Ryan: Obama won because of 'urban' turnout

Dibs Ludicrous

Member
6702

Nov 13th 2012, 21:13:15

urban voters? do you mean that they let the homeless inner city dwellers vote during this election? wonder how they registered? ahhh, probably with an iPhone.

There are no messages in your Inbox.
Elvis has left the building.

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator
1933

Nov 13th 2012, 21:15:36

seems to me that you have to parse the quote and interpret it way out of context in order to reach that conclusion.

Dibs Ludicrous

Member
6702

Nov 13th 2012, 21:19:15

maybe you just need to spend more time in the city, or at a bus stop. actually, it's getting a bit chilly... they'll be at the airport now.

There are no messages in your Inbox.
Elvis has left the building.

Servant

Member

EE Patron
1249

Nov 13th 2012, 21:42:26

The political divide in the US right now really is in many ways an urban/rural divide.

Z is #1

Dibs Ludicrous

Member
6702

Nov 13th 2012, 21:45:31

that simplifies things enough for me. the food producers get my vote.

There are no messages in your Inbox.
Elvis has left the building.

anoniem

Member
2881

Nov 13th 2012, 21:45:46

rural america:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/...LWtb7s92c/s400/cletus.jpg

re(ally)tired

Trife

Member
5817

Nov 13th 2012, 21:49:08

Originally posted by anoniem:

rural america:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/...LWtb7s92c/s400/cletus.jpg

that's one of my sigs in LCN :D

but i must've goofed - i'm rural and voted for OBAMA

ericownsyou5

Member
1262

Nov 13th 2012, 22:46:58

he means naggers.

Dibs Ludicrous

Member
6702

Nov 13th 2012, 22:52:04

wives are rather fond of Obama.

There are no messages in your Inbox.
Elvis has left the building.

KoHeartsGPA

Member

EE Patron
29,671

Nov 13th 2012, 22:52:56

funny how libs can't practice what they preach haha, hypocrites, i guess in their minds we only have to be "tolerant" to their views, no surprise there!

Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6VRMGTwU4I
-=TSO~DKnights~ICD~XI~LaF=-

S.F. Giants 2010, 2012, 2014 World Series Champions, fluff YEAH!

Cougar

Member
517

Nov 13th 2012, 23:18:31

If only he'd listened to Sarah Palin's advice and campaigned more in the "pro-America" parts of the country.....

BobbyATA

Member
2368

Nov 14th 2012, 0:14:04

terrible thread

archaic

Member
7012

Nov 14th 2012, 1:01:11

reading this as 'Turban Burnout' makes it a ton funnier, and makes just as much sense

Cheating Mod Hall of Shame: Dark Morbid, Turtle Crawler, Sov

LittleItaly

Game Moderator
Alliance, FFA, & Cooperation
2198

Nov 14th 2012, 3:00:56

"An urban area is characterized by higher population density and vast human features in comparison to areas surrounding it. Urban areas may be cities, towns or conurbations, but the term is not commonly extended to rural settlements such as villages and hamlets."

I dont see how you came to the conclusion of it meaning those people are not American by referring to them as urban.

LittleItaly
SOL Vet
-Discord: LittleItaly#2905
-IRC: irc.scourge.se #sol
-Apply today @ http://sol.ghqnet.com for Alliance

Brink

Member
634

Nov 14th 2012, 3:14:27

I am a Urban Voter, I just don't recall voting for Obama.

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 3:37:47

"Former Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan says that his party lost the White House in 2012 because so many “urban” voters went to the polls, not because Americans rejected his Medicare and other budget policies."

Ryan is absolutely right. I would be shocked if over 25% of Obama voters know what the Romney/Ryan budget/medicare policies are. This election showed that people vote based on their demographics, not their preferred policies. Yes, many demographics prefer certain policies over others and this is reflected in the vote, but far too many have no idea what policies they're voting for.

Dissidenticn

Member
272

Nov 14th 2012, 4:55:41

If you look at polls, people who voted for Obama do not trust Romney. The whole 47% thing really sunk his campaign.

Romney could have won... but he had to open his mouth and say what was actually on his mind...

I think Obama should have run the campaign ads that Ron Paul, and Newt the Flute put on TV about Romney. People forgot all about the Republicans who threw Romney under the bus early on...

Here's another interesting tidbit. GW Bush got more Mormon votes than Romney did.

