US midterm elections: Barack Obama’s legacy could be ruined in one day

[JDGRUEN]

53 Republican Senate Seats Now ? Pending 54 in 30 days or so in Louisiana...

GOP adds another Senate seat as Sullivan wins Alaska

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Dan Sullivan defeated Sen. Mark Begich, the Democratic incumbent,

in Alaska’s U.S. Senate race Wednesday – a win that gives the GOP eight Senate pickups in the midterm elections.

The Republican Party also is seeking a ninth seat in Louisiana’s runoff in December.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/12/gop-dan-sullivan-maintains-lead-in-alaska-senate-race-as-absentee-ballot-count/

[up-country_sinclair]

It's clear to everyone how much you want to believe this, but this it's just not true. But feel free to prove me wrong and post all the federal, state and local ballots which explicitly show his policies on the ballot.

And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily.

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Edited November 12, 2014 by up-country_sinclair

[thailiketoo]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

[up-country_sinclair]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

So in 1980 when Ronald Reagan won the electoral college 489 to 49 over Jimmy Carter he didn't have much of a mandate to govern because he only won 50.8% of the popular vote?

As far as the "executive order stuff" is concerned, here is a list of recent two term presidents and their number of executive orders issued:

Barack Obama 191

George W. Bush 291

Bill Clinton 364

Ronald Reagan 381

[NeverSure]

It's clear to everyone how much you want to believe this, but this it's just not true. But feel free to prove me wrong and post all the federal, state and local ballots which explicitly show his policies on the ballot.

And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily.

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

I would take you on but thailiketoo did it in his post above. You have been owned.

The point is that Obama wasn't all that popular, winning by just 51% of the popular vote in both of his elections.

Yes of course I know about the electoral college. I've said on here many times that the US isn't a democracy. It's a republic of states. One reason is the electoral college and the other is that each state, regardless of size, gets two senators in the Senate for a total of 100 senators. So the smallest state has as much say in the Senate as the largest state.

BTW did you notice that the Republicans keep gaining seats in the Senate as the races complete vote counting? Toss in some moderate to conservative Southern Democrats and the Dems have lost all control.

[thailiketoo]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

So in 1980 when Ronald Reagan won the electoral college 489 to 49 over Jimmy Carter he didn't have much of a mandate to govern because he only won 50.8% of the popular vote?

As far as the "executive order stuff" is concerned, here is a list of recent two term presidents and their number of executive orders issued:

Barack Obama 191

George W. Bush 291

Bill Clinton 364

Ronald Reagan 381

Ronald Reagan 50.8% popular vote, Jimmie Carter 41% popular vote (devil's in the details eh?)

Executive orders to let 4.5 million illegals stay in America is quite a bit beyond anything the other Presidents tried.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/11/12/fox-news-obtains-drafts-obamas-immigration-plans

Edited November 13, 2014 by thailiketoo

[uptheos]

I suppose that thinking Americans are stupid must be a part of Obama's legacy too, as stated by Johnathan Gruber about Obamacare?

On October 17th, Gruber explained to a panel at the University of Pennsylvania how he helped write the Affordable Care Act so that it would pass congress and become law.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO [Congressional Budget Office] scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass….Look, I wish … that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.”

[chuckd]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

So in 1980 when Ronald Reagan won the electoral college 489 to 49 over Jimmy Carter he didn't have much of a mandate to govern because he only won 50.8% of the popular vote?

As far as the "executive order stuff" is concerned, here is a list of recent two term presidents and their number of executive orders issued:

Barack Obama 191

George W. Bush 291

Bill Clinton 364

Ronald Reagan 381

Your argument on Executive Orders is disingenuous at best.

Your examples are given based on eight year terms for Bush, Clinton and Reagan.

Obama's total is based on less than six years with over two years remaining. His count is now 193 and rising.

Just to get you up to speed:

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

The coming climate onslaught

President Obama readies a sweeping list of executive actions.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/climate-rules-obama-112792.html#ixzz3Iv1K5mBn

...also...

