Obama Thanks Supporters After Winning Re-Election

[thaibeachlovers]

It wasn't a close contest. Obama WILL win Florida adding to his COMMANDING electoral college lead. His TWO PERCENT popular vote margin would have easily been three percent if the turnout in New York and New Jersey had been normal. The turnout in those massively populated states was hugely depressed because of the STORM. Obama did not win a landslide, but he indeed won a mandate to continue with his policies, and set his grand achievements like OBAMACARE in stone for the benefit of future generations of Americans.

However, if Obama continues to refuse to compromise, as he did in his first term, he will never pass any legislation, due to the Republicans controlling the House. Clinton did it, but is Obama willing to?

So whether he has a mandate or not, it's irrelevant in practical terms unless he reaches over to the Republicans.

Of course he could just go play golf for the next 4 years.

I hope you all noticed that the Hispanics are now telling him to "repay" his debt to them.

[Genericnic]

While the Republicans lost the presidency in a close contest, they won in many state contests, and they control the House, ergo the Presidents spending, so let's not write them off yet.

If Obama doesn't solve the many problems facing the country in the next 2 years, the Dems will probably be annihilated in the mid terms.

Or if the House Republicans are seen as being to obstructionist, the Democrats may end up with control of the House as well. And based on past performance, the Rs may well do that.

David

[DiamondKing]

OOOHH!!

YUKK!!

Mean spirited FOX doesn't show the high point of the day, the new President coming out on stage with his family, but stays firmly on the stuffed shirt + modest miniskirt in their vulgar studio.

Christ!

Obama's making his speech and FOX is still in the studio!

Two minutes later:

STILL THERE!

They're ignoring the PResident's speech!

Two more minutes later:

They're STILL IGNORING the president's speech.

It's unbelievable........and Fox is the main news source for 45% of America....Sad

Three more minutes later:

Fox news goes to a roving reporter showing how votes are counted in an election centre.

Looks like he's suggesting there are "disturbing reports" of some people being double counted.

Oh and some machines were broken down.

Meanwhile the President of the USA makes his acceptance speech.....obviously not worth showing.

Ohhh more words "potential fraud"

Ohhh it must have been a fix

SEEMS LIKE YOUR AN AVID VIEWER OF FOX if you dont like it you only have to move your thumb and press change channel.

[samran]

Seems to GOP already have a new front runner for 2016.

http://www.theonion.com/video/after-obama-victory-shrieking-whitehot-sphere-of-p,30284/

Edited November 8, 2012 by samran

[Chicog]

If I can go back to this election for a while (!), I was actually fortunate enough to catch the Limbaugh Advanced Institute of Terminal Whinging last night and it was truly hilarious.

I've never heard the obnoxious buffoon sound so deflated and confused.

And he seemed shocked from reading about exit polls and interviews that demonstrated that more than half of those who voted for Obama did so on the basis of his handling of the economy, and specifically because they blamed Bush and the Republicans for making the mess in the first place.

It's heartening to hear that so many people saw through the rubbish the GOP churned out and realised what a monumental task they left for Obama.

Now if the Republicans could just do the decent thing and stop thinking about themselves for the moment, and try not to block,out of sheer spite, everything Obama tries to do to fix the economy, the USA might actually have a chance at repairing the damage.

[Chicog]

SEEMS LIKE YOUR AN AVID VIEWER OF FOX if you dont like it you only have to move your thumb and press change channel.

From what I understand the choice in Thailand is not great.

Personally I watched a variety of news sources in the build up to this election and Fox, without a doubt, is the absolute worst attempt at masquerading as a news channel as I have seen since "Drop the Dead Donkey".

[samran]

Obama is the new dictator. He rules with Executive Order not within the Constitutional guidelines. If he knows he can't get what he wants he just does an EO without thinking of the countries wishes or what is best. That is why the congress hates him so much and nothing he wants will be passed. Obama is a real dictator. I am not a Romey supporter or for any party but I do know the Constitution and what Obama is doing is not in line what our founding fathers wanted for America. You will see congress come up in anger wanting to support the constitution and Obama will just continue to defy the constitution and do his will. So sad,

So true. The founding fathers also decided that a black person only counted as 3/5's of a white person, so I guess you can say he is really taking it to the founding fathers on that front as well.

There was a very good reason for them doing that. So before you use that in the wrong sense, perhaps you should find out why that was.

Come on, it was a flippant retort.

[theblether]

Nooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!

If the Democrats would be better off with Michelle Obama next time......that would be a slam dunk.

