If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Stuart Stevens now says if he could do Romney's campaign all over again, he'd try to reach out to "women and those Mexicans"   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 143
    More: Followup, Mexico, Hispanic voters  
•       •       •

2905 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Nov 2012 at 2:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-29 04:36:44 PM

CheetahOlivetti:

It was her "you people" comment.


Would have bet that was it.
 
2012-11-29 04:40:34 PM
"I can get along great with the Hispanics. In fact, I sure would like to meet them, even the politicians, maybe in the back room or whatever, have a couple of beers and try to explain."
 
2012-11-29 04:41:01 PM

Abner Doon: NateAsbestos: Vegan Meat Popsicle: Isitoveryet: If only they'd given Mitt breast implants
and a flesh light to hold betwixt his legs
and painted him darker brown :(

It's a not a joke when the candidate you're mocking actually believes it's true:

"You know, I wish I could claim that I'm Hispanic, and it would help me with the Latino community here in Florida and around the country, but my dad was born of American parents living in Mexico."

/ but don't call them racists....

Hey, in Romney's defense [not that he really deserves a defense] this statement doesn't really come off as racist to me, it just makes him seem like a conniving dipshiat. He only wanted to exploit a Latino heritage if it would garner him political clout. That's not racist, just stupid.

I actually don't think Romney is a racist, just an elitist. You only matter if you've got money, and if you've met that requisite, it doesn't even matter if you're black or latino or a woman (how magnanimous, eh?). You're rich! So you're automatically okay.

It's pretty racist, because it implies that he thinks minorities would blindly vote for him if he was himself a minority. Which is stupid in at least three ways, but also quite racist. It's less "I'm better than you because I'm write" racism and more "you're only voting for Obama because he's black" racism. Which I guess is pretty minor for a Republican, so it flies under the radar.


Ah, the subtle racism of lowered expectations. Point ceded.

/Romney is still a giant twat
 
2012-11-29 04:48:57 PM

NateAsbestos: Abner Doon: NateAsbestos: Vegan Meat Popsicle: Isitoveryet: If only they'd given Mitt breast implants
and a flesh light to hold betwixt his legs
and painted him darker brown :(

It's a not a joke when the candidate you're mocking actually believes it's true:

"You know, I wish I could claim that I'm Hispanic, and it would help me with the Latino community here in Florida and around the country, but my dad was born of American parents living in Mexico."

/ but don't call them racists....

Hey, in Romney's defense [not that he really deserves a defense] this statement doesn't really come off as racist to me, it just makes him seem like a conniving dipshiat. He only wanted to exploit a Latino heritage if it would garner him political clout. That's not racist, just stupid.

I actually don't think Romney is a racist, just an elitist. You only matter if you've got money, and if you've met that requisite, it doesn't even matter if you're black or latino or a woman (how magnanimous, eh?). You're rich! So you're automatically okay.

It's pretty racist, because it implies that he thinks minorities would blindly vote for him if he was himself a minority. Which is stupid in at least three ways, but also quite racist. It's less "I'm better than you because I'm write" racism and more "you're only voting for Obama because he's black" racism. Which I guess is pretty minor for a Republican, so it flies under the radar.

Ah, the subtle racism of lowered expectations. Point ceded.

/Romney is still a giant twat


While it was mildly racist, what was more troubling about the comments were that Mitt is dumb enough to think being Latino would make it easier for him to win the Presidency. What with all the previous Latino presidents.
 
2012-11-29 04:50:41 PM

CheetahOlivetti: impaler: mahuika: But they did try to.

I feel like this is just about creating the false narrative that they lost because they didn't try, not because their message and candidate was rejected.

They should have had Ann Romney give a speech during the convention.

Maybe say something about "I LOVE YOU WOOOOOOOMENNNNNNNNNNN!!"

My conservative MIL is now an Obama fan, mostly because of Ann Romney (and a bit because of ACA -- she's an RN). If you say "Ann Romney" around her, you'll get the immediate response: "That biatch; who does she think she is."