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

Edited November 13, 2014 by chuckd

[chuckd]

I suppose that thinking Americans are stupid must be a part of Obama's legacy too, as stated by Johnathan Gruber about Obamacare?

On October 17th, Gruber explained to a panel at the University of Pennsylvania how he helped write the Affordable Care Act so that it would pass congress and become law.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO [Congressional Budget Office] scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass….Look, I wish … that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.”

Uptheos:

Good post. For those that might not believe these words were actually spoken, here is a YouTube of his comments.

[Publicus]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

Prez Obama got 5% more votes than Romney received, not 1%. This matters in the US because the candidate for president needs a majority of the electoral college vote of the states, not necessarily a majority of the electorate, although the two votes usually are consistent to one another.

In 2008 Prez Obama won 52.9% of the popular vote which was almost 8% more votes than Sen John McCain managed to scavenge.

The far right wing in the US and elsewhere have a full time machine to produce absolute fiction against Prez Obama 24/7 since election day November 2008. Barack Obama is not perfect and yes, the full time machine of fiction against him does take its toll over time.

So here instead are the election facts of the matter....

Final Tally Shows Obama First Since ’56 to Win 51% Twice

Photographer: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

President Barack Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Dwight Eisenhower accomplished the feat in 1952 and again in 1956... Read More

Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice.

The president nationally won 65.9 million votes -- or 51.1 percent -- against Republican challenger Mitt Romney, who took 60.9 million votes and 47.2 percent of the total cast, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956, and the first Democrat to do so since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four consecutive White House races. Roosevelt received 53.4 percent of the vote -- his lowest -- in his last race in 1944.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-03/final-tally-shows-obama-first-since-56-to-win-51-twice.html

Prez Obama twice did better with his electorate than Prez Reagan managed to do twice with his electorate of the time.

McCain got 44.5% of the vote which is what the Republican party nominee for president will be looking at the day after the election in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, if that much.

Edited by Publicus for Chinese made computer spacing.

Edited November 13, 2014 by Publicus

[chuckd]

More voices are coming forth on Obama's legacy legislation...Obamacare.

Notice the video clip that follows was broadcast on "Not Fox News". It was aired by the Obama News Network, aka MSNBC.

The words were uttered by Howard Dean, former DNC Chairman and devout Democrat.

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

[Jingthing]

Well, I was wrong. Obamacare is really at risk now. More from the supreme court than from Congress but it won't the congress change makes it worse.

[up-country_sinclair]

The content of the many of the posts above are exactly the type of hyper-partisanship which has left the US practically ungovernable. It was the same with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton before him. Far left/right radicals attacking essentially centrist presidents over manufactured controversies (Benghazi, Whitewater, etc...).

Sad.

[JDGRUEN]

The content of the many of the posts above are exactly the type of hyper-partisanship which has left the US practically ungovernable. It was the same with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton before him. Far left/right radicals attacking essentially centrist presidents over manufactured controversies (Benghazi, Whitewater, etc...).

Sad.

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

[Jingthing]

The content of the many of the posts above are exactly the type of hyper-partisanship which has left the US practically ungovernable. It was the same with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton before him. Far left/right radicals attacking essentially centrist presidents over manufactured controversies (Benghazi, Whitewater, etc...).

Sad.

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

He is a centrist. His health plan was inspired by Mitt Romney. Need to check my address for my next 90 day address report.

[JDGRUEN]

"And just so there is no misunderstanding, I didn't vote for Obama either. But he won twice, and rather handily."

Not true. He won by just barely more than 51% of the vote both times. They were squeakers.

And he had already put Hillary away rather handily. She would have lost. He almost did.

Like a lot of people, you seem to be ignorant of the US electoral process. Presidential elections in the US are not decided by popular vote, but something that is known as the "electoral college".

In 2008 Senator Obama won more than double electoral votes as Senator McCain. In 2012, President Obama won 62% of the electoral vote over Mitt Romney. As I posted (and the facts above make abundantly clear) President Obama won both elections quite handily.

