Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Populist_Prole

(5,364 posts)
Tue Oct 23, 2012, 02:41 AM Oct 2012

It has occurred to me that this election's results will be a super accurate litmus test

Far more brutally frank than any pollster could ever figure out. It's such a stark contrast of positions between the two contenders, more than I've ever seen in my lifetime.

In Romney, here we have a candidate so flawed, so absolutely vile that no sensible voter could ever cast their lot with him:

The one percent after all actually is only one percent of voters as well, and not all of them are necessarily evil plutocrats. Those in the 99 percent that will vote for him will be a an excellent barometer at just how many of ( as a percentage of voters ) people that are wingnuts, ie: reactionaries/birthers/racists, religious fundamentalists, paranoid gun nuts and such. Sure, some of those groups will claim to have more cerebral reasons for supporting Mitt, usually taking the form of carrying water for the plutocrats...their price for being "fellow travelers"... and it is recognized that there will certainly be some overlap in the groups I mentioned. All that matters though is that when it comes down to action, all is those persons can do, as a bloc, is throw a lever ( or touch a screen )

It will be of much interest to me. It may be profoundly dismaying to me as well, even with an Obama win.

I look at it like a "let's all see where we stand" moment. Let's get it over with and find out.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It has occurred to me that this election's results will be a super accurate litmus test (Original Post) Populist_Prole Oct 2012 OP
Golly, stark contrasts? Scootaloo Oct 2012 #1
Those people look at the world through shit covered glasses. nt Comrade_McKenzie Oct 2012 #2
Well, when you keep your head up a pachyderm's ass... Scootaloo Oct 2012 #4
I think the fundies are very distressed about Mitt as a candidate XemaSab Oct 2012 #3
Interesting Populist_Prole Oct 2012 #5
You know... regnaD kciN Oct 2012 #6
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
1. Golly, stark contrasts?
Tue Oct 23, 2012, 02:54 AM
Oct 2012

And to think, so many "long time DU'ers" keep insisting there's "very little difference between the candidates" - who oh who am I to believe?

XemaSab

(60,212 posts)
3. I think the fundies are very distressed about Mitt as a candidate
Tue Oct 23, 2012, 03:19 AM
Oct 2012

The Mormon thing is a big part of it, but I think many of them are well aware of how scattered his policy positions have been, especially on gay rights and abortion. They want someone who believes that the bible is the founding document for America and for the laws of America, and they see a guy who has his finger in the wind.

I would be so not shocked if the percent of people going third party in this election hit 10%.

Populist_Prole

(5,364 posts)
5. Interesting
Tue Oct 23, 2012, 04:06 AM
Oct 2012

I'm sure we've all seen that throughout the primaries Mitt as always the absolute last choice of the Republican "base" with the great part of it being his mormonism.

I do however believe that in a fundie's mind, even they would have to realize it's better to swim with a less than perfect candidate than sink with their dream one; especially if the opposition is a black "muslim librul".

Who knows? Then again that would be great news to see a 3rd party type split the conservatives.

regnaD kciN

(26,045 posts)
6. You know...
Tue Oct 23, 2012, 04:13 AM
Oct 2012
Far more brutally frank than any pollster could ever figure out. It's such a stark contrast of positions between the two contenders, more than I've ever seen in my lifetime.

In Romney, here we have a candidate so flawed, so absolutely vile that no sensible voter could ever cast their lot with him.


Forty years ago, I thought the same about the McGovern/Nixon contest. (Of course, that didn't end so well for us...) It's hard to realize how much things have changed -- while Tricky Dick may have been corrupt, divisive, cynical, and paranoid, most of his non-military policies would be too far left for even the current Democratic Party. Rmoney really would be a quantum leap worse than the Trickster ever was.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It has occurred to me tha...