Republican Mitt Romney attributes his election loss to President Obama’s ‘gifts’ that he bestowed on minorities and young people during his first term.

In a conference call with his national finance committee on Wednesday, Romney said Obama’s win was buoyed in large part by loyal Democratic constituencies including the poor that he had promised ‘free health care,’ the immigrants that he had protected from deportation and the college-aged women that he had offered free contraceptives.

‘You can imagine for somebody making $25,000 or $30,000 or $35,000 a year, being told you’re now going to get free health care, particularly if you don’t have it, getting free health care worth, what, $10,000 per family, in perpetuity? I mean, this is huge.’

‘Likewise, with Hispanic voters, free health care was a big plus,’ he added. ‘But in addition with regards to Hispanic voters, the amnesty for children of illegals, the so-called DREAM Act kids, was a huge plus for that voting group.’

Obama announced in June that he would grant temporary amnesty to some children of undocumented immigrants who met certain requirements and had clean criminal records. The program resembled the DREAM Act, which had long been stalled in Congress.

Romney chided Obama over the summer for waiting so long to address immigration reform, charging that his amnesty program was politically motivated.

‘He saves these sort of things until four-and-a-half months before the general election,’ Romney said in June on CBS’ ‘Face the Nation.’ ‘I think the timing is pretty clear. If he really wanted a solution that dealt with these kids or illegal immigration in America, then this is something he would have taken up in his first three-and-a-half years, not in his last few months.’

Now Romney is saying that the program is what persuaded Hispanics to support Obama.

Romney won 59 percent of the white vote, while Obama was backed by 93 percent of black voters, 71 percent of Latinos and 60 percent of voters younger than 30, according to exit polls.

Romney said that Obama directed his campaign according to the ‘old playbook’ of targeting specific groups with promises of legislation that would persuade them to vote a certain way.

‘In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups,’ Romney said.

‘With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift,’ Romney said. ‘Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people.

‘They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008,’ he said.

Similarly, Paul Ryan, Romney’s running mate, blamed the Republican ticket’s loss on high turnout among ‘urban’ voters.

‘I think the surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race,’ Ryan told a television station in Wisconsin. ‘When we watched Virginia and Ohio coming in, and those ones coming in as tight as they were, and looking like we were going to lose them, that’s when it became clear we weren’t going to win.’

Romney told his finance team that the sting of his loss was still too strong to begin mapping out his plans going forward for himself and for the Republican party.

‘I am very sorry that we didn’t win,’ he said. ‘I know that you expected to win. We expected to win… It was very close, but close doesn’t count in this business.’

He added: ‘And so now we’re looking and saying, “O.K., what can we do going forward?” But frankly we’re still so troubled by the past, it’s hard to put together our plans from the future.’

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Triarius

    What I don’t understand is how the left can attack him and Ryan for saying things like this. They’re 100% correct, for once. I’ve read some comment sections about similar topics and liberals have no response they just call Romney a liar.

    I know they’re counter argument would be pthetic, but has anyone ever heard a one? I haven’t.

    • Oil Can Harry

      The Left are outraged by the (true) suggestion that they engaged in “buying votes”. Also, that their constituencies contain a large number of shiftless deadbeats chanting GIBSMEDAT.
      The re-election of Obamarx proves H. L. Mencken’s quip that “Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.”

    • http://www.newnation.org/ sbuffalonative

      You don’t need to attack a lie that is self evident. You have to actively work to fight the truth.

      That’s why people like Chris Matthews have to constantly call Republicans crypto-racists.

  • potato78

    That is common sense, Right?

    The more poor USA goes, The more people will vote a person like Obama.

  • http://countenance.wordpress.com/ Question Diversity

    Romney realizes:

    Obama won by being Santa Claus.

    Then got so upset that he went on a milk binge.

  • Biff_Maliboo

    Doers he mean people like this freelance-reparations collector from Omaha?

    http://www.ketv.com/news/local-news/Stewart-admits-to-robbing-14-stores/-/9674510/17408592/-/t4c22yz/-/index.html

    • Smeagol2

      Good God. 21 years old, 5 kids, a gun, and an attitude, “One night I just feel like I can’t work that hard to earn a dollar. I got to take how much that I can and be like, ‘I’m done, I’m stopped.'” Forget about terrorism, a few thousand like him would (or will) easily destroy America.

  • ed91

    and here I thought it was just

    VOTER FRAUD with machines and other ungodly methods!!

