• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

A few of my random thoughts tonight

C

Chessic

New Member
There seem to be quite a few things working against Republicans in elections nowadays:

Groups that support the Democratic party are growing quickly, and the trend looks to continue into the future. Perceived minorities in gender, race, and religion; the elderly; and those depending on entitlements vote heavily Democratic and continue to increase in numbers rapidly.

The Republicans have no real charismatic and popular leaders to campaign and to win over and increase enthusiasm among their supporters. Republicans have no answer to Bill and Hillary Clinton and president Obama in the adoration and excitement they bring to supporters.

Republicans have not be able to escape the picture Democrats have painted of them, that they are ignorant, uneducated, uptight, fat, hopelessly uncool, rich white males who want to take away the rights and incomes and healthcare from women, the poor, the middle class, and the elderly.

Christians liberals have long supported Democrats, but that seemed more common in the liberal theological groups previously. In recent years a trend seems to be growing: theological conservatives have been moving away from Republicans and voting for Democrats.

It is hard for many social conservatives like myself to understand why so many believers abandon biblical values and morals for reasons like wealth redistribution and the belief that Republicans don't want to help the needy. It's shocking, to me at least, to see so many of my fellow believers to with their votes support partial-birth and post-birth abortion and the forcing of other believers to pay for it, sexual perversions such as the homosexual movement and pornography industry, the forced hiring of gays and the taxation of churches, the outright refusal to even discuss creationism or to give students any information about other origins theories, the embracing of atheism and secular humanism as the standard of government and public policy and discussion, and the secularization of society and the removal of religious freedoms like the right to pray and to carry the Word of God anywhere we choose. I can understand differing beliefs on economic policy--I'm a fiscal moderate myself--but I don't get the abandonment of the teachings of God's Word on values and morality.

Both parties have people who are power-hungry or greedy or any other ungodly value you care to name, but only one party actively and intentionally gathers, supports, defends, and unapologetically celebrates those who directly oppose the commandments and teachings of God.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

Spear

New Member
My thought is " Congratulations Mr Obama ! I'm glad you're there for 4 more years ! "

To be honest, outside of the USA, Obama has overwhelming support. Most don't understand that M.Romney can stand a fight and have such a high score, even if he looses. An i truly think that most of his voters don't understand the " rest of the world ". That's just the way it is, we sometimes have it hard to understand each other. Many of the most conservative often consider us to be some " socialists ", probably a cultural remnant of the Cold war and Mc Carthysm, and it's a biased thought. Socialism the way it's being used in many mouthes as a word, doesn't have the same sense here, it's not communism.

Top of the news, 1/3 of the time since 2 weeks are about the US Presidential elections. We feel concerned, it interests us. But I frankly wonder, and maybe you could reply me, if something important in political or economical terms occurs in Europe, does it have so much attention in your media ?

Al that to let you know that, from the outside, we're well informed, and B.Obama had a huge support, mine too of course, and I feel that it's a chance for the Obamacare system.

Lastly, an interesting link :
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_choice_for_non_americans_if_they_could.html

Another one :
http://globescan.com/commentary-and...obama-overwhelmingly-preferred-to-romney.html
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Chessic, thanks for starting this thread. I was going to start on asking people to give their analysis of the election.

I have thought a bit about the election this morning. The following are thoughts that came to my mind.

1. A party cannot expect to win a national election with just the white vote. It is no longer possible.

I carefully looked at the people at the convention hall in Chicago and in Boston. This is what I saw:

The crowd in Chicago was made up of white folk, black folk, Hispanics and Asians. The Democratic coalition is broad and is in groups that are increasing in population and thus in the number of people who vote.

The crowd in Boston was made up of only white folk. There may have been a few people who were of a minority, but I did not see any.

The Republican coalition is too one race, one group centered to win national elections.

2. The number of white voters dropped 1% since 2008.

3. The number of young people, 18-29 increased 1% since 2008. The Democrats have made a concerted effort to register young people.

4. Minority groups voted very strongly for Obama. Why wouldn't they are the Republicans have passed or attempted to pass draconian laws, especially against the Hispanics.

5. Surprisingly Catholics went for Obama ... I believe it was 49 to 48 percent.

6. Women voted for Obama. The Republicans practically pushed them into the Democratic camp.

If Republicans continue to follow the path they have been on the last 12 years they will not win another national election. The demographics are against them. In time this will filter down to the State level. Perhaps we already saw this in that the Democrats held onto the Senate majority. And, in time, probably not in my lifetime, it will filter down and impact House races.

I will be interested in seeing other analysis from folks on the board ... thought out analysis and not just complaining one-liners.


