Obama Thanks Supporters After Winning Re-Election

[Genericnic]

Anything that makes Ann Coulter feel this bad has to be good.

David

[chuckd]

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

[GentlemanJim]

I wouldn't mind seeing new faces in the running. A Green candidate would be refreshing, someone who wasn't in the back pockets of big biz and who could really cut expenditures, instead of just ruminating/grandstanding about it. Someone who wouldn't appoint Goldman Sachs execs to dictate economic policy, as both Bush Jr. and Obama did.

Well ya'll had Ron Paul who would have done all that !!

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

There speaks the voice of a Republican LMAO !

[somtumlion]

Meet the 'enlightened' Obama supporters. Remember, we've been told that only Republicans have ignorant and intolerant people in their party. Well lets just listen to Obama's core supporters on election night in Chicago.

I don't expect the BBC, CNN, Al Jezzera, MSNBC, CBS, ABC or any of the elite media outlets to show this.

You have exposed the key Obama demographic. Neither "dumb as a box of rocks" nor "totally clueless" can even begin to describe these idjits. It's no wonder we are now stuck with the incompetent buffoon for another four years!

Enjoy it, because 8 more years of Hillary after him

Edited November 8, 2012 by Scott

[somtumlion]

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

The blasting has been pretty balanced. You might say its been "Fair and Balanced"

Loved Jon Stewart last night - Avalanche on Bullshit Mountain lol

[theblether]

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.

Och behave yourself JT.......the Bush and Clinton show has dominated for 25 years, with the Kennedy's in the background trying to get someone into their 40's and fit to run for office.

Michelle Obama running for President is not anything like as unlikely as you believe.......your political class is becoming narrower and narrower......and you know it.

[MaxYakov]

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.

Besides throwing a lot of money at the problem (most of it misspent), like FDR, and Obamacare, can you please detail what Obama has done to repair the economic damage? Do you consider Obamacare to be an effort to repair the economic damage, BTW?

Do you actually listen to Rush Limbaugh or just get a second-hand opinion from the MSM (which is often quite mis-representative of what he actually says)? Are you a candidate for paying for the 6 trillion or so debt Obama has piled on top of the pre-existing Bush trillions?

Edited November 8, 2012 by MaxYakov

[Dancealot]

Does anybody more then Max see what' s really going on?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As3sBKFRpdU

[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.

Och behave yourself JT.......the Bush and Clinton show has dominated for 25 years, with the Kennedy's in the background trying to get someone into their 40's and fit to run for office.

Michelle Obama running for President is not anything like as unlikely as you believe.......your political class is becoming narrower and narrower......and you know it.

What political class was OBAMA from? OK, maybe there was something genetic from Kenya but no American political background at all. Did you look at some of the rising star SENATORS recently elected, some of whom are potential presidents, none from any family dynasty, and two of them women? romney was from a political family, Daddy the governor, and he has LOST badly two times already. OBAMA beat Clinton. Shocked everyone. If the limited dynasty theory was so strong, that would have never happened. What dynasty is RUBIO from? Sure Jeb Bush will probably run next time, but chances are he will NOT win. The actual evidence points to exactly the opposite of the idea that high offices are that limited. Sure there will always be political families. Not always a bad thing. Such as the case of the wonderful and unfairly vilified Nancy Pelosi, from a dynamic Baltimore political family, during her house speakership, she was the most powerful woman in American history.

As far as Michelle Obama running for president, I agree, that is POSSIBLE if she FIRST serves in another high elected office like senator or governor. Otherwise, I consider it almost impossible. The democratic party is not that stupid to nominate a lady just for being a WIFE. Really, no way! The democrat party is quite linked to FEMINISM in America. The idea of a woman being president based on only wife experience is the opposite of feminism. (Like Yingluck, her story is so NOT feminist.)

If you're asking my prediction about Michelle, I have a strong feeling. She has not acted at all like a president's wife that is going to pursue politics later. (The opposite of Hillary when she was the wife if you followed the news back then.)