Just curious, what about Ann pisses her off so much?
 
2012-11-29 04:54:29 PM
Hey Stuart, you thought putting Ann Romney on stage and having her say "I love you women" was effectively reaching out to women voters. Then you thought spray painting Mitt brown was effectively reaching out to minorities. See the problem yet?
 
2012-11-29 05:03:18 PM

Neeek: I'm absolutely positive that Romney voters had no idea what his positions on the issues actually were. No one does except maybe Romney. And frankly, I think he doesn't actually have positions on most of them at all.


His "five point tax plan"? Talking point. There was nothing behind it. When Paul Ryan claimed that he can't explain all the math behind it because it was too complicated, the real reason was that there was nothing there. The GOP has been all cover, no book since Reagan. They've taken puppetry to not just who they have as a titular head of state, but to policies and positions.
 
2012-11-29 05:06:49 PM

Kanemano: President Al Sharpton, and President Jesse Jackson proves your point.


Jesse Jackson was never elected president because he never carried the white Democratic vote in the primaries. In the primaries, he got roughly the same percent of the minority vote that Obama did. Obama just got more of the white vote.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/01/obama_200 8 _vs_jackson_1988.html

So yeah, the voting pattern for Jackson kinda does prove his point. Minority voters are going to vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and overwhelmingly for a minority candidate. If you're a minority candidate on a Democratic ticket, you're going to do really, really well with minority voters.
 
2012-11-29 05:09:16 PM

Maud Dib: Vegan Meat Popsicle: the money is in the banana stand: Bullshiat blanket statement. They primarily are voting for Obama because he is a minority.

What's it like living in the perpetual fog of complete self-unawareness?

I favorited him as Fark Independent...

[i865.photobucket.com image 360x450]


Isn't it hilarious Romney thought he was going to win, because "independent" voters were swinging towards him.

If he only know about Fark Independents.
 
2012-11-29 05:12:59 PM

Jim_Callahan: Dude... Mexicans don't vote in US elections. The reason your immigration policy is a big minus with latino voters is that it's based around treating latino citizens as if they are Mexicans, i.e. foreign nationals without the normal rights of citizens.

No one cares if you identify illegal immigrants and give them the boot. They do care if you base your attempts to do so on harassing and persecuting entirely legitimate citizens simply because they look kinda brownish or speak in a dialect.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-29 05:14:40 PM
Stuart Stevens now says if he could do Romney's campaign all over again, he'd try to reach out to "women and those Mexicans"

"Impaler Marketing Services LLC" was ready to launch that ad campaign too, but they never gave us the green light!

growlersoftware.com

http://growlersoftware.com/users/Conservative4ever/gop_courting_hispa ni cs.jpg
 
2012-11-29 05:15:15 PM
growlersoftware.com
 
2012-11-29 05:26:24 PM

Talondel: So yeah, the voting pattern for Jackson kinda does prove his point.


That article targeted the black vote, not the minority vote, and one would expect black voters to rally behind Jackson for his Civil Rights activism. Obama didn't win ~75% of the Latino AND Asian-American vote just for being black.
 
2012-11-29 05:29:46 PM

impaler: [growlersoftware.com image 800x562]

afeatheradrift.files.wordpress.com

I guess America wasn't ready for its first Mexican presidente.
 
2012-11-29 05:30:30 PM

jst3p: Just curious, what about Ann pisses her off so much?


Probably that damn bird shirt. I know it infuriated me.
 
2012-11-29 05:52:41 PM
"I certainly don't think it was the ideas. I think the ideas carried the day for us."

But...Your day wasn't carried.
 
2012-11-29 05:59:56 PM

Epoch_Zero: Graffito: [i232.photobucket.com image 399x297]

i915.photobucket.com

 
2012-11-29 06:15:09 PM
FTFA: Still, Stevens repeated many of the same points in the interview that he wrote in the op-ed. The major themes of the campaign were still the right ones to go with, he said on Thursday. "I certainly don't think it was the ideas. I think the ideas carried the day for us."