 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
I'm ambivalent.

I'm not looking forward to four more years of excuses, poor leadership, and likely bankruptcy.

But on the other hand, I wasn't all that sure that Mr. Romney would have done better either, except in the leadership department.

God is in charge of my life regardless.
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mexdeaf said:
I'm ambivalent.

I'm not looking forward to four more years of excuses, poor leadership, and likely bankruptcy.

But on the other hand, I wasn't all that sure that Mr. Romney would have done better either, except in the leadership department.

God is in charge of my life regardless.
Click to expand...

In your opinion why did people vote as they did?
 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
Crabtownboy said:
In your opinion why did people vote as they did?
Click to expand...



Two things:

1. Sandy. Made President Obama look good and forced Romney to back off his message for a few days. Had not Sandy happened I believe the outcome would have been different.

2. Sheeple listened to the media instead of researching and thinking for themselves.
 
S

Spear

New Member
I'll give an external point of view, concerning how things go here, and the feelings I have, but I think most rich and industrialized capitalist countries have some of this going on ...

- These past years, the richest became richer, the poorest became poorer. Subprimes crisis, and then world economy crisis, nothing changed that scheme that was already going on. The mid classes tend to go poorer. I think that it's true everywhere in the rich western countries.

- The stock market and notation agencies rule the world .... on biased ways. Some companies are highly rated, and some flamed down, by speculation. Not on real economy, and that is part of the matter. When a company is worth 50 % less at the stock market than its real value (in terms of funds and belongings, market shares, patents), then there's a matter ... When an internet company that no one has any idea of how it's going to make profit manages to raise billions ... there's a problem too.

There's excess everywhere ... Big cars, big houses, big people, big amounts of food, big money ... No moderation.

I finally think the matter is desillusion. Capitalism, I mean savage capitalism (no taxes, the market rules everything ....) is desillusion. We need rules ... and we don't seem to be able to rule the market. But the biggest desillusion, is the end of an ideal, of a model, which was, I think, a thing we admired about the USA, and that should have inspired us (I mean european) when it still was " more " possible : " If you want it, just work hard, and you'll get it ". That's no more as simple as that. I think all of us know people who work really hard, who don't count their hours, and still they don't earn that much more than some basic employees at the end of the month. Courageous, hard workers, don't systematically earn what they deserve.
 
NaasPreacher (C4K)

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
Mexdeaf said:
1. Sandy. Made President Obama look good and forced Romney to back off his message for a few days. Had not Sandy happened I believe the outcome would have been different.
Click to expand...

Sandy was the key. The president did all the right things, Gov Christie did the right thing. At the moment the election was over.
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Folks, Hurricane Sandy is a nice excuse, but IMHO it was not the defining event. It is far more complex than that. Here is a good analysis:

The story of this election will be all about demographics. As Chuck Todd noted earlier today, the fact that it remained unexpectedly close in GOP-leaning southern states shows that the GOP is not keeping pace with the changing face of America. Meanwhile, Obama’s support proved unexpectedly strong among workers in the industrial midwest, thanks partly to his willingness to pursue aggressive government action to save a major American industry. Obama’s team made the right bet on the true nature of the American electorate. Rather than reverting to the older, whiter, more male version Republicans had hoped for, it continues to be defined by what Ron Brownstein has called the “coalition of the ascendant” — minorities, young voters, and college educated whites, particularly women.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...2892-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_blog.html?hpid=z4
Click to expand...

And as I stated in other posts, the Republicans are on the wrong side of the demographics.
 
A

Aaron

Member
Site Supporter
Chessic said:
There seem to be quite a few things working against Republicans in elections nowadays:

Groups that support the Democratic party are growing quickly, and the trend looks to continue into the future. Perceived minorities in gender, race, and religion; the elderly; and those depending on entitlements vote heavily Democratic and continue to increase in numbers rapidly.

The Republicans have no real charismatic and popular leaders to campaign and to win over and increase enthusiasm among their supporters. Republicans have no answer to Bill and Hillary Clinton and president Obama in the adoration and excitement they bring to supporters.

Republicans have not be able to escape the picture Democrats have painted of them, that they are ignorant, uneducated, uptight, fat, hopelessly uncool, rich white males who want to take away the rights and incomes and healthcare from women, the poor, the middle class, and the elderly.

Christians liberals have long supported Democrats, but that seemed more common in the liberal theological groups previously. In recent years a trend seems to be growing: theological conservatives have been moving away from Republicans and voting for Democrats.