A real slave descendant..........and potentially the first female President? That would cause some tremors in the Republican Party.

I reckon you aren't being serious, right? Running for president with no experience in any elected political office is out of the question. No, being first lady is not an elected office. Her chance to be nominated with no elected office experience? ZERO. Actually, I don't any vibe from her that she is ambitious that way. If she is, the path for her would be to later to run for high office in Illinois FIRST.

The idea that the democrats are lacking fantastic potential candidates for 2016 and they would be so desperate to nominate a lady with zero experience is laughable! Yes, Michelle Obama is popular, but not in that way.

Strongly on the radar now are:

Senator Mark Warner Virginia

Hillary Clinton Secretary of State / Senator

Governor Andrew Cuomo New York

Governor Mark O'Malley Maryland

If Hillary runs, she's the favorite. Otherwise, Warner would be very appealing coming from a border/Southern swing state, would probably bring in North Carolina as well.

Name recognition, after Hillary, Cuomo has it.

Mark O'Malley would be the most unknown, but has great potential, youthful, energetic.

Gov. Beebe of Arkansas is also mentioned but I don't see it.

Hillary was a massively popular and successful U.S. SENATOR and now also has been Secretary of State. Hillary running as VP to Michelle Obama? Not in a million years.

If experience was a pre-requesite then Obama wouldn't have made it past the first primary.

Profile is now more important, and certainly family connections.

Edited November 8, 2012 by theblether

[yourauntbob]

Well, regardless of who your particular flavour was in the election, it's all over and the fat lady is singing. Obama has it not only on Electoral college votes but also on the popular vote, by a narrow margin. The USA is split down the middle by the smallest amount, BUT take note Thailand. Tomorrow there will be NO protests in the United states, there will be no blocking of city centers, there will be no blocking of airports, there will be no burning down of cities and there will be no politician funded killing of its own citizens. There will be no 4 year period where disgruntled politicians do anything but file law suits against each other, lie to the electorate and place themselves above the constitution and the law. Good luck the USA, under the current financial situation it needed ANY party to be in for an 8 year term to try and sort it out. I am relieved it is all over. Back to work then!

probably the best comment on here. +1

[Jingthing]

The margin of victory was not that small! Facts are facts.

[Jingthing]

If experience was a pre-requesite then Obama wouldn't have made it past the first primary.

Profile is now more important, and certainly family connections.

Think what you want, but that doesn't happen in the USA and won't be happening with Michelle Obama. Women don't become presidents ONLY based on being married to presidents. That is not our way. It goes against core American values of meritocracy. Even when super popular presidents die, their wives aren't the choice to replace them as in some cultures, except in a case where the wife had actual successful political experience on her OWN.

Agreed Obama had THIN experience but not even close to NO experience.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Jingthing

[thaibeachlovers]

There is no politician that keeps (or is able to keep) all her promises, especially on a time table.

But in Obama's case his clear CORE VALUES are much more in tune with the masses of American people compared to his plutocratic losing challenger (whose core values were slippery and mysterious at best). (We can forget his challenger's name now, because he is going away.)

Obama's core values

Taking money off some people to give it other people ( like in Europe )

Building BIG government ( like in Europe )

Government control of everything ( like in Europe )

Paying for unaffordable policies with borrowed money ( like in Europe )

Passing the debt down to future generations ( like in Europe )

Gun control ( like in Europe )

Socialist policies ( like in Europe )

Building a dependent underclass ( like in Europe )

Legalising illegal immigrant people that will support his party ( like in Europe )

Seems that he's more European than American.

I wonder if he'll be pushing for a constitutional amendment to allow him to run for more than 2 terms?

[Steely Dan]

The Republicans put up the most moderate candidate they could muster, but still lost. Whoever they put up would have been cast as a demon by the media. Romney's Mormon religion repeatedly came under scrutiny implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs. On the other hand any scrutiny of Obama's past and his Muslim father was met with howls of derision, the dishonest double standard is there for all to see. The trouble is the Democrats have cornered the bleeding hearts market and the old phrase - 'It's the economy, stupid' no longer applies. The interesting question is why is this? Perhaps people have indeed realized that nothing either party did was liable to mend the economy, so in lieu of this people voted for the many single issue items Obama used to divide the Country allowing people to further their personal interests whilst sticking it to the 1%, or whatever other group they disapprove of.

This is the politics of decay and indeed has striking parallels with the reasons for the fall of Rome. Nobody is going to vote for the sacrifices needed to pay off debt and balance the budget, so instead we have the politics of pushing the can down the road hoping for death before the day of financial reckoning. Those who don't have the stomach to look at the financial realities console themselves with sundry fuzzy and uncosted social measures on which to rationalize their votes with.