  • fakeemail

    Maybe Romney should’ve talked tough like this during the campaign instead of playing it so calculatingly safe. I mean, the media is going to call him and Repubs crypto-Nazis even when they play the color-blind libertarian gentlemen pushovers that they are. Why not advocate justice for white people even just half as hard as the Dems advocate injustice in favor of blacks and mexicans?

    Regardless, I give up. There’s too many non-whites and Sandra Flukes’ in this country. Too many whites who side with Obama for various idiotic and nefarious reasons. There’s no reasoning with all these people or fixing anything any more. This is a bloody mess that can’t be straightened out any more by talking or voting; as if it ever could.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/7RORAJVG7LJJZECDJIILHJBE7U So CAL Snowman

    Liberals can’t stand that the TRUTH is racist!

    • Charles Edward Lincoln III

      You are certainly right that the left can’t stand hearing that racial divisions underlie all major “interest group articulation” in America, and indeed, most of the world today, but it’s not because they can’t accept this fact as true: starting in 1945 and onwards, the left has been pushing racial agendas MUCH more than the right. Even my old hero, the late Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, had in his 1948 Dixiecrat Platform that it was the leftist, pro-integration, Democrats who were pushing racial conflict as a means to impose socialism.

      Hubert Horatio Humphrey led the way in every “Civil Rights Act” between 1948 and 1972, and never once did he propose a genuine program of “equal rights” for whites and the “non-white” minorities. The whole purpose of the Civil Rights movement was to maintain the classifications of the Jim Crow era but turn the hierarchy upside down because the “have-nots” would support socialism—and hence the birth of a new socialist intelligentsia and elite—which the already enfranchised white majority could not tolerate.

      So the “truth” may be racist, but liberals use race cynically and consciously antithetically to inform the “Hegelian dialectic” that abolishes OUR world as merely the “Archaic Thesis”.

      The new “Synthesis” is this interracially synthetic, hamburger-helper, “shake-and-bake” world order and morality….

      Quite simply, we were divided and conquered by integration, when the “bad old” segregationist order provided a platform on which to build a united and cooperative society in which “moral boundaries” mattered enough to be respected and maintained.

      In our brave new world, post 1984, government and the corporate-financial infrastructure know neither law nor boundaries of any kind. And yes, I think there is a strong correlation between the breakdown of racial boundaries, the most fundamental, instinctual taboos, and all other moral failures, including the complete “integration” of the Banking Establishment, which no longer respects simple boundaries such as the common law doctrines of “privity of contract” and “holder in due course”.

      Everyone can and does now have the right to mate with everyone, so family is dead, and everyone can and does now have the right to cross-contractual lines and boundaries of ownership. Does anyone else see this as the new universal norm? A world of no boundaries or laws except power?

    • redfeathers

      Governor Jindal can’t stand the truth too!

  • anmpr1

    I’m not sure the message, here. That Democrats pander? Is this the great intellect of Romney on display? Telling everyone what has been evident for 70 years, or longer? Did he just figure this out?

    [Romney] added: ‘And so now we’re looking and saying, “O.K., what can we do going forward?” But frankly we’re still so troubled by the past, it’s hard to put together our plans from the future.’

    Is this the great Romney moral leadership on display? So “troubled” by an election defeat that it’s “hard” for him to put together any future plans? I tell you, Romney deserved to lose. What a milksop. One of these days an intelligent and politically saavy white man with courage may arise. But then, he will not be a Republican, since Republicans are the Stupid Party.

    • JohnEngelman

      Republicans pander by promising tax cuts without being specific about which spending programs they intend to cut in order to pay for those tax cuts.

  • libertarian1234

    “Obama Won the Election by Winning over Low-Income Voters, Young Americans and Minorities, Says Romney in Explosive Post-Mortem of the GOP 2012 Campaign”

    I can’t help but believe that many of the 39 percent of whites who voted for him did so, because they didn’t want to see a black brought up short which would be blamed on whites. And, of that group, I’m willing to bet many of them were intimidated into keeping the black mobs from rioting, because the prospect of it scared them after reading all those posts from blacks threatening to kill Romney and riot if Obama were defeated.

    • JohnEngelman

      Obama also won those who went to graduate school.

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-exit-poll?intcmp=related

      • libertarian1234

        “Obama also won those who went to graduate school.”

        Of course. He also won most all of academia.

