Romneypathy. [rom-nee-puh-thee]
n. plural -thies.
1.
absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement because a Party’s promoted candidate, who is the only “electable” candidate, is a milquetoast progressive posing as a conservative.
2.
lack of interest in or concern for things that the GOP establishment finds important or moving or exciting.
3.
The feeling of, “yeah, like I’m going to give up an hour of my day to head down to the high school, find parking, and pull the lever for this milquetoast douche.”
(h/t geoffb)
I’m not voting for him. Plus he’s super-electable anyway he’ll figure it out.
Winning elections by supressing voter turnout…
Only a government technocrat could make sense of that one. Must be some of that creative destruction I hear folks talking about.
I dunno, Bob, perhaps Romney plans on beating the Democrats at their own game: vote manufacturing.
Which is kind of stupid, because everyone knows Democrats are renowned experts at “creative voting.”
Suppressing Republican/conservative voter turnout by inducing apathy has always been a method used to elect Democrats. Everything from 2008 has just been moved up in time for this campaign season. This part is usually reserved for the general election.
Are there bonus points given for winning an election as narrowly as possible?
A thought experiment here. It’s inspired by the whole “sitting at home = vote for Obama/Romney” argument:
Our voting process normally involves a positive “for” vote for one specific candidate, with the candidate gathering the most “for” votes winning (ignore electoral college, etc for this.)
Let’s posit that we can now cast negative “against” votes. Each voter, for each office, can cast either a for OR an against, not both. A For vote means “I positively want THIS douchebag in the office”, and an Against vote means “I don’t care which shitbird has the office, as long as it’s not THAT fucktard”. To determine total votes, we simply take For – Against. To win office, your vote total must be >0 AND the maximum of all candidates for the office. Even trivial cases like “one office, one candidate” get more interesting.
We can get into some interesting scenarios depending on how many people are running for an office, if the total number of Against votes is more than the total number of For votes, and if NOBODY gets positive votes.
I get that under these rules it’s possible that offices would not get filled. In fact, I see that as a feature. What do you do if you hold elections and the candidates are so odious to the electorate that nobody wins? Current office-holder stays? Office goes vacant or to the official next-in-line? Redo the election with a new slate?
I know this is pointless in that it doesn’t reflect reality, but I think it’s interesting to think about. Maybe some future iteration of liberty-based self-government would use a concept like this. Maybe I’m full of myself for thinking so. Maybe I’m bound up and need some of that oatmeal to regilate my system.
3. The feeling of, “yeah, like I’m going to give up an hour of my day to head down to the high school, find parking, and pull the lever for this milquetoast douche.”
One does get the sense that someone hasn’t quite done the math there, doesn’t one.
…except that in reading the unnecessary and counter-productive vitriol spewed by some Mitt-bots at some forums (whom are in obvious denial over the significance of what the result of alienating the 5 or 6 in 10 or so of the GOP who don’t really care for Mitt would mean to his chances in the general), perhaps the singular “someone” is incorrect usage?
But this is voter suppression being used against us by our own “side”. Which begs the question as to how many sides there are.
It’s voter depression, not supression. Nobody’s standing on the courthouse steps with a baseball bat or a crowbar and telling you that you can’t vote.
That comes in November.
Remember: the flip side of every “Get Out The Vote” campaign is the effort to make sure the other side stays home. And as the magnificent cock noted at #8 — we’re not on anybody’s side.
Under the milquetoast exterior is a romantic vampire waiting to be let out.
I missed a memo here. Romney is a vampire? I guess that’s why I’ve never seen his reflection.
Still time to write in the Sweet Meteor of Death.
Slogan: Duuuust in the wiiiind. All we are is dust in the wind.
I sat down to do a “pro and con” analysis of Obama and Romney. I started with Obama. Pros:
And that was all the motivation I needed.
Before anyone asks all I had to do was right down “nice hair” for Romney. It saved me a butt load of time.
Wait a minute Di, what about the new contender?
Squid @ 10. Stop it, I’m blushing! Besides, which, I’m told that my firearm collection is compensating for something.
Medically Induced Coma requires that someone else take exquisite care of you.
Trust No One™
Please tell your doctor if you experience a Medically Induced Coma lasting more than four hours.