• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Republican Self Rape--to what extent did the Rape comments hurt in the 2012 election?

WhipperSnapper

WhipperSnapper

Lifer
To what extent did Republican candidates' comments about rape and abortion end up hurting the Republicans in the elections for President, the Senate, and the House?

Would it have made a difference if Akin and his ilk had just kept their mouths shut on the issue of rape?
 
It was one of numerous things that sunk Rmoney's battleship. The GOP are running out of voting blocks to piss off.
 
It hurt them in the senate. But Romney's loss was so large that it probably didn't do much there. Where it really hurt was in turning the new generation of women into Democrats, possibly permanently.
 
it definitely killed those two senate races, and probably helped drive women turnout higher (along with Panderthon 2012 by the Obama campaign).

but Romney would have lost either way.
 
Romney shot up huge in the polls after he exposed Obama in first debate. That surge took place well after the Rape comments. Obama was easy to expose but Romney chose to run a defensive campaign and that was his undoing. Keep in mind the tea party 2010 GOP blowout wasn't stopped by Hispanics etc. Much of the debate about GOP loss last week is fallacious (rape comments, need to go soft on borders etc)
 
I think it's pretty obvious the economy and jobs were the overwhelming issue and even things like Romney calling half of America lazy moochers didn't have a serious impact on the election. Still, every little bit adds up and the collective influence of such comments over time are painting the party for exactly what it is, a bunch of intolerant throwbacks you only vote for out of desperation.
 
I think the comments cost Romney a chance to clinch the election.

If he had come out in a very forceful way and not just in his usual weasly way he could have made it into a big thing and he could have stood out as a real centrist candidate. I think an underlying feeling about Romney was that he wouldn't stand up to the looneys in the Republican party. He missed his chance for a major coup.
 
It possibly cost them the election. Even hardcore conservative white christian males dont wanna hear that shit from their politicians.

The GOP needs to boot out the christian fundamentalist zealots. They will keep losing until they do.
 
shortylickens said:
It possibly cost them the election. Even hardcore conservative white christian males dont wanna hear that shit from their politicians.

The GOP needs to boot out the christian fundamentalist zealots. They will keep losing until they do.
Click to expand...

yup.

(but the GOP also needs to stop adopting their policies while criticizing them for such policies at the same time. That isn't helping them)
 
Well also after booting the zealots out of their party they need to ignore zealot lobbyists, groups similar to the Westboro Baptist Church.
 
finglobes said:
Romney shot up huge in the polls after he exposed Obama in first debate. That surge took place well after the Rape comments. Obama was easy to expose but Romney chose to run a defensive campaign and that was his undoing. Keep in mind the tea party 2010 GOP blowout wasn't stopped by Hispanics etc. Much of the debate about GOP loss last week is fallacious (rape comments, need to go soft on borders etc)
Click to expand...

Yes, the actual 'mechanics' of Romney's campaign must be questioned/analyzed. There are any number of things that can be questioned. Was he too defensive? Should he have hit Benghazi etc harder? Did he allocate his resources among the states in the most beneficial manner? Did he wait too long to step up his campaign and spending and by virture of his absence allow Obama paint their own picture of him?

Repubs need to chill, regroup and gather data before jumping straight to conclusions. The fact that many are doing just that does not bode well for them.

Fern
 
In 1992 Clinton interrupted his campaign to go back to Arkansas to oversee the execution of Ray Rector.

Romny lost because he didn't have Clintons balls.

If Romney had forcefully stood up the Tea Party wackos even once he would have gotten enough Dems to vote for him to win.
 
Fern said:
Yes, the actual 'mechanics' of Romney's campaign must be questioned/analyzed. There are any number of things that can be questioned. Was he too defensive? Should he have hit Benghazi etc harder? Did he allocate his resources among the states in the most beneficial manner? Did he wait too long to step up his campaign and spending and by virture of his absence allow Obama paint their own picture of him?

Repubs need to chill, regroup and gather data before jumping straight to conclusions. The fact that many are doing just that does not bode well for them.

Fern
Click to expand...

He definitely should not have hit Benghazi harder. It's simply not a big enough 'scandal' (if you can even call it that) to work with. It has virtually no impact outside of the ultra right hardcore Republican base.
 
I heard that the margin of "victory" is more like .1% rather than the 2 percentage points the MSM originally wanted you to believe. Sounds a lot like Putin's "victory".

Not trying to thread crap, but I'm not sure that Obama was really more popular.
 
finglobes said:
Romney shot up huge in the polls after he exposed Obama in first debate. That surge took place well after the Rape comments. Obama was easy to expose but Romney chose to run a defensive campaign and that was his undoing. Keep in mind the tea party 2010 GOP blowout wasn't stopped by Hispanics etc. Much of the debate about GOP loss last week is fallacious (rape comments, need to go soft on borders etc)
Click to expand...
still in denial huh..........
 
Anarchist420 said:
I heard that the margin of "victory" is more like .1% rather than the 2 percentage points the MSM originally wanted you to believe. Sounds a lot like Putin's "victory".

Not trying to thread crap, but I'm not sure that Obama was really more popular.
Click to expand...

pray-tell: from where did you "hear" this?
 
Anarchist420 said:
I heard that the margin of "victory" is more like .1% rather than the 2 percentage points the MSM originally wanted you to believe. Sounds a lot like Putin's "victory".

Not trying to thread crap, but I'm not sure that Obama was really more popular.
Click to expand...
coming from you.....
 
techs said:
In 1992 Clinton interrupted his campaign to go back to Arkansas to oversee the execution of Ray Rector.

Romny lost because he didn't have Clintons balls.

If Romney had forcefully stood up the Tea Party wackos even once he would have gotten enough Dems to vote for him to win.
Click to expand...
Are you insane?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top