I have a feeling the next government will not be elected on a populist platform but will be one dealing with national emergency using emergency powers. Time will tell, but I can't see a happy outcome here.

[yourauntbob]

If I can go back to this election for a while (!), I was actually fortunate enough to catch the Limbaugh Advanced Institute of Terminal Whinging last night and it was truly hilarious.

I've never heard the obnoxious buffoon sound so deflated and confused.

And he seemed shocked from reading about exit polls and interviews that demonstrated that more than half of those who voted for Obama did so on the basis of his handling of the economy, and specifically because they blamed Bush and the Republicans for making the mess in the first place.

It's heartening to hear that so many people saw through the rubbish the GOP churned out and realised what a monumental task they left for Obama.

Now if the Republicans could just do the decent thing and stop thinking about themselves for the moment, and try not to block,out of sheer spite, everything Obama tries to do to fix the economy, the USA might actually have a chance at repairing the damage.

their not blocking out of spite, their blocking because his policies are out if left field. They tried to work with him in healthcare and got locked out of the room. they tried a compromise on taxes/spending cuts and Obama reniged and asked for more. then there was simpson/bowels and nothing came of it. or the time when the president called the repblican leadership for a sit down and proceeded to lecture them and dismiss their ideas. remember that we "need to pass the bill to see whats in it." Its amazing how blind the democratic party is to their own obstructionism. The senate cant pass a budget, and the white house wont even open the door but republicans are blamed when things dont get done. seriously, snap out of it and look in the mirror a bit.

[Jingthing]

...

Seems that he's more European than American.

...

Actually, he's more like a old school MODERATE REPUBLICAN than any of those things,

BTW, yes I totally believe this. I would much prefer a president to the LEFT of Obama but America is a very right wing country now so that isn't possible.

http://www.slate.com...ch_the_gop.html

Cheer up. The guy we just re-elected is a moderate Republican.

I know how stupid that sounds. Barack Obama is the head of the Democratic Party. For five years, conservative politicians and media told you he was a raving socialist. In the heat of the campaign, when you’re trying to beat the guy, it’s hard to let go of that image of him, just as it’s hard for Democrats to see past the caricatures of Mitt Romney. But now that the campaign is over and you’re staring at a second Obama term, the falsity of the propaganda may come as a relief. By and large, Obama’s instincts are the instincts of a moderate Republican. His policies are the policies of a moderate Republican. He stands where the GOP used to stand and will someday stand again.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Jingthing

[thaibeachlovers]

If I can go back to this election for a while (!), I was actually fortunate enough to catch the Limbaugh Advanced Institute of Terminal Whinging last night and it was truly hilarious.

I've never heard the obnoxious buffoon sound so deflated and confused.

And he seemed shocked from reading about exit polls and interviews that demonstrated that more than half of those who voted for Obama did so on the basis of his handling of the economy, and specifically because they blamed Bush and the Republicans for making the mess in the first place.

It's heartening to hear that so many people saw through the rubbish the GOP churned out and realised what a monumental task they left for Obama.

Now if the Republicans could just do the decent thing and stop thinking about themselves for the moment, and try not to block,out of sheer spite, everything Obama tries to do to fix the economy, the USA might actually have a chance at repairing the damage.

So who will Obama blame in his next 4 years? Is 4 years long enough to make things his own, or will it be the same old boring litany of "it is Bush's fault" for another 4 years?

[Jingthing]

Obama doesn't need to blame anyone anymore and won't (except the obstructionist republicans currently in office). He isn't running for anything again, ever!

[keemapoot]

If I can go back to this election for a while (!), I was actually fortunate enough to catch the Limbaugh Advanced Institute of Terminal Whinging last night and it was truly hilarious.

I've never heard the obnoxious buffoon sound so deflated and confused.

And he seemed shocked from reading about exit polls and interviews that demonstrated that more than half of those who voted for Obama did so on the basis of his handling of the economy, and specifically because they blamed Bush and the Republicans for making the mess in the first place.

It's heartening to hear that so many people saw through the rubbish the GOP churned out and realised what a monumental task they left for Obama.

Now if the Republicans could just do the decent thing and stop thinking about themselves for the moment, and try not to block,out of sheer spite, everything Obama tries to do to fix the economy, the USA might actually have a chance at repairing the damage.

So who will Obama blame in his next 4 years? Is 4 years long enough to make things his own, or will it be the same old boring litany of "it is Bush's fault" for another 4 years?

