Slog Comments
The Biggest Losers
3
"Karl Rove — perhaps the leading political entrepreneur of the super PAC era — ... offered them a grim upside: without us, the race would not have been as close as it was."
So your $300 million flipped North Carolina, Indiana and Omaha. Congratulations.
So your $300 million flipped North Carolina, Indiana and Omaha. Congratulations.
4
You can spend a billion dollars in advertising but if you have a shitty product people will figure that out & your shitty product will not sell.
Sad trombone indeed!
Sad trombone indeed!
5
Does anyone know how much money was raised from small donations? It would be very interesting to see if that's an equal or greater amount. I don't know about you, but Citizens United put me in a more generous mood this time around.
7
Haley Barbour was just crying about how negative Obama went on Rmoney. After all the garbage Republicans have spouted about Obama for the last four years?!? And Limbaugh was crying about how horrible it is that Republicans have to reach out to the moochers and ugh! of all people, WOMEN! And latinos! We have to throw open our borders!?! Republicans real problem is they are mean spirited and backwards. And they aren't even good for the economy.
10
This post makes my heart sing with gladness.
And, @2, sneer if you will, but when it's4:00 a.m. in Las Vegas and you're desperate for some roulette action, and the 50-story Adelson casino-hotel you come to has its doors boarded up, well then you'll rue the day the nation turned its back on ubermenschen like Adelson. .
And, @2, sneer if you will, but when it's4:00 a.m. in Las Vegas and you're desperate for some roulette action, and the 50-story Adelson casino-hotel you come to has its doors boarded up, well then you'll rue the day the nation turned its back on ubermenschen like Adelson. .
11
Gosh, I hope these billionaires make it through this tough time okay. Poor fellows.
(Except, you know, not LITERALLY 'poor'.)
(Except, you know, not LITERALLY 'poor'.)
12
According to USA, the only income group that went for Obama were those making less than $50,000.
What would have to be termed lower middle class up through everyone else, went for Romney by a large margin.
7 points for $50K to $100K.
10 points for $100K or more!
Hardly "The Rich" !!
Under $50K went for Obama by more than 20 points.
So you could say the very poor hijacked the election and they used their "influence" to swing the election!!
http://www.usatoday.com/interactives/new…
What would have to be termed lower middle class up through everyone else, went for Romney by a large margin.
7 points for $50K to $100K.
10 points for $100K or more!
Hardly "The Rich" !!
Under $50K went for Obama by more than 20 points.
So you could say the very poor hijacked the election and they used their "influence" to swing the election!!
http://www.usatoday.com/interactives/new…
13
I worry about poor Adelson. Is he going to have to go back and face his Chinese mafia bosses now? Losing an election is tough; failing to deliver to the tongs is really bad news.
14
Adelson is worth around 20.5 billion.
I don't know exactly how much he spent this election (since some of it could be secret), but let's go ahead and say $150 million; likely a very liberal number.
That's what? 0.7% of his wealth?
I don't know exactly how much he spent this election (since some of it could be secret), but let's go ahead and say $150 million; likely a very liberal number.
That's what? 0.7% of his wealth?
15
@14 Good point. That's like buying a MacBookPro to me. It's not something I can do every day, but once every four years? Game on.
16
@14 Like everything else, Republicans decried gambling. They said it was robbing working people. That it was immoral, the devil's game, the end of America! Now they gobble gambling money like a hungry piglet at sow's teat.
17
@12: My god Bailo, has this election really broken your already feeble brain?
God forbid lower income people "hijack" an election with their votes, and use that horrible "influence" of votes to elect a leader!
What a nightmare world we live in now, where even those who are not wealthy get an equal say in their governance!
Go lay in a dark hole, and take your anti-democracy, anti-American views with you.
God forbid lower income people "hijack" an election with their votes, and use that horrible "influence" of votes to elect a leader!
What a nightmare world we live in now, where even those who are not wealthy get an equal say in their governance!
Go lay in a dark hole, and take your anti-democracy, anti-American views with you.
18
In a game where a million dollar ante can win you a billion dollar pot, you don't need to pick many winners.
The game hasn't changed, and the table is still tilted in favor of the big bucks.
The game hasn't changed, and the table is still tilted in favor of the big bucks.
19
#17
I'm just pointing out that far from SLOG's paranoid vision of Dapper Dans grabbing power from within cloistered rooms, Obama mobilized a ragtag army of the very destitute to propel him into office.
A more accurate vision would be that of bums, grad students, retail clerks, bicycle repairmen and entry level technicians, gathering in secret urban watering holes and plotting their "revenge" on society.
If anything, it was a big practical joke on "the Rich" as they spent oodles of money to no effect whatsoever.
I'm just pointing out that far from SLOG's paranoid vision of Dapper Dans grabbing power from within cloistered rooms, Obama mobilized a ragtag army of the very destitute to propel him into office.