Um, no. No, they didn't. You lost; by definition, nothing "carried the day" for you.
 
2012-11-29 06:22:07 PM

the money is in the banana stand: flux: Here's one example of why "the message" is fundamentally flawed: "it should be left up to the States" was a mantra of the Romney campaign, repeated by the candidate and his spokespeople on a huge range of issues: off the top of my head, that line was Romney's "position" on abortion, personhood laws, same-sex visitation rights, the affordable care act, minimum wage, disaster relief, and probably at least a few more. I think it was more of an evasion than a position, but is "states' rights" a component of the GOP's message? It sure is.

Here's the problem: "states' rights" has been the primary argument for the continued oppression of minorities throughout US history. It was the argument against abolishing slavery, desegregation, and the Civil Rights Act. Minorities aren't voting for Obama because he's a minority; they didn't vote for Clinton because he "acted black" by going on Arsenio Hall and playing black music on his "Blaxophone." It's because they aren't completely ignorant of the political history of the country they live in.

If your plan for winning minority voters is just making extra sure that they hear your message, I feel obligated to point out that the message you're explaining to them, again, is the same message your party used to oppress them fifty years ago. It's going to be a hard sell.


Bullshiat blanket statement. They primarily are voting for Obama because he is a minority. The Democratic Party could more or less do or say anything and it wouldn't change the voting trend much. Don't believe that? Look at Bush. Huge fark up and yet he got elected for a second term. You give voters and people in general too much credit. I guaran-farking-tee you that the VAST majority of voters have no idea where their candidates stand on most issues and are able to hold any sort of intelligent discussion. You can sure bet they can parrot whatever they heard their friends or the TV say. The Republican Party more or less cannot win minority votes. The whole part ...


Make up your mind; did voters blindly vote for Obama because he's a minority, or because he's an incumbent? Or was it because they wanted free stuff? Or was it some other excuse that spares you from any amount of self-reflection?
 
2012-11-29 07:56:20 PM
They absolutely were trying to win women and Mexican voters.

1. Mitt Romney used every single opportunity he could to point out that his dad was born in Mexico. That was his Mexican outreach. That and the mantra that America needed to expand trade, in Latin America. That was his general Hispanic outreach. That and self-deportation. (The kinder, gentler getting rid of Hispanic people!) They were trying, and it was laughable.


2. "Women don't care about reproductive health, women care about THE ECONOMY" was their message. For months. They really thought that they could pacify the pro-rape-because-Jesus people by bashing Planned Parenthood, while simultaneously telling women this was all was okay because they didn't care about their health, right?
In other words, they were morons. Obama picked up on this early and was able to demonstrate his considerable record of being a feminist President throughout the campaign. It was smart and on-note.
There's another few readily observable differences that I'm women will have picked up on, consciously or not. If you look at Obama's chief advisors and the most visible people he has appointed to his Cabinet and to the Supreme Court, there are a lot of high-profile women, of a variety of ethnic backgrounds. If you look at how Obama describes gender issues, it's often in relation to being a father of daughters; he's been really clear in communicating his commitment to advancing equality for women in a way that is profoundly relatable. Obama has gone out of his way for four years to demonstrate that he's a man who respects women as equals. And I doubt it's just for the electoral advantage; I'm pretty sure that's how he's lived his life.
I'm equally sure Mitt Romney isn't a sexist asshole. He probably really tried with that binders full of women stuff. There is certainly a Republican elite commitment to female CEOs and high-level politicians and public figures. Republicans absolutely do support successful women. And I'm sure Romney respects the women in his life. But his tone-deafness on any issue relevant to women in the general public is part of his general problem of being unable to comprehend or relate to people whose life experiences are different from his own.
 