Nope, nobody to blame, the only thing at stake is your Presidential legacy, and with egos this large, that is very important to Obama. Presidents often get much more accomplished and are more bi-partisan in their 2nd term than their first because there is nothing to lose except a good legacy.

[Scott]

Several off-topic posts have been deleted. Let's avoid moving too far away from the main topic--going back to Eisenhower, Nixon and Kennedy is a little too far off-topic.

Please be civil to other posters and respectful in your disagreement with their opinions.

[SteeleJoe]

Obama is the new dictator. He rules with Executive Order not within the Constitutional guidelines. If he knows he can't get what he wants he just does an EO without thinking of the countries wishes or what is best. That is why the congress hates him so much and nothing he wants will be passed. Obama is a real dictator. I am not a Romey supporter or for any party but I do know the Constitution and what Obama is doing is not in line what our founding fathers wanted for America. You will see congress come up in anger wanting to support the constitution and Obama will just continue to defy the constitution and do his will. So sad,

So true. The founding fathers also decided that a black person only counted as 3/5's of a white person, so I guess you can say he is really taking it to the founding fathers on that front as well.

There was a very good reason for them doing that. So before you use that in the wrong sense, perhaps you should find out why that was.

Come on, it was a flippant retort.

Fair enough. But it was one that perpetuates a very commonly held distortion of historical fact.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[Chicog]

Romney's Mormon religion repeatedly came under scrutiny implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs. On the other hand any scrutiny of Obama's past and his Muslim father was met with howls of derision, the dishonest double standard is there for all to see.

I'm sorry but surely you can see that is a truly feeble claim?

First of all, can you show us examples of where his religion repeatedly came under scrutiny and examples of implying that policies would all be based on his religious beliefs?

Secondly that is not even close to being analogous. Let's see...

Muslim father who had virtually no role in his life. Brought up as (at least ostensibly) Christian.

Brought up by Mormons in a family that has been Mormon for generations (very high in the LDS hierarchy) and has been a devout Mormon all his life.

If Obama's father was Christian would you ever suggest that his father's religion was relevant? We both know you wouldn't. Nor should you.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

More to the point, while we may have discussed it here, I didn't see either candidates faith as being an election issue. It was the economy that won it.

Who did the damage - question answered.

How well do the American people think Obama has done to start repairing it - question answered.

Who do the Americans believe would do a better job of improving it for the next four years - question answered.

But I have to agree, as much as the Republicans have to stop with the spite, Obama has to eat some humble pie as well.

The voters want Obamacare. Deal with it.

The voters want higher taxes from those that can afford it. Deal with it.

The voters are fed up with banks and big businesses buying the government that suits them. Deal with it.

Well I can dream, can't I?

Edited November 8, 2012 by Chicog

[SteeleJoe]

Romney's Mormon religion repeatedly came under scrutiny implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs. On the other hand any scrutiny of Obama's past and his Muslim father was met with howls of derision, the dishonest double standard is there for all to see.

Seriously? Do you really think that stands up?

First of all, I'd genuinely like to see examples of his religion repeatedly coming under scrutiny and examples of implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs.

Secondly, it's not even close to comparable:

Brought up by Christians and raised as a Christian. Muslim father having virtually no role.

Brought up by Mormons in a family that was highly laced in the LDS and had been Mormons for generations.

If Obama's father was a Christian, would you suggest that his father's religion was relevant? We both know you wouldn't. Nor should you. On the other hand, a candidates own personal beliefs and the values that guide him are arguably relevant.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[thatguy]

It will always take more time and money to clean up a mess than it did to create it.

[Jingthing]

There has been a rating/evaluation of all the polling organizations this time to see how accurate they were.

PPP was the winner.

Near the bottom: Pew Research and Gallup.

[chuckd]

I fervently hope the newest "man of the people" thanks those that got him elected.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama Wins 8 of the Nation’s 10 Wealthiest Counties

Published: Wednesday, 7 Nov 2012 | 10:35 AM ET

By: Paul Toscano

Producer, CNBC.com

In an election that often focused on debates about class warfare, President Barack Obama was favored over multimillionaire businessman Mitt Romney in eight of the nation’s 10 wealthiest counties.

And his margin of victory in all eight counties was greater than that of the national vote, in which Obama was leading by 50 percent to 48 percent with 97 percent of precincts reporting.

The 10 richest counties accounted for 1,337,700 votes, or about 1.1 percent of the national popular vote.