        Why wouldn’t he win over a segment of the population who have been hammered and conditioned all their lives by the schools like lab rats to the point where they couldn’t think objectively if their lives depended on it?

        They belong to the sect or cult of political correctness, and they are fully expected to drink the kool aid.

        That’s a bit like poiinting out that the Nazi Brown Shirt faction supported Hitler wholeheartedly.

      • http://www.newnation.org/ sbuffalonative

        Again, by buying their vote when he said ‘people shouldn’t go broke or into debt paying for college’

        Someone has to pay for their free education and as long as they believe it won’t be them, Obama got their vote.

      • preparationHbomb

        Obama won: (1) blacks and Hispanics – the racist and entitlement vote; (2) ivory tower intellectuals – the Ph.D’s who embrace marxist theory and want it put into practice; (3) younger people brainwashed by liberalist education in public schools; (4) GWL’s – guilty white liberals who still stupidly think they OWE blacks something for the past history of slavery; (5) special interest groups like gays, who believe their interests are better served by Democrats. Looks to me like the majority of people fall into one of these groups, which confirms my belief that this nation has turned into a morass of spineless whiners.

        • David Ashton

          Precisely the groups targeted by “non-existent” cultural Marxists like Herbert Marcuse. When will Engelman read the books and websites we have listed to refute his “bogeyman” recitations?

      • Dan Reardon

        And Obama suggesting that student loans should be forgiven played no part in that.

        • OlderWoman

          ‘These people support Obama because he is so wise….’
          ______
          You’ve got to be kidding me! Potus is NOT the brain the left are trying to sell us. All his decisions are bogus. This potus is a truly stupid person, a fake intellectual and a fake president. I believe he had bad grades and is hiding them. He probably plagiarized his dissertation also. Lord know, no good law firm would have hired him. He’s only window dressing……and that’s not even great to look at.

          • Dan Reardon

            Olderwoman, I was being sarcastic.

  • preparationHbomb

    It IS true. However, a factor that isn’t mentioned is, all persons educated from the late 1960’s and beyond have been force-fed the REVISIONIST version of US history, in which the white people, all capitalists, and capitalism generally are demonized. These younger folk, brainwashed on liberal lies from day one, truly believe that they are ENTITLED to government handouts, and to government’s paying for the mistakes they made in doing drugs/alcohol, having babies while teenagers, and in refusing to train for a career when the time was appropriate for them to do so. These people were taught that competition was bad, that their feelings mattered, and that their slightest whim should be granted. Therefore, without that edge of competition, their brains have not been honed to the sharpness that should have been theirs, they cannot take criticism, and their solution to anything not going their way is to show up with a gun and start shooting people. These people are weak, and as the years pass they’re getting weaker. I do not feel very good about the future as I observe these pathetic whiners who are masquerading as adults….. They will ALWAYS go for what they believe to be “the easier, softer way,” i.e. the way of the socialists, Obama, and the Democrats.

    • David Ashton

      This systematic brainwashing is what is loosely known as “Cultural Marxism”.
      The answer is still: oppose it, refute it, and offer a national alternative.
      The “way forward” is NOT to copy Democrats with open-door immigration, legalizing the mass-marketing of addictive brain-poisons, giving racial groups special benefits they do not deserve, etc. This will not rescue the “party”, but it could well destroy the nation.

      • JohnEngelman

        Cultural Marxists as a self identified group of political activists do not exist.

        Under President Obama more illegal immigrants were deported than under any other president.

        Marijuana is seldom addictive, and less harmful than alcohol and tobacco.

        • pecosbill

          “Under President Obama more illegal immigrants were deported than under any other president”.

          Sure. And we have a 7.9 percent unemployment rate too.

        • http://www.newnation.org/ sbuffalonative

          As long as they don’t self identify they don’t exist?

          • JohnEngelman

            “Cultural Marxists,” are less dangerous than the bogey man hiding in the closet that you may have worried about while trying to go to sleep as a child, and have no more real existence.

          • Dan Reardon

            Well Engleman it’s your story, tell it anyway you want to.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman sbuffalonative•10 hours ago
            “Cultural Marxists,” are less dangerous than the bogey man hiding in the closet that you may have worried about while trying to go to sleep as a child, and have no more real existence.”
            Cultural Marxists from the Frankfort School fled the Nazis, were given sanctuary at Columbia and showed their gratitude by poisoning our system. It was they who gave us what is described today as political correctness.
            There never was a group who self-identified as Cultural Marxists, but what the Frankfort School promoted was Cultural Marxism, and they and anybody, then and now, who espouses their ideology as political correctness….whether they know it or not… are correctly identified as cultural Marxists.
            The conversion of economic Marxism into one concentrating on culture, rather than economics, is cultural Marxism, which is what the Frankfort School was all about.
            And dangerous?
            There has been no military threat as great or as devastating to the Western world as Cultural Marxism.