Quite frankly I don't have time to educate you on the topic of the electoral college, but if you are interested in actually obtaining some knowledge on the topic you are posting about, you can find an immense amount of information online. But let me leave you with this: if presidential elections were determined by popular vote, then Al Gore would have been president and not George W. Bush--for better or worse.

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

Prez Obama got 5% more votes than Romney received, not 1%. This matters in the US because the candidate for president needs a majority of the electoral college vote of the states, not necessarily a majority of the electorate, although the two votes usually are consistent to one another.

In 2008 Prez Obama won 52.9% of the popular vote which was almost 8% more votes than Sen John McCain managed to scavenge.

The far right wing in the US and elsewhere have a full time machine to produce absolute fiction against Prez Obama 24/7 since election day November 2008. Barack Obama is not perfect and yes, the full time machine of fiction against him does take its toll over time.

So here instead are the election facts of the matter....

Final Tally Shows Obama First Since ’56 to Win 51% Twice

Photographer: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

President Barack Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Dwight Eisenhower accomplished the feat in 1952 and again in 1956... Read More

Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice.

The president nationally won 65.9 million votes -- or 51.1 percent -- against Republican challenger Mitt Romney, who took 60.9 million votes and 47.2 percent of the total cast, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956, and the first Democrat to do so since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four consecutive White House races. Roosevelt received 53.4 percent of the vote -- his lowest -- in his last race in 1944.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-03/final-tally-shows-obama-first-since-56-to-win-51-twice.html

Prez Obama twice did better with his electorate than Prez Reagan managed to do twice with his electorate of the time.

McCain got 44.5% of the vote which is what the Republican party nominee for president will be looking at the day after the election in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, if that much.

Edited by Publicus for Chinese made computer spacing.

Lets see illegal aliens voting in states where there is not voter ID, Dead people voting, deliberate voter fraud of various and sundry methods, paper ballots lost or supplied, voting machines missing in trunks of cars, people who have since been prosecuted for voting multiple times. Invention of the mother of elections...

[ricklev]

No real point I can tell in reading this thread. So depressing. A reasonable and intelligent centrist implementing and attempting to implement nothing but republican policies from 20 years back is vilified as evil personified as a political tactic and half the country buys into it.

I gave up hope for America after George Bush was elected the second time. The insane hatred for Obama has broken my heart.

Edited November 13, 2014 by ricklev

[JDGRUEN]

The content of the many of the posts above are exactly the type of hyper-partisanship which has left the US practically ungovernable. It was the same with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton before him. Far left/right radicals attacking essentially centrist presidents over manufactured controversies (Benghazi, Whitewater, etc...).

Sad.

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

He is a centrist. His health plan was inspired by Mitt Romney. Need to check my address for my next 90 day address report.

Yes borrowed Romney plan and have the read the very latest revelations by obama's obamacare architect? I just continue shaking my head in amazement ... obama a centrist... it is something out of SNL to believe that. Totally off the charts. This is what the mid term elections were about - all those people who pushed the Democrats out of the Senate and the House and the Governor's offices believe very much as I do ... Leftist socialist - Muslim - as wacko combination as obama is...

[Jingthing]

No real point I can tell in reading this thread. So depressing. A reasonable and intelligent centrist implementing and attempting to implement nothing but republican policies from 20 years back is vilified as evil personified as a political tactic and half the country buys into it.

I gave up hope for America after George Bush was elected the second time. The insane hatred for Obama has broken my heart.

Agreed, much of the demonization against him is totally irrational and bizarre, but on the other hand, I can't paint Obama as perfect in the performance department even with that handicap.

[Jingthing]

The content of the many of the posts above are exactly the type of hyper-partisanship which has left the US practically ungovernable. It was the same with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton before him. Far left/right radicals attacking essentially centrist presidents over manufactured controversies (Benghazi, Whitewater, etc...).

Sad.

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

He is a centrist. His health plan was inspired by Mitt Romney. Need to check my address for my next 90 day address report.