Dissidenticn

Member
272

Nov 14th 2012, 5:04:10

I actually don't understand Ryan's complaint. If he is using the term "urban" in regards to city dwellers, it wouldn't matter how many urban voters voted be it 20% or 90%, the results would be the same.

If he uses the term "urban" in reference to black people... that's not a very statesmanlike thing to say (clearly). But, in the end, Obama won Wisconsin... I predict Ryan will be looking for a new job in 2 years.

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 5:06:54

Why is that unstatemanlike? It's simply a fact that high black turnout was key to Obama's victory.

Dissidenticn

Member
272

Nov 14th 2012, 5:38:39

Why then, didn't he say "black"?

It's unstatesmanlike because he should suck it up and quit blaming black people for his losing the VP seat. Republicans need to take this time to be more introspective on why they lost instead of finding flaws with how Obama won.

I mean, another segment of society that voted way more for Obama was single mothers! Should we put them on the chopping block too?

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 5:57:10

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...n-the-exit_b_2094354.html

Again, race is the single biggest determinant for how anyone voted.

whooze

Member

EE Patron
949

Nov 14th 2012, 6:03:39

Klown, yeah, it couldn't be that most people (read women) don't feel that their body is "good enough" to do the job on its own if they get raped...

BobbyATA

Member
2368

Nov 14th 2012, 14:03:21

Dissident, actually city voters voted for Obama in high numbers regardless of race. Just look at any map that colors localities blue/red based on who won. Obama basically only wins in cities. Dumbass

I love how we have all been discussing demographics this past week and the minute a Republican politician does, he must be raaaaaaaaaaacist...

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 14:21:52

I saw the interview and read his wording. It's also a nicer version of 'we lost cause of the ethnic vote' that sunk at least one Canadian separatist's political career when they lost the referendum in 1995.

It really only reinforces Republican view that they only lost because they didn't suppress the vote well enough in places like Florida.

There's a lot of equivalency that Republicans like to pull that Dems do it too etc etc but in this case there is none. Dem governors and state legislatures don't go around systematically limiting the rural white vote. I'm still waiting for an explanation of why Florida's Republican governor Rick Scott keeps dodging questions on why he eliminated several days of early voting which resulted in 4-5 hour lines in Democratic counties on election day.

Edited By: dex on Nov 14th 2012, 14:24:53
See Original Post

trumper

Member
1558

Nov 14th 2012, 14:32:41

Originally posted by Trife:

Implying that "urban voters" aren't Americans. Glad to see you're keepin' it classy Paul/Republicans...

http://www.rawstory.com/...because-of-urban-turnout/

P.s. did this one do the trick, galleri? ;)

It would appear the Associated Press missed your memo that "urban voters" is now coded language:
http://www.denverpost.com/...cians-silence-gun-control

As does Slate (ironic given they're complaining too):
http://www.slate.com/...were_four_years_ago_.html

And even Ohio Democratic Officials missed the memo when they said efforts against longer voting hours targeted urban voters (an interesting theory given it's easier to vote when your precinct is a few minutes away rather than several miles away):
http://www2.ohio-votes.com/...cess-urban-vo-ar-1146462/

The sensitive left strikes again.

We will make sure to add urban to the words Republicans (note I'm not adding Democrats or quite frankly anyone else) can't use without being secretly racist.

=)

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 14:38:54

Nah, we knew exactly what he meant, so do Republicans.

It is as I said. It essentially translates to 'We lost cause of the ethnic vote'

And signals to Republicans that they ought to do something about it, which Repubs are indeed discussing. I see 3 camps right now. The tea party types who think they weren't conservative/racist enough, people who think Republicans just have a branding issue, and the smallest group, Republicans who think the party had gone off the deep end and need to moderate and have policies that you know, actually appeals to young and voters who aren't white.

There will be blood for sure. I hope it is a long and bloody civil war for the party.

BobbyATA

Member
2368

Nov 14th 2012, 14:45:40

I love all the projections of doom and gloom for Republicans. Bro, more people blamed teh economy on Bush then Obama. GL having that stay true 4 years from now when we go into another election with a terrible economy.

Trumper, I don't really like your post b/c you give away too much (seemingly implying that if he had said black folks it would have been terrible of him). If Ryan had said he lost b/c of the black or Latino vote that wouldn't have been racist. It would have been A) True and B) similar to the analysis of almost everyone else.

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 14:52:27

@bobby who is projecting what?

Repubs were sure Obama would be a one termer because of the economy, they were wrong when the electorate proved to be smarter and still remembered the worst president in US history GW Bush was in charge before Obama and rightly blamed the economy on Bush.