2012-11-29 08:04:08 PM
You know what bothered me about this election is that Romney even got 47% of the vote. What is wrong with these people? They hate Obama so much that they are willing to vote against their interest. I don't get it.
 
2012-11-29 08:07:30 PM

AeAe: You know what bothered me about this election is that Romney even got 47% of the vote. What is wrong with these people? They hate Obama so much that they are willing to vote against their interest. I don't get it.


Think about it another way. Only 47% of Americans voted for Romney. You guys are making great progress as a country. Think of how many Americans actually thought George W. Bush was a good idea... twice.
 
2012-11-29 08:42:27 PM
s1.reutersmedia.net

i.imgur.com

www.mikechurch.com
 
2012-11-29 08:46:03 PM

bobbette: Think about it another way. Only 47% of Americans voted for Romney.


Actually, only about 19% of Americans voted for Romney. About 59 million from a population of 311.5 million. Around 28% of eligible voters picked him.
 
2012-11-29 08:48:56 PM
ihatepeacocks.com
 
2012-11-29 09:52:16 PM

Dr Dreidel: PsiChick: The same goes for women voters, he said. "The governor has a great record on women's issues. We should have done a better job articulating that record."

ohwaityou'reseriousletmelaughevenharder.jpeg

/When you sign a party platform that farks over women, you are no longer someone with a great record on women's issues.

The governor himself may hold views that are not repugnant to women. The thing about down-ticket races and party ID is that it ain't just about him. People see that HIS PARTY is full of nutjobs and weirdos (and wasteoids, etc), and he gets painted with the same brush.

Perhaps a more forceful rejection and rePudiation of such vile views would be a better balm for the party than "He's pro-women, I pinky-swear. He's got binders full of them!"


Pretty much, yeah. Not sure why the P is bolded, though...

/Romney lost because of the rape comments. He might not have made them, but if your party marches in lockstep, and you signed a goddamn platform about this exact topic...
 
2012-11-29 10:21:10 PM
"I think he was saying there was an effort that the incumbent used as many other incumbents have used to reach out to constituents," Stevens said in the interview. 



Yes, that's what he meant.
 
2012-11-29 10:45:09 PM
Here's a tip: if you lose the election, your ideas did not, in fact, "carry the day." If you win "the majority of the middle class" but lose the election, you did not, in fact, win Jack shiat.

You're welcome.
 
2012-11-29 10:52:20 PM

cbathrob: Here's a tip: if you lose the election, your ideas did not, in fact, "carry the day." If you win "the majority of the middle class" but lose the election, you did not, in fact, win Jack shiat.

You're welcome.


You give them too much credit. They didn't win a majority of the middle class. They are delusional on who is middle class.
 
2012-11-29 10:59:44 PM

Neeek: cbathrob: Here's a tip: if you lose the election, your ideas did not, in fact, "carry the day." If you win "the majority of the middle class" but lose the election, you did not, in fact, win Jack shiat.

You're welcome.

You give them too much credit. They didn't win a majority of the middle class. They are delusional on who is middle class.


I know, but this was an argument he used in yesterday's Op Ed in the Washington Post. Even if it was true, he still lost.
 
2012-11-30 12:18:49 AM
talkingpointsmemo.com
 
2012-11-30 12:23:18 AM

Sock Ruh Tease: But Romney did try to reach out to women and Mexicans. Both groups love a swarthy man.

[www.fataldownflaw.com image 427x242]


He also reached out to the African American community:
www.ha-yes.com

If only he had tried to reach out to the transgender community as well.
 
2012-11-30 12:48:28 AM

theknuckler_33: and held onto the moral victory over President Obama.

Yay! We won something I totally made up and that is completely impossible to quantify or verify! Go us!!!


"We killed more VC than they killed US infantrymen! We totally won the war!"
 
2012-11-30 03:15:37 AM

bobbette: If you look at how Obama describes gender issues, it's often in relation to being a father of daughters;


You know, now that you are pointing this out, that explains some thins Obama only has daughters, whereas Romney only has sons. That could explain how he could be out of touch, or not care, about women's issues.
 