          • JohnEngelman

            Bogey. Bogey. Bogey.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•8 hours ago
            “Bogey. Bogey. Bogey.”
            Well, now isn’t THAT an intelligence response to points offered on Cultural Marxism.

        • libertarian1234

          This systematic brainwashing is what is loosely known as “Cultural Marxism”.

          JohnEngelman David Ashton•
          “Cultural Marxists” as a self identified group of political activists do not exist.”

          “Loosely known as,” does not mean they comprise an identifiable group.

          And, he’s right. The tenents of Cultural Marxism….whether they are recognized by the advocates as belonging to a specific school of thought….are embraced by most on the left…….most specifically “critical theory.”

        • libertarian1234

          “Under President Obama more illegal immigrants were deported than under any other president.”
          That assertion by obamaites has been roundlly criticized as being fabricated.
          Like most of what he and his administration, and campaign managers in the press, do, that’s more likely than not just more of the same of their 24/7 agenda of distortion and obfuscation.

          • JohnEngelman
          • Puggg

            Of course they can say that, because they’re engaging in Clintonesque haggling over the definition of “deportation.”

          • libertarian1234

            Your sources are about as reliable as Obama’s campaign manager.

          • JohnEngelman

            libertarian1234,

            It is impossible to even attempt to reason with someone like you who refuses to believe anything you do not want to believe, regardless of credible sources.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman
            “It is impossible to even attempt to reason with someone like you who refuses to believe anything you do not want to believe, regardless of credible sources.”

            When have you provided credible sources? And, when have you attempted to reason with anyone on here?

            I’ve never seen a single post you’ve made that lays out anything in a logical manner. They’re rfife with unfounded, screwball assertions, then you naively cite some ideologue who has an agenda, which you insist is bona fide proof of whatever outlandish allegations you make, or you’ve never stopped to consider other aspects involved in the situation, which is more in depth about the subject than the shallow one line links you post that are either biased or they don’t tell the whole story.

            Don’t expect others to be as gullible as you are. Or as naive.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234
            “The assertion of higher deportations under President Obama has been substantiated by Politifact.com, The Washington Post, abc News, and The New York Tiimes.”

            Every source you cited has acted as a campaign manager for Obama.

            Too, it has been pointed out in numerous internet news sites that the Obama administration has been counting turn-arounds at the border as deportations., which is likely so, since they deal so much in exaggerations, manipulation and deceit.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/NQHEAYZCMBOERHG2VZRDQ3YUSQ Felix

        When GOP congressmen support amnesty for illegals, they sign their party’s death warrant.

  • http://countenance.wordpress.com/ Question Diversity

    The “Next Gen” twits are already denouncing:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/15/New-Leaders-Of-The-Republican-Party-Slam-Romney-For-His-Remarks

    This lists Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad here, but he’s currently on his fifth term as Iowa Governor, after serving four terms from 1982 to 1998, and is currently 65 years old. “Next gen” is a bit of a stretch when it comes to him.

  • kjh64

    This will all come to an end when then the money runs out and if things don’t change, the money WILL run out. All these “entitled” people can scream and yell all they want when they swipe their EBT cards and the computer flashes “insufficient funds.”

  • negrolocaust

    are blacks going to go out and trash walmart and act like stupid trash like they always do making clowns out of themselves and shooting and beating each other over tennis shoes on black friday as always? yes, they are.

  • eunometic

    A look at Hadding Scott’s “A Party of Plutocrats Has No Future”
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/11/a-party-of-plutocrats-has-no-future/
    Over at the Occidental Observer provides a more realistic analysis.

  • You Are Now Enriched

    The GOP is “distancing” itself from him, which means its ready for top to bottom Hispanization.

    We saw the future in how much Spanish we heard at the GOP convention.

    Every day in every way, America gets progressively more horrid. If you aren’t prepared for inevitable, it is prepared for you…

  • charles

    It reminds me of an old saying from lawyers I read “If you cant argue the facts attack the persons character ” Debate the person not the idea. Republicans are not against everyone as suggested, it’s a huge misunderstanding perceived by the left.