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, she came into view as wife, but now really is the most qualified woman in the country to be president and one of the few most qualified, men or women. Hillary and Michelle's situations: totally different.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Jingthing

[samran]

Meet the 'enlightened' Obama supporters. Remember, we've been told that only Republicans have ignorant and intolerant people in their party. Well lets just listen to Obama's core supporters on election night in Chicago.

I don't expect the BBC, CNN, Al Jezzera, MSNBC, CBS, ABC or any of the elite media outlets to show this.

You have exposed the key Obama demographic. Neither "dumb as a box of rocks" nor "totally clueless" can even begin to describe these idjits. It's no wonder we are now stuck with the incompetent buffoon for another four years!

Enjoy it, because 8 more years of Hillary after him

Some pretty stupid republicans out there too.

Fail: Anti-Obama teen wants to move to Australia because we have ‘Christian, male president

and Australia's response:

http://www.heraldsun...o-1226512853271

Edited November 8, 2012 by Scott

[Jingthing]

You'd be surprised how many Americans think they are welcome (unconditionally) to reside in any country in the world just because they're Americans.

[samran]

Get over it ……?

Have you ever started your own business Samran? I have.

Indeed I have started my own business. Been running my current one for the past 3 years.

Do I get to join the club entitled to comment on stuff now?

Obama published an academic paper in 1965 reasoned, private investors inevitably seek to earn “dividends” from their investments, and “turning a profit” was the gravest of all immoralities. Instead, Mr. Obama proposed higher taxes on the wealthy, and a redistribution of that money, for the “collective good” of the nation.

“Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income,” Mr. Obama wrote, “so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.

All I can say to that I would be taking my bat and ball home very swiftly and I think there would be many other would be entrepreneurs that who would do the same. What is in it for me ??

http://townhall.com/...ther/page/full/

Well, few of the sins of fathers are visited upon their sons, unless you are Obama (in the eyes of some).

I do note the word ‘Theoretically’- meaning it might work if there wasn’t any transaction costs. And the paper was written during the height of Keynesian economics – which all fell in a heap in the 1970’s.

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.

Besides throwing a lot of money at the problem (most of it misspent), like FDR, and Obamacare, can you please detail what Obama has done to repair the economic damage? Do you consider Obamacare to be an effort to repair the economic damage, BTW?

Do you actually listen to Rush Limbaugh or just get a second-hand opinion from the MSM (which is often quite mis-representative of what he actually says)? Are you a candidate for paying for the 6 trillion or so debt Obama has piled on top of the pre-existing Bush trillions?

Are you serious with any of these angry questions? If so, I'll have a go. But I have to say the only thing that sticks out of this post is you admit Bush dumped trillions - but in reality, of American taxpayers dollars elsewhere, and lined the pockets of his family and friends in the process.

Oh, and cost a lot of American lives fighting a war that really didn't need fighting. Even though I'm not American, I probably care more about them than most Republicans do, they seem to see them as cannon fodder.

I'll be at Remembrance again on Sunday. What will you be doing?

Edited November 8, 2012 by Chicog

[Jingthing]

Zakaria's interesting and uplifting take on this BIG election:

I hesitate to build a grand narrative out of all this, but the trend seems to be toward individual freedom, self-expression and dignity for all. This embrace of diversity — in every sense — is America’s great gift to the world, one at which, since the days of J. Hector St. John de Crèvecoeur and Alexis de Tocqueville, foreigners have marveled.

...

What the world saw this week was a picture of America at its best: edgy, experimental, open-minded — and brilliantly diverse.

The story behind the story about this election: gay rights, marijuana legalization (challenging the insane drug war), immigration reform.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-emerging-america/2012/11/07/6d976cac-2916-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_story.html

[theblether]

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.

Och behave yourself JT.......the Bush and Clinton show has dominated for 25 years, with the Kennedy's in the background trying to get someone into their 40's and fit to run for office.