2012-11-30 03:25:06 AM

padraig: bobbette: If you look at how Obama describes gender issues, it's often in relation to being a father of daughters;

You know, now that you are pointing this out, that explains some thins Obama only has daughters, whereas Romney only has sons. That could explain how he could be out of touch, or not care, about women's issues.


...except that Romney has a wife (one assumes, unless he propagates by asexual fission) (which seems not entirely out of the question) and therefore one might assume he would be at least somewhat in touch with or care about women's issues.
 
2012-11-30 05:25:47 AM

Testiclaw: [s1.reutersmedia.net image 450x332]

[i.imgur.com image 605x328]

[www.mikechurch.com image 620x350]


a2.ec-images.myspacecdn.coma2.ec-images.myspacecdn.coma2.ec-images.myspacecdn.com
www.mikechurch.com
i915.photobucket.comi915.photobucket.comi915.photobucket.com 
 
2012-11-30 06:13:57 AM

NateGrey: Where is that one Fark Con that was adamant Romney would win because minorities and women wouldn't come out to vote and the Freeper enthusiasm of 2010 would guarantee a Romney landslide.

Hire that guy.

/Wombat something


I haven't seen wombat in a while (I am sure that I have't seen him since November 6th. I think it's wombat hater or something. I have someone favorited (don't remember who it is right now) as "handed wombat_____ his ass in thread." He must be using a new alt now.
 
2012-11-30 06:44:10 AM

Talondel: Kanemano: President Al Sharpton, and President Jesse Jackson proves your point.

Jesse Jackson was never elected president because he never carried the white Democratic vote in the primaries. In the primaries, he got roughly the same percent of the minority vote that Obama did. Obama just got more of the white vote.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/01/obama_200 8 _vs_jackson_1988.html

So yeah, the voting pattern for Jackson kinda does prove his point. Minority voters are going to vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and overwhelmingly for a minority candidate. If you're a minority candidate on a Democratic ticket, you're going to do really, really well with minority voters.


citation please (since I'm black and never voted for Jesse Jackson or Al Shapton).
 
2012-11-30 07:13:57 AM

busy chillin': the money is in the banana stand: I guaran-farking-tee you that the VAST majority of voters have no idea where their candidates stand on most issues and are able to hold any sort of intelligent discussion.

Well, what do you expect? Romney didn't even know where he stood on most issues.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
2012-11-30 07:17:13 AM

impaler: Markoff_Cheney: the post mortem on this campaign is going to get even more brutal methinks.
clown shoes, clown shoes everywhere.

I hope so.

I don't ever remember discussions about "why we lost" going for this long after an election. I also don't ever remember this much self-analysis by a party being so far off from reality.

It used to hard to tell if some marginal Republican analysis was for real or satire.
It's starting to get hard to tell if some mainstream Republican analysis is for real or satire.


Maybe it's because a lot more money was tied up in this election? If it were just the little folks on both sides, that'd be the end of it. Because it was the Sheldon Adelsons of the world who put a lot of money into this and still managed to 'lose', the Sheldon Adelsons want answers and they'll push, prod and poke whom they need to to get those answers (telling them what they want to hear). The shiat drops from the top. The rest of us are expected to root and roll in it.
 
2012-11-30 07:29:03 AM

bobbette: They absolutely were trying to win women and Mexican voters.

1. Mitt Romney used every single opportunity he could to point out that his dad was born in Mexico. That was his Mexican outreach. That and the mantra that America needed to expand trade, in Latin America. That was his general Hispanic outreach. That and self-deportation. (The kinder, gentler getting rid of Hispanic people!) They were trying, and it was laughable.