  • JohnEngelman

    The President won the votes of those who went to graduate school by 55 to 42 percent.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-exit-poll?intcmp=related

    Like every Republican presidential candidate beginning with Ronald Reagan, Mitt Romney promised to cut taxes for the rich, raise defense spending, and balance the budget with the magic of voodoo economics. One should not need a graduate degree to realize that that has been tried, that it has always failed, and that it always will. Unfortunately, graduate study seems to help bring about that cognition.

    • libertarian1234

      JohnEngelman•a day ago
      “The President won the votes of those who went to graduate school by 55 to 42 percent.”

      Only 55% considering that they have been brainwashed and mentally conditioned for years? And what does “graduate school have to do with anything?” Some of the biggest. most inept fools in politics and science went to graduate school. It certainly doesn’t translate to exceptional intelligence. Above average a bit, but nothing commendable necessarily.

      In fact if we would look into it further we would probably see that the 55% amounted to the dumbest of the entire group.

      “Like every Republican presidential candidate beginning with Ronald Reagan, Mitt Romney promised to cut taxes for the rich, raise defense spending, and balance the budget with the magic of voodoo economics.”

      Reaganomics pulled us out of the recession created by Carter and gave us unparalleled growth that carried on into the Clinton years.

      • David Ashton

        What is the difference between John Engelman himself and a Cultural Marxist? An acquaintance with Jared Taylor.

  • puffdaddy

    Actually, according to polling data young whites broke for Romney by 8% over Obama this time; in 2008 they went for Obama by 11%. Maybe young white people are finally realizing that what they see with their own eyes is true, and not what the elites tell them is so.

  • JohnEngelman
    • http://www.newnation.org/ sbuffalonative

      That sure looks like Marxism to me.

      • JohnEngelman

        I doubt you have ever known a real Marxist. I have. I liked most of them.

        Once I took a fascinating seminar on Das Kapital given by the Washington, DC chapter of the American Communist Party.

        • libertarian1234

          JohnEngelman sbuffalonative•20 hours ago

          “I doubt you have ever known a real Marxist. I have. I liked most of them.”
          Which proves exactly what?

          What has that to do with their ideology and their penchant for mind-control and totalitarianism?

          “Once I took a fascinating seminar on Das Kapital given by the Washington, DC chapter of the American Communist Party.”

          And what was your opinion of the communist ideology afterwards?

          Are you in favor of communist systems over capitalism?

          Doesn’t it bother you that communism has failed everywhere it has been tried?

          • JohnEngelman

            I read any social thinker for insight rather than doctrine. Karl Marx was right that unregulated capitalism expands the gross domestic product while reducing median income. He was also right that unregulated capitalism leads to increasingly destructive economic downturns. When he wrote The Communist Manifesto in 1848 he predicted the Great Depression, which began with the stock market crash of 1929.

            Karl Marx was mistaken when he argued that among working class people economic loyalties are stronger than loyalties of race, nation, and ethnicity.

            He never advocated the dictatorships that were created in his name, and would probably have disliked them, although he did inspire them.

            I favor neither Communism, nor the American free enterprise system, but Social Democracy. At the same time I acknowledge that it has only worked in countries where the vast majority was white. I hope Social Democrats realize that before it is too late.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•2 hours ago

            ” Karl Marx was right that unregulated capitalism expands the gross domestic product while reducing median income.”

            First of all, where is there “unregulated” capitalism?

            Secondly, without the expansion of gross domestic product….as in a socialist or communist system that invariably suppresses individual incentive…. an economy will fail to keep up with population growth, which is devastating to median incomes.

            And if debt to GDP reaches thelevels it is here and in GReece, Spain, POrtugasl and Italy

          • JohnEngelman

            Capitalism was unregulated during the day of Karl Marx. As Republicans deregulate American capitalism it begins to behave the way it did during the nineteenth century.

            The closest approximation to democratic socialism is in the social democratic economies of Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway. Taxes are quite a bit higher there than in the United States, or in Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Italy.