It is hard for many social conservatives like myself to understand why so many believers abandon biblical values and morals for reasons like wealth redistribution and the belief that Republicans don't want to help the needy. It's shocking, to me at least, to see so many of my fellow believers to with their votes support partial-birth and post-birth abortion and the forcing of other believers to pay for it, sexual perversions such as the homosexual movement and pornography industry, the forced hiring of gays and the taxation of churches, the outright refusal to even discuss creationism or to give students any information about other origins theories, the embracing of atheism and secular humanism as the standard of government and public policy and discussion, and the secularization of society and the removal of religious freedoms like the right to pray and to carry the Word of God anywhere we choose. I can understand differing beliefs on economic policy--I'm a fiscal moderate myself--but I don't get the abandonment of the teachings of God's Word on values and morality.

Both parties have people who are power-hungry or greedy or any other ungodly value you care to name, but only one party actively and intentionally gathers, supports, defends, and unapologetically celebrates those who directly oppose the commandments and teachings of God.
Click to expand...
<PA deleted - LE>.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

saturneptune

New Member
Crabtownboy said:
In your opinion why did people vote as they did?
Click to expand...
One thing that is correct is that many voters do not have a realisitic perception of how minorities have grown over the last few decades. My main mistake in judging the outcome of the election was the Midwest states. I honestly thought Romney would win Wisconsin, Michigan, and maybe Pennsylvania. I also thought he would win Virginia and Florida. No real other surprises.

Another comment from another thread. The Republicans have no one to blame for losing the Senate because of the nominees from Indiana and Missouri.
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
saturneptune said:
One thing that is correct is that many voters do not have a realisitic perception of how minorities have grown over the last few decades. My main mistake in judging the outcome of the election was the Midwest states. I honestly thought Romney would win Wisconsin, Michigan, and maybe Pennsylvania. I also thought he would win Virginia and Florida. No real other surprises.

Another comment from another thread. The Republicans have no one to blame for losing the Senate because of the nominees from Indiana and Missouri.
Click to expand...

I believe you are correct about minority groups. A party cannot win a national election appealing only to white folk or to only evangelistic folk. The Republican Party has to change or they will gradually whither away.

If they do not change their course the same will begin to happen on the State level, i.e. senators. And in a long time even down to the local level.

Yes, Indiana and Missouri was the fault of the nominees. But these two fellows point directly to the heart of the Republican problem. This is also the problem of the Tea Party. They are killing the GOP with their extreme stances. If you go to far off center, either right or left, you will not win many elections.
 
E

Eric B

Active Member
Site Supporter
A GOP leader even seems to make the same point:

The Republican Party, by contrast, has been reduced to a rump parliament of Caucasian traditionalism: white, married, church-going -- to oversimplify only slightly. "It's a catastrophe," said GOP strategist Steve Schmidt. "This is, this will have to be, the last time that the Republican Party tries to win this way."

The GOP chose as its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, whose own Mormon Church until recent decades discriminated officially against blacks. His campaign made little serious effort to reach out to Hispanics voters, and Romney hurt himself by taking far-right positions on immigration during the GOP primaries. He made no effort whatsoever in the black community.
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/barack-obama-reelection_n_2085819.html
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aaron said:
Racism put Obama in the White House (twice). Now you want Republicans to be racist. Amazing.
Click to expand...

If you look at the people in the convention hall in Chicago waiting to see Obama and hear his speech you will see people from all major racial groups; white, black, Oriental. That doesn't seem very racist.

If you look at the folk in Boston waiting for Romney, they were all white. At least I did not see any African Americans or Orientals and I looked carefully. That crown was mono-racial and that appears much more racist than a crowd comprised of numerous racial groups.

Did race play a part in this election? Yes. But it cut both ways; some folks voted against Obama because of race. Some folks voted for Obama because of race.
 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
Crabtownboy said:
If you look at the people in the convention hall in Chicago waiting to see Obama and hear his speech you will see people from all major racial groups; white, black, Oriental. That doesn't seem very racist.

If you look at the folk in Boston waiting for Romney, they were all white. At least I did not see any African Americans or Orientals and I looked carefully. That crown was mono-racial and that appears much more racist than a crowd comprised of numerous racial groups.

Did race play a part in this election? Yes. But it cut both ways; some folks voted against Obama because of race. Some folks voted for Obama because of race.
Click to expand...

That may have had more to do with the demographics of the locations where the speeches were held: (from Wiki)

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the racial composition of Boston was as follows:[101]

The racial makeup of Chicago in 2010 was :


45% white, 31% non hispanic white
32% black,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_(U.S._Census)

28% Hispanic of any race,

5% Asian, and 3% from two or more races.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top