In the richest, Massachusetts’ Nantucket County, where average annual household income is over $137,000, Obama won by 63 percent to Romney’s 36 percent with all precincts reporting. The richest county in Romney’s home state is also where, just prior to accepting the Republican nomination, the former Massachusetts governor held a $75,000-per-person dinner fundraiser.

Read more here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/49726054

[Basil B]

What the "F" is going on in Florida, if Alaska can declare within a few hours why is it taking Florida days.

You would think things would have changed since the fiasco back in 2000, but obviously seems they still can not even organize a piss up in brewery down there.

[Steely Dan]

Romney's Mormon religion repeatedly came under scrutiny implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs. On the other hand any scrutiny of Obama's past and his Muslim father was met with howls of derision, the dishonest double standard is there for all to see.

Seriously? Do you really think that stands up?

First of all, I'd genuinely like to see examples of his religion repeatedly coming under scrutiny and examples of implying his policies would all be based on his religious beliefs.

Secondly, it's not even close to comparable:

Brought up by Christians and raised as a Christian. Muslim father having virtually no role.

Brought up by Mormons in a family that was highly laced in the LDS and had been Mormons for generations.

If Obama's father was a Christian, would you suggest that his father's religion was relevant? We both know you wouldn't. Nor should you. On the other hand, a candidates own personal beliefs and the values that guide him are arguably relevant.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Mormons give 10% of their income to the church, ergo the repeated calls for Romney to publish his tax returns. I know full well Mormons had dirty laundry where it comes to race, which I'm sure played a significant part in the decision of many blacks to vote Democrat and on a high turnout, are you seriously considering Romney's background was never hinted at? It's irrelevant and academic now, but for the life of me I can't imagine what the Republicans were thinking of picking a Mormon in 2012 America and expecting it not to be played, both directly and indirectly. You are missing my point as far as Obama is concerned. He may have been raised a Christian and his Muslim father may well have played no role as you say. But to ask such questions and juxtapose them against the outreach of Obama towards the Muslim world would be a valid comparison to make.

P.S Took me all of 5 minutes to find a link backing up my point.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/11/05/romneys-mormon-beliefs-featured-in-pro-obama-voter-education-brochure/

Edited November 8, 2012 by Steely Dan

[Jingthing]

Yes, our beloved President Obama enjoys very DIVERSE support. Diversity of all kinds. Race, income, education, gender, sexual orientation, class, religion, etc. The other party: very, very poor performance overall in the diversity department. Basically change or lose.

[uptheos]

It's difficult to know where the Republican Party goes from here. The main problem was that Romney had to start so far on the right in the primaries and manoeuvre himself to the moderate centre, which he did quite badly and too sudden. I believe his choice of Ryan as running mate was a poor choice and picking a guy who couldn't win his own state speaks volumes.

However, while all this was going on sensible ideas were being voted for in Maryland and Washington.

If the next four years are in fact better and the country starts to see the light, then I fail to see who the Republican's can produce and provide policies that can possibly defeat the Democrats. Lets face it, the two loonies didn't help with their comments on God blessing rape and a woman's body shutting down during rape. One wonders how these imbeciles got through high school let alone become politicians. I think Romney is an OK guy, but it seems he was shoving you know what uphill from the start. It would be nice if Obama did give him a call, I'm sure there's a lot of wisdom to be tapped.

I quite enjoy the American election and build up to it, even if it is a circus.

As for me I'll continue my policy of never voting, because one thing I've realised over time is that whoever you vote for the government always gets in...and that's not necessarily a good thing.

[samran]

I fervently hope the newest "man of the people" thanks those that got him elected.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama Wins 8 of the Nation’s 10 Wealthiest Counties

Published: Wednesday, 7 Nov 2012 | 10:35 AM ET

By: Paul Toscano

Producer, CNBC.com

In an election that often focused on debates about class warfare, President Barack Obama was favored over multimillionaire businessman Mitt Romney in eight of the nation’s 10 wealthiest counties.

And his margin of victory in all eight counties was greater than that of the national vote, in which Obama was leading by 50 percent to 48 percent with 97 percent of precincts reporting.

The 10 richest counties accounted for 1,337,700 votes, or about 1.1 percent of the national popular vote.

In the richest, Massachusetts’ Nantucket County, where average annual household income is over $137,000, Obama won by 63 percent to Romney’s 36 percent with all precincts reporting. The richest county in Romney’s home state is also where, just prior to accepting the Republican nomination, the former Massachusetts governor held a $75,000-per-person dinner fundraiser.

Read more here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/49726054

One thing is for sure, wall street have made it so that he owes them nothing...