            Scandinavian countries retain triple A ratings with Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. They have less public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product than the United States.

            http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/09/tea-party-taxes-opinions-columnists-bartlett.html

            http://www.huliq.com/3257/us-leaves-whos-left-among-countries-both-moodys-s-p-aaa-ratings

            https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html?countryName=United+States&countryCode=us&regionCode=noa&rank=38#us

            The Scandinavian social democracies have responded better to the Great Recession than the United States and in other European countries.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234
            “The closest approximation to democratic socialism is in the social democratic economies of Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway. Taxes are quite a bit higher there than in the United States, or in Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Italy.”

            Taxes are not only higher they’re at confiscatory levels, which is unsustainable. They are able to maintain such a system primarily due to capitalist systems in the world which have allowed them to increase their GDP’s. That will not last.

            Those countries and Germany are barely keeping their heads above water, but they will also eventually become affected. Cracks are beginning to show economically and socially, with their burdensome populations of third world emigres.

            If social democracy was installed worldwide, there would be no largess to acquire, which is available only via capitalism. So your social democracies could not exist in a social democratic world.

          • JohnEngelman

            You imply that the social democratic economies are somehow predatory on other economies. How is that?

            How is what they are doing unsustainable? As far as I am concerned they are doing better than we are in the United States.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•19 hours ago
            “You imply that the social democratic economies are somehow predatory on other economies. How is that?”

            No, I didn’t imply predation. I said:

            “They are able to maintain such a system primarily due to capitalist systems in the world which have allowed them to increase their GDP’s. That will not last.”

            That refers to DEPENDENCY not predatorey practices. It is because booming capitalism throughout the world and most especially in the US, enables any nation to depart from strict capitalist principles. If the US ever crashed, Scandanavia would do the same, as would the rest of the world, including China and India.

            A confiscatory system of taxation can exist only so long as it can acquire revenue on the world market, and ONLY when the global market is booming. We will see Scandanavia…and Germany….implode economically just as the PIIG countries are doing right now, as we devolve further into this global economic plummet.

            It is, incidentally, their partial capitalist systems and their abundant trade with capitalist countries, that have kept them afloat up to this point.

            Social democracies by their very natures cannot create booming national economies and definitely not global prosperity.

            While capitalism is a cyclic system of ups and downs, the basic prinicple allows for recovery during down times. Social democracies that provide an abundance of services and benefits are not self-sustaining societies.

          • JohnEngelman

            Give some indication that social democratic economies cannot be sustained. Right now they are doing better than the American free enterprise system.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•36 minutes ago
            “Give some indication that social democratic economies cannot be sustained.”

            You’re laboring under the delusion that Scandanavia hasn’t yet fallen to the level of the PIIGS due to its social democratic system, not understanding that it is in spite of its system it is holding on for now. It isn’t social democracy that garners revenue and prosperity it is its capitalistic feautures.

            In fact, when its trade is stifled by falling EU dominos, and its welfare state policies continue to pour out inflated benefits it will go down in the blink of an eye.

            Austerity riots there will be a sight to behold.

          • JohnEngelman

            Right now Scandinavia is doing better than the United States economically. You are making predictions on the basis of your dogmatic belief that alternatives to laissez faire capitalism do not work.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•12 hours ago

            “Right now Scandinavia is doing better than the United States economically.”

            You keep up that mantra but you’re not understanding that even if it were true it doesn’t prove your point about a social democracy being better than capitalism, nor does it take into consideration that capitalism is what is keeping Scandanavia afloat right now.

            Basically you’re alleging that a country that acquires its wealth via capitalism is a better system if it has confiscatory tax policies and huge benefit payouts. That doesn’t make sense. In fact that’s exactly what is causing the PIIGS countries to fall apart and is causing the US economy to plummet.

            “You are making predictions on the basis of your dogmatic belief that alternatives to laissez faire capitalism do not work.”

            It is not my “dogmatic” belief it is proven fact.

            And what you refer to as my “predictions” are long term projections based on known facts that falling revenues will decimate a social democracy to a much greater extent than a capitalist system. Common sense will tell you that.

            And these projections are voiced by so many top notch economists it would be preposterous to ignore them. Nouriel Roubini, Marc Faber, Gerald Celente, Niall Ferguson, Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers, et al. http://www.trendsresearch.com

          • JohnEngelman

            It is not my “dogmatic” belief it is proven fact.

            -libertarian1234

            Proven facts are that the Scandinavian countries retain triple AAA ratings from Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s, that they have less public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product than the United States, that they have better health, and lower crime rates. They also benefit by having lower third world populations. Nevertheless, those who maintain that what they have is not sustainable maintain something for which there is no evidence.