Yes borrowed Romney plan and have the read the very latest revelations by obama's obamacare architect? I just continue shaking my head in amazement ... obama a centrist... it is something out of SNL to believe that. Totally off the charts. This is what the mid term elections were about - all those people who pushed the Democrats out of the Senate and the House and the Governor's offices believe very much as I do ... Leftist socialist - Muslim - as wacko combination as obama is...

No the midterms were about the right wing angry white men expressing their irrational hatred of Obama. The vast majority of voters stayed home because they were OK with Obama. Is this evidence that American democracy is failing badly? I think so.

[JDGRUEN]

No real point I can tell in reading this thread. So depressing. A reasonable and intelligent centrist implementing and attempting to implement nothing but republican policies from 20 years back is vilified as evil personified as a political tactic and half the country buys into it.

I gave up hope for America after George Bush was elected the second time. The insane hatred for Obama has broken my heart.

You shouldn't live a cloistered life and get out among the Americans who just threw Democrats out of office for supporting a Leftist - Socialist fool...

If you believe in what you just wrote -- you are totally without contact with 1/2 of American voters

Edited November 13, 2014 by JDGRUEN

[ricklev]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

No real point I can tell in reading this thread. So depressing. A reasonable and intelligent centrist implementing and attempting to implement nothing but republican policies from 20 years back is vilified as evil personified as a political tactic and half the country buys into it.

I gave up hope for America after George Bush was elected the second time. The insane hatred for Obama has broken my heart.

You shouldn't live a cloistered life and get out among the Americans who just threw Democrats out of office for supporting a Leftist - Socialist fool...

If you believe in what you just wrote -- you are totally without contact with 1/2 of American voters

Point well taken. I should challenge my beliefs. Search for the truth. Ask myself why I believe what I believe and try to answer with the greatest depth and honesty I can muster.

[JDGRUEN]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

No real point I can tell in reading this thread. So depressing. A reasonable and intelligent centrist implementing and attempting to implement nothing but republican policies from 20 years back is vilified as evil personified as a political tactic and half the country buys into it.

I gave up hope for America after George Bush was elected the second time. The insane hatred for Obama has broken my heart.

You shouldn't live a cloistered life and get out among the Americans who just threw Democrats out of office for supporting a Leftist - Socialist fool...

If you believe in what you just wrote -- you are totally without contact with 1/2 of American voters

Point well taken. I should challenge my beliefs. Search for the truth. Ask myself why I believe what I believe and try to answer with the greatest depth and honesty I can muster.

In America I cannot get away from the opposite of what I believe politically - it totally permeates the News and the entertainment media ... 90 percent of mainstream news media that bows and curtsies to ever breath obama takes is opposite of what I believe...

[up-country_sinclair]

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

He is a centrist. His health plan was inspired by Mitt Romney. Need to check my address for my next 90 day address report.

Yes borrowed Romney plan and have the read the very latest revelations by obama's obamacare architect? I just continue shaking my head in amazement ... obama a centrist... it is something out of SNL to believe that. Totally off the charts. This is what the mid term elections were about - all those people who pushed the Democrats out of the Senate and the House and the Governor's offices believe very much as I do ... Leftist socialist - Muslim - as wacko combination as obama is...

While it could certainly be argued that President Obama is a leftist, the other two just prove the point I made in my earlier post.

And about "all those people" you mentioned:

Voter turnout in last week's midterm elections was terrible. How terrible? Just 36.3 percent of eligible voters cast votes — the worst turnout in 72 years, the New York Times reports. Only the 1942 election (33.9 percent) had a lower rate of voter turnout.

http://news.yahoo.com/voter-turnout-2014-midterms-worst-in-72-years-143406756.html

[chuckd]

Yes borrowed Romney plan and have the read the very latest revelations by obama's obamacare architect? I just continue shaking my head in amazement ... obama a centrist... it is something out of SNL to believe that. Totally off the charts. This is what the mid term elections were about - all those people who pushed the Democrats out of the Senate and the House and the Governor's offices believe very much as I do ... Leftist socialist - Muslim - as wacko combination as obama is...

