal, isn't it? If I have an interest in an offshore hedge fund that actually owns your company, that's legal too, isn't it?

Is there a panoply of other perfectly legal business arrangements whereby Mr Rove could easily have benefited? Obviously.

If you're asserting that Rove did all this out of the goodness of his heart, you'd be terribly naive, wouldn't you?

[Jhhnn]

Colbert shows us what happens to leftover super PAC funds-

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...-trevor-potter

[PottedMeat]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

Colbert shows us what happens to leftover super PAC funds-

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...-trevor-potter

is that sum legal money laundering?

[Balt]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

Colbert shows us what happens to leftover super PAC funds-

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...-trevor-potter

Holy crap.

[dawp]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

Colbert shows us what happens to leftover super PAC funds-

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...-trevor-potter

I think I need to setup a super pac

[tweaker2]

I'm wondering how long it will take the IRS to figure out a way to get their share out of this magic trick. lol

[Screech]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

Colbert shows us what happens to leftover super PAC funds-

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...-trevor-potter

Bumping to bring this to the top. Holy crap I can't believe that is legal (well, I can, but you know what I mean.) Jeez.

[Meghan54]

Originally Posted by tweaker2

I'm wondering how long it will take the IRS to figure out a way to get their share out of this magic trick. lol

About the time the House loses its Republican majority. Remember, the function of the IRS is to execute laws which Congress has passed. So, until the party that created and passed such a law allowing that loophole, massive as it is, is removed, the law won't change.

Besides, it benefits both sides, so I doubt there's much push to close that from either side.

[OBLAMA2009]

karl rove is a menace to society