The Republicans gave it their best shot . . .

No, for Congressional Democrats to have a mandate they'd need to capture the house. For Barack Obama to have a mandate, he needs to win the election. He did. He has a mandate.

Though you raise a good point. Democrats have a mandate in the Senate and White House, Republicans in the House. Any compromise should be proportioned appropriately.

 

well? he came back after looking the words up

but you haven't come back to talk

why is that?

 

I have a life other than this forum. You should try it sometime. Now I will go back and catch up.

 

I current parlance, mandate is used to describe an overwhelming victory. 51% is not an overwhelming victory. 49% of the voters did not want obama's policies implemented.

You are correct that he ran on taxing the evil rich. Even though he and everyone else knows that is not the answer to the fiscal mess. He ran on class warfare and slightly over half of the voters bought into it. The other half has the perfect right to fight those policies through their elected representatives.

Was senator Obama giving in to the "mandate" of the people when he said that Bush was unpatriotic for raising the debt ceiling? Sorry, lil buddy, but its a two way street.

 

that's only with people that don't use the dictionary

 

No its not. Its the commonly used meaning of the word. I am quite aware of the dictionary definition. But the way the word is used today is different. The way its used today, a 75% win would be a mandate. 51/49 is not a mandate, its little beyond a tie.

 

they're misusing the word

according to the dictionary, a win qualifies as a mandate, obama won, you lost

mandate - the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election

 

I agree that the word is misused in current parlance. As used today it means an overwhelming win. I didn't change the meaning, our media did.

Yes, obama won, I didn't lose, the country lost. I will be just fine. My assets are safe from obama's confiscation policies. The ones who will be hurt worst by obamacare, higher taxes, and government intrusion are the middle and lower classes, and over half of them voted against their own best interests because of a lying biased media and a cult of celebrity.

 

And the Republicans lost to a black, foreign, muslim, community-organizin', left-handed, job-killin', deficit-explodin' commie. I ain't EVER going to figure that one out, but it almost has to be that Americans just don't like Republicans.

 

No, they lost to a biased media with a left wing agenda that would not tell the truth about the first black president. Political correctness, black pride, white guilt, and a lying media elected obama. and thats just fine, now the people deserve what happens to them as a result of their choice.

 

No, they lost to a biased media with a left wing agenda that would not tell the truth about the first black president. Political correctness, black pride, white guilt, and a lying media elected obama. and thats just fine, now the people deserve what happens to them as a result of their choice.

 

I don't think so.

 

There should be no compromise of any sort.

 

Right does not compromise with wrong. There should be no tax increases on anyone, and there must be major spending cuts. Anything else is pissing into the wind and asking why the wind smells like (*)(*)(*)(*).

 

There's always an excuse, isn't there? There's not a reason in the world you boys can't buy a media with rightwing bias.

 

LOL, the entire media has become the mouthpiece for the dem/lib party. Are they for sale? definitely. Corrupt people are always for sale.

But what I said was true, the biased media refused to fully vet obama. They were so obsessed with the first black president that they did not care who he was or what he represented. Its the race card played in 'spades'

 

LOL, the entire media has become the mouthpiece for the dem/lib party. Are they for sale? definitely. Corrupt people are always for sale.

But what I said was true, the biased media refused to fully vet obama. They were so obsessed with the first black president that they did not care who he was or what he represented. Its the race card played in 'spades'

 

no it didn't

stop parroting ridiculous partisan rhetoric

 

yes, du, the country lost when it elected obama to a second term. That becomes more evident every day and will be revealed to even you by 2016, and then it will be too late. The country was at a crossroads in 2012 and it took the wrong fork in the road.

I truly grieve for this country. We have decided to become a european welfare state and ignore our huge debt. Human beings can do some really stupid things in order to get "free stuff"

 

So you told me to look up the definition and I did. When it showed you were wrong, you ignored it. Nice.

Senator Obama was idiotic for voting against the debt ceiling increase and he has admitted as much. It's refreshing to hear politicians own their mistakes.

 

what a bunch of malarkey

most of the country didn't trust romney and rightly so

 

You got Fox. You got all of talk radio. If that doesn't do it, buy some more media or buy some more members of the media. Surely you can do that. It's not our fault if you can't keep up, is it?

And just as surely, your right wing media vetted Obama. I know what he represents and there's no way I can wait around for Orly Taitz to make another goofball claim.

As an aside, I'd bet that Obama couldn't have gotten away with hiding taxable cash in the Caymans. The entire left-wing media went soft of him, while the right-wing media approved of, and made excuses for, Romney and his tax cheat ways.

 

We'll never know. Republicans just don't know when to leave bad enough alone.

 

that's funny, it reminds of the movie i streamed on netflix last night

the guy keeps going back in time to fix his previous mistakes, but makes it worse each time, until…

[video=youtube;vrzI3lVzQnM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrzI3lVzQnM[/video]

 

Do you think its OK for a political party to "buy" media bias? thats what you seem to be saying. What do the dems do for MSNBC in exchange for their biased reporting?