Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Is "devaluing a vote" a thing? I don't see how I've done that, and if I have, I don't see why you would care.
And yes, this is generally true of almost every candidate.
As for there being just as many people "who voted for Obama because they thought he was the better candidate as there were who thought he was less bad" - I don't think there is a distinction. If he is less bad, then he is the better candidate.
|
So you were saying nothing. Got it.
Your point seemed to be that Obama won because of distaste of Romney as opposed to excitement about Obama. And you and Hank seem to think that the swing voters (people like you and Hank, apparently) are the reasons why Obama won. I think that's ridiculous. They (or you) are no more the reason why Obama won than gay voters or Latinos or women or hard-core Obama supporters.
You and Hank really just wanted to say Obama didn't win because of enthusiasm about him or the job he's doing--at least not in your very important swing voter eyes. I say that thought process is silly and devalues the impact of black voters who stood in line for 6 hours to cast their ballot or youth voters who voted for him for the first time, etc.
Whatever.
TM
