red states rule
11-13-2012, 03:52 AM
Ever since Tuesday night, the liberal media has been pushing the talking point how Obama has a mandate to raise taxes. Well lets take a look and compare this election to 2004
Remember when this was the Democrats’ mantra (http://sd2cx1.webring.org/l/rd?ring=tees;id=156;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecafepre ss%2Ecom%2Fgriff%2E14705230), oh, about eight years ago?http://i1.cpcache.com/product/14705253/large_mug.jpg?side=Back&height=240&width=240
Back then, an incumbent president — loathed by the opposing party’s base – had just won re-election, carrying 51 percent of the vote to the challenger’s 48 percent. Sound familiar? Things get downright eerie when you look at the similarities in the raw vote totals (http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/main) (as of today):
Obama 62,156,980
Romney 58,805,060
Bush: 62,040,606
Kerry: 59,028,109
As I noted over at Townhall (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/11/12/the_400000_votes_that_tipped_the_election) earlier, if liberals believed President Bush had no governing or ideological mandate after his 2004 victory, they have even less reason to claim one on behalf of Obama:
In 2004, Democrats’ rallying cry was “51 percent isn’t a mandate (http://www.cafepress.com/mf/5713070/51-percent-isnt-a-mandate-brash-grey-tshirt_tshirt?shop=not_a_mandate).” They fought Bush and the Republicans tooth and nail, and ultimately benefited in subsequent elections. Will similar obstinance redound to the GOP’s benefit? Perhaps, although their demographic challenges are serious. Republicans have an even stronger case that Obama has no mandate. Unlike Bush, his vote totals and margins decreased compared to his first election, he didn’t run on any concrete agenda, and voters returned Republicans to a double-digit advantage in the House of Representatives.
Perhaps liberals will rationally consider this evidence and conclude that the logical extension of their own previous standard clearly demonstrates that Obama has no post-2012 mandate. Or perhaps they were whipping themselves into an emotional frenzy of rage and despair in 2004, and couldn’t care less about the details of what they once said.http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/11/12/2004-flashback-democrats-on-mandates/
Remember when this was the Democrats’ mantra (http://sd2cx1.webring.org/l/rd?ring=tees;id=156;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecafepre ss%2Ecom%2Fgriff%2E14705230), oh, about eight years ago?http://i1.cpcache.com/product/14705253/large_mug.jpg?side=Back&height=240&width=240
Back then, an incumbent president — loathed by the opposing party’s base – had just won re-election, carrying 51 percent of the vote to the challenger’s 48 percent. Sound familiar? Things get downright eerie when you look at the similarities in the raw vote totals (http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/main) (as of today):
Obama 62,156,980
Romney 58,805,060
Bush: 62,040,606
Kerry: 59,028,109
As I noted over at Townhall (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/11/12/the_400000_votes_that_tipped_the_election) earlier, if liberals believed President Bush had no governing or ideological mandate after his 2004 victory, they have even less reason to claim one on behalf of Obama:
In 2004, Democrats’ rallying cry was “51 percent isn’t a mandate (http://www.cafepress.com/mf/5713070/51-percent-isnt-a-mandate-brash-grey-tshirt_tshirt?shop=not_a_mandate).” They fought Bush and the Republicans tooth and nail, and ultimately benefited in subsequent elections. Will similar obstinance redound to the GOP’s benefit? Perhaps, although their demographic challenges are serious. Republicans have an even stronger case that Obama has no mandate. Unlike Bush, his vote totals and margins decreased compared to his first election, he didn’t run on any concrete agenda, and voters returned Republicans to a double-digit advantage in the House of Representatives.
Perhaps liberals will rationally consider this evidence and conclude that the logical extension of their own previous standard clearly demonstrates that Obama has no post-2012 mandate. Or perhaps they were whipping themselves into an emotional frenzy of rage and despair in 2004, and couldn’t care less about the details of what they once said.http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/11/12/2004-flashback-democrats-on-mandates/