            If you want to see what laissez faire capitalism really was like, read some of the grimmer novels by Charles Dickens, and selected fiction by Jack London.

            Also, click on this:

            http://www.google.com/search?q=%22industrial+revolution%22+%2B+photos&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=UkeqUIX4DMPE0QGX34CgDQ&ved=0CCsQsAQ&biw=930&bih=593

            It wasn’t pretty.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234
            “Nevertheless, those who maintain that what they have is not sustainable maintain something for which there is no evidence.”

            The nations in Europe are falling because of out-of-control spending and you say there is no evidence? That defies reality.

            Well, tell us, then, John, how do social democracies sustain themselves?

        • David Ashton

          You surprise us.

          • JohnEngelman

            I have known, and usually liked Marxists of several varieties. I have known Marxist Leninists in the American Communist Party. I have known Marxist Leninist Trotskyites in the Socialist Workers’s Party and the Workers’ League. I have known Marxist Leninist Maoists in the Progressive Labor Party. They were no more prone to hide what they believed in then are born again Christians who belong to the Christian Coalition and contribute to the 700 Club.

            These various Marxists never told me anything about Cultural Marxism. That is because it only exists in the fantasies of those who are cultural reactionaries.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman

            “These various Marxists never told me anything about Cultural Marxism. That is because it only exists in the fantasies of those who are cultural reactionaries.”

            “Political Correctness Is Cultural Marxism ”
            http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/print.php?articleid=4104

            “The PC crowd uses this chaos to justify more government. Political correctness is really a masking term for cultural Marxism. An all-powerful and intrusive government that robs you of your freedoms is the ultimate goal of what you may know only as political correctness. ”
            Did anybody read the recent quote by the Cultural Marxist Debbie Wasserman Schultz who said the GOP is too male and too white?
            She was expressing a cultural Marxist tactic known as Critical Theory. It is a process of denunciation of whites, men, traditional American values and all things this country has always been based on.
            All anybody has to do is run a Google on “Cultural Marxism” to know that denying the existence of Cultural Marxism is pure rubbish and the denial of it works only on grade school children or those too unintelligent to comprehend the truth.
            Denying the existence of Cultural Marxism is a childish, immature tactic used by people who are not too bright themselves.

          • JohnEngelman

            The web address you provided goes to a right wing website. That merely substantiates my point that “cultural Marxism” is a right wing fantasy. Until someone is able to list several prominent leftists who declare themselves to be cultural Marxists, along with self identified cultural Marxist organizations, websites, and publications, my point stands,.

          • libertarian1234

            JohnEngelman libertarian1234•
            “The web address you provided goes to a right wing website.”
            Of course. Is anybody so naive as to expect the PC crowd or Cultural Marxists to admit to their chicanery? Surely leftists are more sophisticated than that.
            I mean, especially since their entire efforts are based in obfuscation, subterfuge, manipulation and deceit?
            The link was not provided for you, but to the very few people who might visit this site who are unfamiliar with the history of leftist propaganda known as Cultural Marxism.
            Big Brother may be watching us…..
            But we’re watching him too.

          • libertarian1234

            Jonhm Engleman
            “These various Marxists never told me anything about Cultural Marxism. That is because it only exists in the fantasies of those who are cultural reactionaries.”

            Of course, like about a thousand experts on the subject.

            http://countercultureconservative.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/death-of-the-west-bill-lind-on-cultural-marxism-and-the-frankfurt-school/

  • Capetown SA

    South Afrikaners are shaking heads in amazement after you had 72% of the electorate and still lost to a revolutionist radical 3rd world homosexualizer socialist liberal coloured who openly demands redistribution of all wealth and this is after you have awarded them trillions since all your slaves were liberated in 1865. What is wrong with you? Do you refuse to believe the same wont happen to you and already in full progress? Do you not understand what your “Forward” means? The can of worms is open now and we cant believe it is self inflicted in incredible ignorance of your rapidly approaching fate.

    Who is brainwashing you and your children? We could only wish to have been in such a lucrative position as you in before being seized by those black devils who outnumber us 100-1 as the entire continent hates us as they rape rob murder us at will being at their mercy. We thought you would save us so we could come to America but it appears that is gone now. All hope is lost as your new enemy 3rd worlders south of your border will be used as the tool to for surgical eradication. We pity your coming fate. Your only hope is to regroup and return to your 1776 revolutionary mentality to reform a new nation and fight for your independence from your enemy who is vastly a million times worse than the British Empire who were really your friends. Just be glad you weren’t in our situation in South Africa and there is still time to take drastic steps to solve your crisis before the point of no return.