What makes it more ironic is I hear a lot of 'Obama is the worst president in history' from right wingers during election, and during their salty tears phase after election day when they posted videos and wrote blogs showing their incomprehension of why they lost.

So obviously, lots didn't get the memo that Obama didn't preside over the worst terrorist attack on American soil in US history then followed that up by invading a country that didn't have anything to do with 9/11, killing thousands more.

The biggest reason for people flipping out over Obama's re-election is Obamacare stays, and from what I recall in another thread, you seem to agree it's actually a fairly reasonable piece of legislation and would lower costs of care. So I'm not really sure why you'd be upset he won.

Pontius Pirate

Member

EE Patron
1907

Nov 14th 2012, 15:03:50

Originally posted by dex:

So obviously, lots didn't get the memo that Obama didn't preside over the worst terrorist attack on American soil in US history then followed that up by invading a country that didn't have anything to do with 9/11, killing thousands more.

hundreds of thousands :P the non-US deaths count as well

Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

archaic

Member
7012

Nov 14th 2012, 15:11:21

Paul Ryan did not even win in his own state, neither did Romney. Ask Al Gore what happens to a presidential nominee that loses his home state. Case closed.

Cheating Mod Hall of Shame: Dark Morbid, Turtle Crawler, Sov

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 15:11:44

Originally posted by Pontius Pirate:

Originally posted by dex:

hundreds of thousands :P the non-US deaths count as well

I had meant to include it but forgot. Not to mention to the extra trillion it added to the debt during good economic times.

Oh and GW Bush's tax cut for the rich that turned Clinton's surpluses into deficits.

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 15:11:49

dex: Do you have anything to support your claim that Obamacare will lower health care costs? I have never seen a single analysis that suggests this is true, only the opposite. I would be interested to read something that says otherwise as this is my biggest problem with Obamacare.

archaic

Member
7012

Nov 14th 2012, 15:18:31

http://www.gao.gov/assets/210/204285.pdf

Cheating Mod Hall of Shame: Dark Morbid, Turtle Crawler, Sov

Trife

Member
5817

Nov 14th 2012, 15:23:20

dey see me trollin', dey hatin', moderators they tryna catch me ridin' dirteh

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 15:29:21

Originally posted by Klown:

Mitt Romney will pinch hit for me on this question.

http://www.forbes.com/...usetts-healthcare-reform/

BobbyATA

Member
2368

Nov 14th 2012, 15:30:35

dex I thought the goals were admirable of Obamacare. But no I don't think it is all that great a piece of legislation, and I think it will lead to higher insurance premiums across the board and hurt low wage employees, businesses that employ low wage employees and small to medium sized businesses a great deal.

dex

Member
180

Nov 14th 2012, 15:34:05

Originally posted by BobbyATA:

Well, Americans already spend more per capita than any other industrialized nation and it also happen to be the only industrialized OECD nation without universal care.

It's fairly compelling what is driving up costs. The healthy are uninsured and the sick shoulder all the costs. And when you are sick and dying, you'll pay $2000 for a nurse to draw blood from you for 'tests'.

That's a nice series of Republican talking points though, but it doesn't empirically prove risk pooling is the wrong way to go.
Just fluffy things Repubs like to say while people go bankrupt for getting sick.

Also interesting everyone on Fox news and think tanks making the point against universal care have insurance coverage. Would love to see these same people on cheapo insurance or no insurance for a year and make the same argument.

I don't even want to know how much care some of these old white republicans are receiving behind the scenes.

Edited By: dex on Nov 14th 2012, 15:36:05
See Original Post

martian

Game Moderator
Mod Boss
7830

Nov 14th 2012, 15:40:00

lol. I think the point is that they should stop trying to blame groups of people or demographics and try to appeal to them instead.
Minorities and city dwellers are not automatically against right wing parties but the use of division and region bashing to score political points is a double edged sword, especially when demographics are no longer in your favor.

The Conservative party of Canada spent a *lot* of resources trying to win over additional demographics and it worked reasonably well for them...

you are all special in the eyes of fluff
(|(|
( ._.) -----)-->
(_(' )(' )

RUN IT IS A KILLER BUNNY!!!

Dibs Ludicrous

Member
6702

Nov 14th 2012, 15:40:30

$2k for tests? i thought that was the cost of the bed per night.

oh, and i don't think i've had health insurance since 1987. probably had it in the AF, but i forget. no kids. what do i need it for?