Michelle Obama running for President is not anything like as unlikely as you believe.......your political class is becoming narrower and narrower......and you know it.

What political class was OBAMA from? OK, maybe there was something genetic from Kenya but no American political background at all. Did you look at some of the rising star SENATORS recently elected, some of whom are potential presidents, none from any family dynasty, and two of them women? romney was from a political family, Daddy the governor, and he has LOST badly two times already. OBAMA beat Clinton. Shocked everyone. If the limited dynasty theory was so strong, that would have never happened. What dynasty is RUBIO from? Sure Jeb Bush will probably run next time, but chances are he will NOT win. The actual evidence points to exactly the opposite of the idea that high offices are that limited. Sure there will always be political families. Not always a bad thing. Such as the case of the wonderful and unfairly vilified Nancy Pelosi, from a dynamic Baltimore political family, during her house speakership, she was the most powerful woman in American history.

As far as Michelle Obama running for president, I agree, that is POSSIBLE if she FIRST serves in another high elected office like senator or governor. Otherwise, I consider it almost impossible. The democratic party is not that stupid to nominate a lady just for being a WIFE. Really, no way! The democrat party is quite linked to FEMINISM in America. The idea of a woman being president based on only wife experience is the opposite of feminism. (Like Yingluck, her story is so NOT feminist.)

If you're asking my prediction about Michelle, I have a strong feeling. She has not acted at all like a president's wife that is going to pursue politics later. (The opposite of Hillary when she was the wife if you followed the news back then.)

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, she came into view as wife, but now really is the most qualified woman in the country to be president and one of the few most qualified, men or women. Hillary and Michelle's situations: totally different.

If Obama was white would he have beaten Clinton in the 08 primaries?

[keemapoot]

What a fabulous quote. This really supports the theory that Republicans are comprised of essentially two groups of people: (1) rich guys who stand to lose very large sums of money doe to income and capital gains tax issues; (2) Ignorant, paranoid, religious zealot types who cannot think for themselves, need a lot of structure in their life, afraid of government, and vote based on fear even though the Republican platform does nothing for them economically, but does allow them to keep their guns.

You are so on target! I always felt guilty as I was becoming a young successful entrepreneur businessman, because I was told I had to be Republican, so I was, donated a lot of money, and I did endorse much of the platform in those days. As the Republican party moved to the far right I finally woke up. I never for once thought of not starting a business due to tax reasons. People start businesses because they have a passion and want to win. They don't fret about silly things like "will the corporate tax rate rise?" Easy enough to just incorporate offshore, but still do business at home. So easy to solve.

This forum is inhabited with Obama haters who blather on about business, but they don't talk like businessmen, and they certainly don't understand business. I have nothing against old, rich white guys, I kind of like em. And, I do understand wanting to keep capital gains structures as they are. But, the argument that these guys are job creators is just a myth.

its not just the tax, as a businessman you should understand the importance of regulation. republicans are certainly worried about the tax consequences of obama, but even more worried about the regulatory environment. lefties like to point out how not everybody has the resources to start a business which leads to inequality. raising taxes and adding regulation on regulation in every industry is only going to dissuade people from following their passion.

Of course every businessman deplores excessive regulation, and of course increases in operating expenses due to taxes, healthcare benefits, etc... However, the Wall St. bailout and lack of proper regulation is at the heart of the U.S. and world's economic woes, and there needs to be serious financial reform. However, no President dares to tackle it, including this one.

[MaxYakov]

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.

Besides throwing a lot of money at the problem (most of it misspent), like FDR, and Obamacare, can you please detail what Obama has done to repair the economic damage? Do you consider Obamacare to be an effort to repair the economic damage, BTW?

Do you actually listen to Rush Limbaugh or just get a second-hand opinion from the MSM (which is often quite mis-representative of what he actually says)? Are you a candidate for paying for the 6 trillion or so debt Obama has piled on top of the pre-existing Bush trillions?

