Have campaigns become nastier? Consider this: John Adams lived long enough to see his son become president in 1825, but he died before John Quincy Adams lost the presidency to Andrew Jackson in 1828. Fortunately, that meant he didn't have to witness what many historians consider the nastiest contest in American history. The slurs flew back and forth, with John Quincy Adams being labeled a pimp, and Andrew Jackson's wife getting called a slut. As the election progressed, editorials in the American newspapers read more like bathroom graffiti than political commentary. One paper reported that "General Jackson's mother was a common prostitute, brought to this country by the British soldiers! She afterward married a mulatto man, with whom she had several children, of which number General Jackson is one!" Could you imagine Romney labeling Obama a pimp, or vice versa? Wow.
Oh, I don't know... I can imagine a lot. What I can't imagine is posting in a thread started by basso.
It is not part of his agenda. He would not propose the legislation. He would support such legislation. If such legislation were to be presented to him, he would sign it. Not good, but not inconsistent either.
Yeah, Mitt doesn't care. But he's been able to play to a tie with that strategy so maybe there's no reason for him to change his flip flopping way.
Every single one of those states has either had a voter suppression law struck down or it's being fought in the courts before the election.
Here's why Obama supporters are happy. 1. Biden rallied the base. Dems are excited. We loved the aggression. It'll get us pumped for election day. 2. Look, it doesn't matter what the polls show when it comes to overall perception, it's about getting the undecideds.
I'm still waiting for President Charley. Spoiler <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/opKGHoaeEBo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I like it because I like history. But, when it comes to reflecting on the slanders and lies in this political campaign, why does the answer seem to always compare to the worst in our country's history, which was 150 to 200 years ago? How does this campaign season stack up against the 1912 election or the 1944 election? Is it really unfair to say that campaign rhetoric has actually gotten worse relative to some kind of average?
Romney gaining facebook fans without their permission. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/mitt-romney-fraudulent-facebook-likes https://www.facebook.com/MittYouDidntBuildThat
Probably posted here but here goes anyway: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/av3q7-a-ayc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
comparison of absentee ballot requests in Ohio from 2010 vs. 2012 (not done by me) The gist of it is that blue counties are under-performing vs. 2010 as far as total percentage of absentee ballot requests (which is amazing, considering it was thought to be a nadir for Dems)
Great stuff. How people can vote for this flip-flopping, dishonest liar is beyond me. You thought that people would wake up about the Republican party after Bush's reign, but the idiocy will seemingly continue forever. I can understand if you are in favour of Republican candidates somehow, but Romney/Ryan is the worst duo in years and how anyone can trust and vote for them is stunning, every sane person should realize that these guys are playing with their voters.
That you can't understand why someone would vote for them (even if you don't agree) is your own weakness. You can't persuade those you don't understand.
I don't try to persuade them anyhow. I understand why they vote for them, but there reasons are moronic in most cases.
If Romney/Ryan is "the worst duo in years", then why did Romney absolutely obliterate Obama in the last debate? Who will you be voting for in November, Yung-T? you strike me as somebody easily duped by what you hear in the media. Focus on the candidates' performance in unbiased forums (like the first debate)... You'll make better decisions when you actually think for yourself, son.