Edited By: Dibs Ludicrous on Nov 14th 2012, 16:15:05
See Original Post

There are no messages in your Inbox.
Elvis has left the building.

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 16:47:06

Originally posted by archaic:

http://www.gao.gov/assets/210/204285.pdf

That link discusses federal health care spending. That is not the same as health care costs. Any other source?

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 16:48:12

Originally posted by dex:

Originally posted by Klown:

Mitt Romney will pinch hit for me on this question.

http://www.forbes.com/...usetts-healthcare-reform/

That link discusses the MA health care law. That is not the same as ObamaCare. Any other source?

tellarion

Member
3906

Nov 14th 2012, 17:36:17

Originally posted by Klown:

Originally posted by dex:

Originally posted by Klown:

Mitt Romney will pinch hit for me on this question.

http://www.forbes.com/...usetts-healthcare-reform/

That link discusses the MA health care law. That is not the same as ObamaCare. Any other source?

I'll let dex or someone else find your report for you, but in the meantime..the heck is wrong with you? 1) Obamacare is not yet fully implemented, so nobody actually knows what will happen in the future. 2) Romneycare is pretty much a proof of concept on a smaller scale. Yes, they differ in many ways, but the same idea allowed Mass to dramatically expand coverage without a similarly large increase in health expenditures. That's what the article says, if you had bothered to read it.

Saying an article about Romneycare has nothing to do with Obamacare is just silly and just makes you seem like a complete troll.

Klown

Member
967

Nov 14th 2012, 17:47:19

You're joking right? MA is a single state that could craft its health care law toward its 6 million people. That is in no way, not remotely, not at all similar to a national law that governs 300 million people with vastly different components.

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator
1933

Nov 14th 2012, 17:48:45

Universal coverage is cheaper for a slew of reasons (including but not limited to: lack of a profit motive on premium payments, since everyone is covered there is a higher prevelence of cheaper preventative care vs. more expensive care for issues in advanced states). All empirical data indicates that jurisdictions with universal coverage have substantially lower healthcare costs per capita.

However, that may not necessarily have any bearing on obamacare, since it does not constitute universal coverage and the profit motive with premiums has been maintained.

trumper

Member
1558

Nov 14th 2012, 19:37:23

Originally posted by BobbyATA:

I was going for the sarcastic point that they're overtly sensitive to implications of racism.

They lost for one reason: they received less votes. Why they received less votes can be attributed to a number of factors. Consistent higher minority turnout (and the obvious that goes with it of doing poorly with minority communities), an effective turnout machine focused on early voting by the Obama team, being defined by their opponent first (in fairness, this really dates back to Gingrich opening the floodgates on Romney), the so-called "war on women," and so forth.

I just find it amusing that some folks are beyond sensitive to the discussion at all. What I find more amusing is the presumption that being pro-life, for instance, makes one a warrior against women. If the same sensitivism was applied then one could make the case that presuming all women fit neatly into a box is absurd. Alas, defining perception is an age-old game in Washington.

trumper

Member
1558

Nov 14th 2012, 19:38:57

Originally posted by H4xOr WaNgEr:

Americans want the same quality care at the universal care cost. The two don't necessarily jive.

martian

Game Moderator
Mod Boss
7830

Nov 14th 2012, 21:03:57

Originally posted by trumper:

Americans want the same quality care at the universal care cost. The two don't necessarily jive.

ie. having a lot of money entitles me to better and faster treatment than anyone else, and if you are poor you get the shaft.

you are all special in the eyes of fluff
(|(|
( ._.) -----)-->
(_(' )(' )

RUN IT IS A KILLER BUNNY!!!

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator
1933

Nov 14th 2012, 21:19:59

Originally posted by trumper:

Originally posted by H4xOr WaNgEr:

Americans want the same quality care at the universal care cost. The two don't necessarily jive.

How so? If universal coverage is cheaper than private care, then simply invest more $ into the public system to increase the results. People are already paying that much on a per capita basis, so nobody should be strictly worse off.

If you have a universal system but spend more per capita than other universal systems then by extension the quality of care will be improved as well. Even simply redirecting insurance profits back into the system (which would occur with a public insurance system) would improve care substantially.

Oceana

Member
1111

Nov 14th 2012, 22:00:07

where in that story did he imply what you are claiming?
Did you fail to read the article? please I'm just a non urban ignorant folk so I need your help with the hidden text that isn't there which line was it that really said that?