A more accurate vision would be that of bums, grad students, retail clerks, bicycle repairmen and entry level technicians, gathering in secret urban watering holes and plotting their "revenge" on society.
If anything, it was a big practical joke on "the Rich" as they spent oodles of money to no effect whatsoever.
20
@19: You moron. There is a huge difference between small groups of people SPENDING money to win elections and the people of a nation VOTING to choose leaders.
It does not surprise me that you see no difference, as most republicans do not seem to understand it either.
You are a joke, as were your hilariously wrong "predictions" about the election.
It does not surprise me that you see no difference, as most republicans do not seem to understand it either.
You are a joke, as were your hilariously wrong "predictions" about the election.
21
#20
Nice to know that one thing hasn't changed post-election.
The reading comprehension of Democrats...
Nice to know that one thing hasn't changed post-election.
The reading comprehension of Democrats...
22
@13, Fnarf --- "tongs" ? ? ?
They've been called "Triads" now for quite a few decades --- get with the picture, hoss!
So, Eli, you are suggesting there's a significant difference between Obamney and Romobama?
You mean Obama really didn't appoint Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, Diana Farrell, Neal Wolin, Larry Fuhrman, Peter Orszag, Jeffrey Immelt and Jim Kolbe????
Obama Déjà vu
Almost immediately, upon winning the presidential election, Obama stated he wanted to get together with Mitt Romney to discuss the country's future.
Mitt Romney? The private equity leveraged buyout super debt-creator? The jobs offshoring guy who offshores all his money as well?
The guy who only knows how to raid the US tax base, not to enhance it? (And doesn’t the Obama administration already have plenty of private banksters for such discussions?)
After saying that, President Obama called both Boehner and McConnell, neither of whom would accept his call????
Not accepting the call of the President of the USA? Almost like they consider him nothing more than a former local organizer who is nothing more today than a hapless figurehead?
And the beat goes on . . . .
They've been called "Triads" now for quite a few decades --- get with the picture, hoss!
So, Eli, you are suggesting there's a significant difference between Obamney and Romobama?
You mean Obama really didn't appoint Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, Diana Farrell, Neal Wolin, Larry Fuhrman, Peter Orszag, Jeffrey Immelt and Jim Kolbe????
Obama Déjà vu
Almost immediately, upon winning the presidential election, Obama stated he wanted to get together with Mitt Romney to discuss the country's future.
Mitt Romney? The private equity leveraged buyout super debt-creator? The jobs offshoring guy who offshores all his money as well?
The guy who only knows how to raid the US tax base, not to enhance it? (And doesn’t the Obama administration already have plenty of private banksters for such discussions?)
After saying that, President Obama called both Boehner and McConnell, neither of whom would accept his call????
Not accepting the call of the President of the USA? Almost like they consider him nothing more than a former local organizer who is nothing more today than a hapless figurehead?
And the beat goes on . . . .
23
Large groups of the poor winning elections is actually a check that our government needs to have for the safety of the people. The way it works is if a Republican President like George W. Bush destroys the economy and impoverishes large chunks of the population, then those large chunks of the population do not vote in someone who will destroy it more so that they cannot get good jobs and more people become very poor. So, well done - the system worked.
24
@21: Yep, that is basically what people say on the internet when they have no argument left.
Here are few choice conclusions that massive brain of yours has made recently, pre-election:
"Obama is having the equivalent of post-breakup sex with the American people now that Mitt Romney has pretty much won the election."
"Maybe the Demorats are looking for an excuse when Romney (legitimately) takes Oregon."
"Romney has a gut shot straight draw to win CA. It gets more real by the minute."
"I think they just earned Rob the election."
"Romney could even take California the way it's going."
"As a Republican, I know how she feels. To be persecuted I mean."
"My read is that there is about 20 percent of the electorate in the center who basically have been waiting to see "who is gonna win" and then switch sides to them as fast as possible. That last debate pretty much convinced them which way the wind is blowing [for Romney]."
"Tate got both hands on the ball before GBs feet touched the ground. This was an excellent call, one that showed understanding of the rules of the game."
Here are few choice conclusions that massive brain of yours has made recently, pre-election:
"Obama is having the equivalent of post-breakup sex with the American people now that Mitt Romney has pretty much won the election."
"Maybe the Demorats are looking for an excuse when Romney (legitimately) takes Oregon."
"Romney has a gut shot straight draw to win CA. It gets more real by the minute."
"I think they just earned Rob the election."
"Romney could even take California the way it's going."
"As a Republican, I know how she feels. To be persecuted I mean."
"My read is that there is about 20 percent of the electorate in the center who basically have been waiting to see "who is gonna win" and then switch sides to them as fast as possible. That last debate pretty much convinced them which way the wind is blowing [for Romney]."
"Tate got both hands on the ball before GBs feet touched the ground. This was an excellent call, one that showed understanding of the rules of the game."
Comments (25) RSS