victor809 wrote:Never mind the complexities of a presidential campaign and party platforms. The author astutely boiled it down to "Everyone who voted against my candidate wants free stuff, anyone who voted for my candidate wants to be an honest worker."
Really, this is the level of complexity you're able to handle in the world?
It's the level that the average American voter seems to comprehend.
Look at the presidential election.
For instance, a huge percentage voted against Romney because he "wanted to control a woman's reproductive rights".
Yup.
Forget the deficit. Forget wars in the Middle East. Forget our spiral into bancruptcy.
The new GOP president would have seen to it that woman would have to pay for their own contraception. Then they'd make it illegal to get their coveted abortion. Then they would have paid them 20% less for the same job.
You know that's hogwash, but I bet you've used a portion of these arguments yourself. Probably on these forums.
It's mind boggling to hear such lunacy from supposedly sane people.
And I haven't even mentioned the platform of "fair share". That's an even bigger joke.
Logical discussions can be made about wealth disparity. But to say "Pay your fair share" without identifying what it is and (more importantly) how it will be used is idiotic to put it mildly.
So the "free stuff" mantra from the author isn't too far off from how it unfolded.
And I haven't even touched upon the race issue.
I'm sure lots of backwoods rednecks voted against Obama because he's black.
But about 95% of black voters cast their ballot for Obama.
Think about that. Because if you've ever did any work on consensus, you'd understand how it's almost impossible to get 95% to agree on ANYTHING.
But. Well.
There it is.