Quote: (09-20-2014 01:33 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:
Quote: (09-20-2014 12:11 PM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:
You guys give women too much credit. If Hillary wins on 2016 it will be because of the weak candidate the republicans nominate not women rallying against the patriarchy. Women in the country couldn't rally together for anything.
Wrong, and wrong by a lot.
Obama spent 4 years bankrupting the middle class. Doubling the national debt with nothing to show for it other than paying off his rich friends, creating larger economic bubbles, destroying our healthcare system and increasing the number of people who can't provide for themselves and depend on a govt that is heading to default.
So how did Obama win in 2012?
The Democrats tried something that had never been tried before. They doubled down. They knew they had nothing to run on. Obama had been beyond a failure. And then right before the election you have the Benghazi cover up. No way he could win this election, unless...
They pander to women. They put all their chips on the table in hopes that women as a group really are that stupid. They make up a "war on women" and then make up the Republicans are the fault for it. As if women are not concerned with income or safety and basically only care about abortion and birth control pills.
And it worked perfectly. The 2012 election will go down in history of when the USA officially "jumped the shark". For the first time in the history of the country, the women decided the president. The men voted for Romney. The women voted for Obama. The women got their way as they were 54% of the voters.
The 2012 election was the new ultra feminist blue print for the Democrats. Men no longer matter at all as a voter base. Pander to women, even if it means destroying men's rights. It will win elections.
As bad as things have been, we are just seeing the start of some real bad shit. I wish I could get out now, but it will be a while.
Google the name Jim Messina and learn all about the architect of the strategy of which you reference - you're right on the money.
Also do not underestimate the effect of kneecapping nascent opposition fund raising groups via IRS stonewalling of their Section 527 applications. As long as those applications sat in limbo for months or even years, the groups could not fund raise. Whaddya know, damn near all of them were conservative-leaning groups. This is well documented and Lois Lerner is on tape describing the post-Citizens United ruling and the pressure put on her office in the IRS.
Once the Citizens United decision came down, the Dems lost a unique advantage they had via fundraising (it was always ok to fund raise from unions, groups that almost unanimously support the DNC). With Citizens United, groups that favored the GOP were now able to create similar fundraising arms catering to private industry and private individual interests (Tea Party, Israel, etc.). The DNC was willing to do anything to stop it. An entire election strategy ran on vapid, drive-by bullshit and sound bites while unemployment was (and still is) well over 8%, and the stuffed shirt in chief still won - even after getting his ass kicked in the first debate.
Romney's incessant gaffes (ten thousand dollar bet; binder full of women; I like to fire people) did not do us any favors either, but with that extra money they probably would have had the election in the bag.