  • http://www.newnation.org/ sbuffalonative

    Romney alluded to this in his ‘47%’ comments. He knew that talk of tax cuts weren’t going to appeal to people who don’t pay taxes.

  • Howard W. Campbell

    The GIBSMEDAT crowd won this battle, however, they will eventually lose the war. Eventually, the 200+ trillion in unfunded liabilities (Soc. Sec, Medicare, Welfare, et al) will be dealt with by defaulting on these “promises”. We may well see the break up of the US (and probably a number of other countries with similar problems) and there is the very likely possibility that there will be a period where things will similar to the living conditions in the movie “Mad Max”. If this does not crush and destroy the entitlement mentality, nothing will. Or as Margaret Thatcher used to say “The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money.”

    While it is not really reported in the mainstream media, Government agencies that one does not normally think of as “law enforcement” or military have been buying up large stocks of ammo. All this will do is to keep kicking the can a little longer. What happens when whites are not around to pay the bills and there is no money to keep funding this nonsense. You can get something of a preview on “Life after (White) people”.

    I’m not happy about the election, but if things blow up on Obama’s watch, all the better.

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    The bribe has been going on since the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act was put into place along with the Great Society programs. These were all Democratic party, leftist agendas that have always been understood as intended to recruit the majority of immigrants to the Democratic Party. The only thing that amazes me is that the Republican party seems to have forgotten that their extinction was planned to occur simultaneously with whites. The problem with conservatives is that they have always been short sighted and rely too much on going to church as a sort of remedy for what is too difficult to deal with immediately.

    • David Ashton

      Same with the Conservatives in the UK.

  • Dave4088

    I question the “high” turnout among urban (read non-white) voters. That’s just a politically correct way of saying that non-white criminals voted while others voted more than once. This is why the electoral college needs to be changed so populous urban areas dominated by non-whites cannot outnumber the votes in the suburbs and small towns. Electoral votes should be awarded based on who wins the most counties and if this were adopted the radical anti-white Democrats would never win the presidency and the moron Republicans wouldn’t have to pander as much.

  • John Bonham

    Yes and now his ole buddy Chris Christie just bashed Mitt for this as being Divisive . It’s always good to have a real friend around ..pppffftt !!! What a joker Christie is..

  • Wake up

    The election was in simple terms ,determined by the uninformed and ignorant. It can’t be explained any simpler that that.

  • ageofknowledge

    It’s true of course. Obama was reelected because most Americans get government money anymore and the opposing candidate was threatening to reduce it in order to start the process of closing the enormous deficit the U.S. is running which if nothing is done will eventually crash our economy.

    The only mandate Obama received from a very slim majority of voters was to keep pumping other people’s money into their hands. That’s it. The rest of the “mandate” is made up in his own head. I’m not saying the American people put a “chimp” in the White House to get “mo gubnmnent stash” but what the alternative explanation is I can’t grasp.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/NQHEAYZCMBOERHG2VZRDQ3YUSQ Felix

    Here’s a thought, Mittens: Start taking care of middle America. If GOP fat cats hadn’t outsourced the economy, been dancing to Israel’s tune and refused to crack down on illegal aliens, they wouldn’t be in this sorry mess.

  • tax payer

    I would have voted for Obama had I been low income because he promised every low income people he wouldn’t stop their benefits and I get no benefits so I voted for Romney since he was going to do away with the food stamp program, and it is about time that became a reality. He lost, so the poor lazy Americans will continue to parasites off the tax payers. He allowed the children of illegals to stay and work or go to school, and didn’t say the parents had to leave or no deal, so no wonder the Hispanics voted for him since every Hispanic must have someone from Mexico living here as an illegal.

  • tax payer

    I heard somewhere the Mayor of a certain city in Texas wants the President to allow all illegals to vote because he wants to run for President after he leaves office as Mayor of a city that is close to three Borders. He wants the children of the low income and the children of the illegals to go to an all day Pre-K, so maybe they can catch up to our smart children before they enter Kindergarten. We will have to wait, so our children can be five years old to go to school, when it is mentioned often by members of the Dummies of L-LAC ” Every Child Deserves An Education”, but they really mean the children of low income parents and children of illegals that don’t speak English even though they have been here over twenty years or more.