Are you serious with any of these angry questions? If so, I'll have a go. But I have to say the only thing that sticks out of this post is you admit Bush dumped trillions - but in reality, of American taxpayers dollars elsewhere, and lined the pockets of his family and friends in the process.

Oh, and cost a lot of American lives fighting a war that really didn't need fighting. Even though I'm not American, I probably care more about them than most Republicans do, they seem to see them as cannon fodder.

I'll be at Remembrance again on Sunday. What will you be doing?

Typical liberal response: change the subject, don't answer the questions and/or bring in Bush to blame. But, since you brought up 'cannon fodder', the U.S. is still in Afghanistan and having our soldiers murdered by both alleged friends and foes alike because ...? Yes, that's another question that you won't answer.

My Remembrance is now, not waiting on Sunday: Ambassador Stevens and his compatriots who died of the obvious negligence of the Obama administration.

Edited November 8, 2012 by MaxYakov

[keemapoot]

Thank God, the angel Moroni, and Joseph Smith for this. We never have to think about Mormons again. They had their 15 minutes of fame.

Romney’s loss closes out ‘Mormon moment’

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/romneys-loss-closes-out-mormon-moment/comment-page-1/

[keemapoot]

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

Chuck, I know this hurts, but a lot of the "blasting" is for the Republicans own good. The US has changed. The Republicans are stunned and didn't see it happening. Adapt or perish. Hanging on stubbornly to your existing Republican platform only ensures continued Democratic success.

Obama's big Hispanic win worries Republicans

DENVER (AP) — Omayra Vasquez blinks and does a double take when asked why she voted to re-elect President Barack Obama. The reason for her was as natural as breathing.

"I feel closer to him," said Vasquez, a 43-year-old Federal Express worker from Denver. "He cares about the Spanish people."

http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-big-hispanic-win-worries-republicans-182128372--election.html

[keemapoot]

And, to be fair, most Republican are in shock and awe (to coin a phrase from a great Republican - I miss those types) still today after all this, including now the loss of Florida it appears.

Mitt Romney 'Shellshocked' After Lost Election, Adviser Says

Now, Rupert Murdoch's newspaper is complaining that the rich guy didn't have enough money.

One major reason why Romney lost, according to The Wall Street Journal, is that his campaign lacked money to counter the Obama campaign's attacks on him as an out-of-touch plutocrat. Romney had to spend a lot of time in fundraisers, according to the Journal:

http://www.huffingto...hp_ref=politics

[mesquite]

I have to admit Obama is off to a good start. Now if only Hillary will decide to spend more time with the family ...

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/08/report-holder-announces-he-might-not-stay-on-as-attorney-general/

[keemapoot]

I'm sure Romney and all his supporters are happy about this one.

Kenyan mother names twins Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

http://news.yahoo.co...-132344622.html

Edited November 9, 2012 by keemapoot

[mesquite]

There were ruminations earlier about who might run in 2016. Ms Clinton would make a good president. I actually preferred her over Obama when they were in the primaries. Anyone who runs for the Dem ticket will have to put up with a withering attacks from the Reps. No exceptions. They're out for blood. The 'swift boat' slime tactics will look like a kindergarten party - compared to what they'll put forth next time.

I suggested Michelle Obama a month ago on T.Visa, but I wouldn't want her to get attacked either, by inevitable Rep attack dog squads.

No chance in a bazillion that Bill Clinton will run as Prez or VP.

I wouldn't mind seeing new faces in the running. A Green candidate would be refreshing, someone who wasn't in the back pockets of big biz and who could really cut expenditures, instead of just ruminating/grandstanding about it. Someone who wouldn't appoint Goldman Sachs execs to dictate economic policy, as both Bush Jr. and Obama did.

Hillary would get votes, but none from the relatives of Americans slain in Benghazi terrorist attack.