2. "Women don't care about reproductive health, women care about THE ECONOMY" was their message. For months. They really thought that they could pacify the pro-rape-because-Jesus people by bashing Planned Parenthood, while simultaneously telling women this was all was okay because they didn't care about their health, right?
In other words, they were morons. Obama picked up on this early and was able to demonstrate his considerable record of being a feminist President throughout the campaign. It was smart and on-note.
There's another few readily observable differences that I'm women will have picked up on, consciously or not. If you look at Obama's chief advisors and the most visible people he has appointed to his Cabinet and to the Supreme Court, there are a lot of high-profile women, of a variety of ethnic backgrounds. If you look at how Obama describes gender issues, it's often in relation to being a father of daughters; he's been really clear in communicating his commitment to advancing equality for women in a way that is profoundly relatable. Obama has gone out of his way for four years to demonstrate that he's a man who respects women as equals. And I doubt it's just for the electoral advantage; I'm pretty sure that's how he's lived his life.
I'm equally sure Mitt Romney isn't a sexist asshole. He probably really tried with that binders full of women stuff. There is certainly a Republican elite commitment to female CEOs and high-level politicians and public figures. Republicans absolutely do support successful women. And ...


No, he didn't. He twisted the story around to make himself look like the magnanimous Patriarch commanding his humble minions to engage in some affirmative action. It angered both sides.
- His alleged 'core' for stating outright that he took it upon himself to pass over qualified persons who happened to be male and white, for possibly lesser qualified female and who-knows-what-the-fk, for politically correct reasons. No fking bueno. No fking bueno at all.
- Libs who thought the story sounded mighty suspect, and were proven right when come to find out the binder of women was presented to him after the fact by a women's group... it was something forced on him, not something he commanded to happen. No bueno.
- Everybody else who just thought the story was shady. Mas no bueno.

It was just fail all the way around. It was fail because he's inauthentic, and doesn't have Bill Clinton's preternatural gift for turning inauthenticity into charmingness. If Bill Clinton had sat up there and relayed that same story, more people would have swallowed it, because Bill's just that good. But it wasn't.

As for your analysis of Obama, I agree with you on those points, and wish I could state them as well as you. So I'll just steal them from you with credit to you, for the future.
 
2012-11-30 09:47:12 AM

flux: Here's one example of why "the message" is fundamentally flawed: "it should be left up to the States" was a mantra of the Romney campaign, repeated by the candidate and his spokespeople on a huge range of issues: off the top of my head, that line was Romney's "position" on abortion, personhood laws, same-sex visitation rights, the affordable care act, minimum wage, disaster relief, and probably at least a few more. I think it was more of an evasion than a position, but is "states' rights" a component of the GOP's message? It sure is.

Here's the problem: "states' rights" has been the primary argument for the continued oppression of minorities throughout US history. It was the argument against abolishing slavery, desegregation, and the Civil Rights Act. Minorities aren't voting for Obama because he's a minority; they didn't vote for Clinton because he "acted black" by going on Arsenio Hall and playing black music on his "Blaxophone." It's because they aren't completely ignorant of the political history of the country they live in.

If your plan for winning minority voters is just making extra sure that they hear your message, I feel obligated to point out that the message you're explaining to them, again, is the same message your party used to oppress them fifty years ago. It's going to be a hard sell.


"States Rights" is code for southern white man redneck bullsh*t. Bank on it.

Any guy starts spouting that, you can flush his views and ignore his crap from that point on. Why? Because he wants to live in a world that died in 1865, and believes our world is fundamentally not legitimate.
 
2012-11-30 05:49:31 PM

thamike: Testiclaw: [s1.reutersmedia.net image 450x332]

[i.imgur.com image 605x328]

[www.mikechurch.com image 620x350]

[a2.ec-images.myspacecdn.com image 244x200][a2.ec-images.myspacecdn.com image 244x200][a2.ec-images.myspacecdn.com image 244x200]
[www.mikechurch.com image 732x350]
[i915.photobucket.com image 244x200][i915.photobucket.com image 244x200][i915.photobucket.com image 244x200]


I don't know why I found that so hilarious, but thank you.
 
Displayed 43 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report