Hispanics have been flooding into Texas for decades now. Meanwhile, Texas was 19 points to the right of the popular vote in 2012, 19 points to the right of the popular vote in 2008, 20 points to the right of the popular vote in 2004, 15 points to the right of the popular vote in 1996.
Sorry, just not seeing the movement. Hell, Romney nearly won Houston-Harris County.
Although I must ask you, if it is true, as you and no doubt many others on this board believe, that Obama is the worst president in history, how did he ever get reelected?
I never said that. He's currently tied for worst in my lifetime with his brother from another mother GWB. Personally, I think Wilson was the worst in history (not to be confusted with most ineffective).
Although I must ask you, if it is true, as you and no doubt many others on this board believe, that Obama is the worst president in history, how did he ever get reelected?
Good question, he has been unable to bring unemployment down a tick and in fact has increased it, he has spend us into oblivion and has been the least transparent president I can recall. Energy prices are at an all time high as well. I certainly can't explain it, but wait until we see what shape this country is in at 2016.
Like GWB's "Vote for me or you are a traitor/hate the troops" campaign of 2004, I think Race and a complient media (who sees in Obama the realization of their PC wet dreams) were major factors.
love to hear your thoughts on the trends of all the blue states that are voting republican at a much faster growth rate than Texas is going blue
__________________
I am the guy who in April of 2005 said on the GC boards that Walsh and Roberson leaving was a good thing for our team and that we would win it all in 2007.....I was called an idiot then too!
I thought I'd remembered reading that Nate Silver (remember him ?) opined that the GOP has a better chance of flipping PA, soon, than the Democrats have of flipping a Red state.
love to hear your thoughts on the trends of all the blue states that are voting republican at a much faster growth rate than Texas is going blue
Not sure I understand, when I look at the map of the 2012 elections, it looks to me like other than Texas, every State that really matters went Democratic.
Not sure I understand, when I look at the map of the 2012 elections, it looks to me like other than Texas, every State that really matters went Democratic.
not that difficult of a point so not sure where you're understanding is falling short.
the point is for you to examine the voting trends over the past say 15 years of the "solid blue" states.
You will find that many of these states are trending heavily red.....still not there yet. But the trends are obvious.
I would like your opinion on these trends
__________________
I am the guy who in April of 2005 said on the GC boards that Walsh and Roberson leaving was a good thing for our team and that we would win it all in 2007.....I was called an idiot then too!
If you want to show me the support for your argument, I'll look at it and offer any comments I might have.
I don't think that was his point. I think his point was that the swing states are tending more Republican than Democrat. specifically, Romney chopped into Obama's numbers in reliably blue states like PA, MI, WI, et.al., whereas Obama did not chop into reliably red states so much.
Ex: PA is a much better bet to swing red than Texas is to swing blue.
Many of the Whigs became dead-ender Know-nothings/Anti-masons. The ones that were anti-slavery became Republicans, like Thaddeus Stevens. The ones that werent became Democrats. The point is, they splintered. They didnt just become the GOP. But the GOP did rapidly grow in the vacuum they left, mostly because of their stance on the slavery question.
__________________
"The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openess, honesty, understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meaness, egotism and self-interest, are the traits of success."
Many of the Whigs became dead-ender Know-nothings/Anti-masons. The ones that were anti-slavery became Republicans, like Thaddeus Stevens. The ones that werent became Democrats. The point is, they splintered. They didnt just become the GOP. But the GOP did rapidly grow in the vacuum they left, mostly because of their stance on the slavery question.
Policywise (excluding slavery), how were they different from the Whigs? Did they not represent the conservative side of the argument, the decendents of the Optimates if you will?
Bottom line, the (D)s will never see the complete victory the OP salavates for. But I will enjoy his frustration and drink his tears like fine wine when the realization hits him like a brick in the face in a couple years.
Linear Mode