Michelle is a joke.

Bill is not eligible to serve again.

[maidu]

In fact, I believe that the crushing of any idea to cancel or delay the buying of expensive, shiny new carriers for the Navy was led by Senator Jim Webb (Democrat)!

Perhaps Mr. Webb broached the idea, but Romney and Ryan have been strong supporters of adding two or more carrier groups. They wanted to take the money NOT spent on two wars (started by Bush/Cheney) and plow it to military coffers, and then a trillion or so additional. They had no idea how to pay for it. The reason they wanted added carrier groups? To flex US military might around the world. The US is already the strongest military, by far. I agree a deterrent to Chinese imperialism in S.China Sea and elsewhere is needed, but the US already has that. China came to the aircraft carrier party 90 years after the US and Europe, and even now, doesn't have planes for their re-cycled Ukrainian hull.

[maidu]

Lessons from the US election for Thailand (if they care to learn from it):

>>>> Debates can and should be allowed in an election campaigns. Same for 'town hall meetings.' Some reasons why they don't happen here in Thailand:

1. Political parties set the agenda. All candidates the party picks are required to walk in lock-step with the party. They are not expected to have any individual ideas. So debates would be a moot exercise.

2. Candidates are too worried about 'defamation suits' so are afraid to speak out against an opponent. The poster boy, in Thailand, for anti-defamation suits is, of course, Thaksin. The irony is, he doesn't have any decent character left to defame.

3. In a country so deeply embedded in superstition, it's assumed every Thai already knows what the candidate thinks and stands-for (via mind-waves or whatever).

4. many voters will vote for whomever the pu yai ban (village headman) pays them to vote for. Going rate: Bt.200 to Bt.500. Farang reading this might think: "why don't the little people take the money, and simply vote for whomever they want?" Reason: This is Thailand, and the pu yai ban has ways of knowing how each individual votes, even if that person wants his/her vote to be private. He can then discipline errant voters.

[tominbkk]

You would not say that if you still lived there.

Obama is a MONET WASTER.

I hate how he wastes that fine art too!

[ttelise]

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.

Besides throwing a lot of money at the problem (most of it misspent), like FDR, and Obamacare, can you please detail what Obama has done to repair the economic damage? Do you consider Obamacare to be an effort to repair the economic damage, BTW?

Do you actually listen to Rush Limbaugh or just get a second-hand opinion from the MSM (which is often quite mis-representative of what he actually says)? Are you a candidate for paying for the 6 trillion or so debt Obama has piled on top of the pre-existing Bush trillions?

Auto bailout, bank bailout, investment banking bailout, AIG bailout, and trying to finish two wars ain't cheap. Maybe Bush tax cut extension not so smart.

[samran]

Mitts Last Gaffe?

For a brief moment on Wednesday, US websites reported that a draft version of his transition site was accidentally published on romney.solutionstreamcreative.com, and featured a photograph of the Republican candidate looking into the distance below a logo of the "Office of the President-Elect".

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/mitts-last-gaffe--romney-the-presidentelect-20121109-291o7.html

A sense of entitlement? A reflection of the GOP's management skills (or lack of)?

We report, YOU DECIDE

[samran]

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

Battle of the fittest. Dog eat Dog. The weak get left behind....

I thought that was how you guys rolled?

Edited November 9, 2012 by samran

[chuckd]

Twenty seven pages of blasting the Republicans?

And the Democratic candidate won!!!

Isn't it time to close this thread and open up something constructive, like what is going to change in the next four years?

Battle of the fittest. Dog eat Dog. The weak get left behind....

I thought that was how you guys rolled?

It has nothing to do with battle of the fittest. The battle is over, the better campaign won. We are now at this stage...

It is now time to try and figure out what will happen during the next four years. Since Obama has no idea, perhaps some of the brilliance on this forum will show through and light the way.

So far the only concrete changes that are being talked about is Harry Reid saying he will change the rules on cloture.