He is a centrist. His health plan was inspired by Mitt Romney. Need to check my address for my next 90 day address report.

Anyone who thinks obama is a centrist president is smoking dope 3 times a day or living on another planet or both.

While it could certainly be argued that President Obama is a leftist, the other two just prove the point I made in my earlier post.

And about "all those people" you mentioned:

Voter turnout in last week's midterm elections was terrible. How terrible? Just 36.3 percent of eligible voters cast votes — the worst turnout in 72 years, the New York Times reports. Only the 1942 election (33.9 percent) had a lower rate of voter turnout.

http://news.yahoo.com/voter-turnout-2014-midterms-worst-in-72-years-143406756.html

I just love all you people seemingly trying to blame the defeat handed the Democratic Party on low voter turnout.

Just one question about that...

Who's fault is it if the Democratic voters were not interested enough or inspired enough to get out and vote?

You can't blame the Republicans if the Democrats didn't have the incentive to vote. Perhaps some new Obama phones would have helped.

This is what Obama suggested in 2013. Some took it to heart. Check out the last sentence in the video.

[Jingthing]

Lowest turnout since 1942 ...

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[chuckd]

The lowest turnout since 1942 has become one that will have a Republican led Senate and House of Representatives sworn in on 4 January 2015, replacing a Democrat Senate leadership that desperately needed replacing.

It isn't all bad.

And the Republican Senate has the nuclear option should they choose to use it. Interesting days ahead.

[up-country_sinclair]

The lowest turnout since 1942 has become one that will have a Republican led Senate and House of Representatives sworn in on 4 January 2015, replacing a Democrat Senate leadership that desperately needed replacing.

It isn't all bad.

And the Republican Senate has the nuclear option should they choose to use it. Interesting days ahead.

No, of course it isn't all bad. What's problematic and annoying is when hyper-partisans attempt to make more out of a midterm election with the lowest turnout in 72 years. It wasn't "a wave", Republicans don't have a mandate and the president wasn't on the ballot. All of the recent two term presidents lost similar amounts of seats in the Senate and House of Representatives in the 2nd midterm election of their presidency. This is a fact, not an opinion or point of view.

Americans seem to prefer a divided government, and there are many examples of it being conducive to legislative progress. I am skeptical, but let's hope that in the next two years we see some meaningful legislation turned in to law.

And back to the thread topic: I hope we can all agree that the president's legacy wasn't "ruined" because of the election results. Due to the presidential veto, the Affordable Care Act will never be repealed by this congress, but they (along with the Supreme Court) might be able to chip away it slightly. For better or worse, President Obama's legacy will remain intact until at least after he leaves office in January 2017. If Republicans are able to win the presidency and hold both chambers of congress in 2016, then the ACA and President Obama's legacy will be in jeopardy.

[Publicus]

Only 4 or 5 times out of 43 has the popular vote differed from the electoral college vote. I think the point is with less than a percent of the popular vote in your favor it is not really much of a mandate to govern which I understand Obama will find out next week with his executive order stuff.

Prez Obama got 5% more votes than Romney received, not 1%. This matters in the US because the candidate for president needs a majority of the electoral college vote of the states, not necessarily a majority of the electorate, although the two votes usually are consistent to one another.

In 2008 Prez Obama won 52.9% of the popular vote which was almost 8% more votes than Sen John McCain managed to scavenge.

The far right wing in the US and elsewhere have a full time machine to produce absolute fiction against Prez Obama 24/7 since election day November 2008. Barack Obama is not perfect and yes, the full time machine of fiction against him does take its toll over time.

So here instead are the election facts of the matter....

Final Tally Shows Obama First Since ’56 to Win 51% Twice

Photographer: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

President Barack Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Dwight Eisenhower accomplished the feat in 1952 and again in 1956... Read More

Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice.

The president nationally won 65.9 million votes -- or 51.1 percent -- against Republican challenger Mitt Romney, who took 60.9 million votes and 47.2 percent of the total cast, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956, and the first Democrat to do so since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four consecutive White House races. Roosevelt received 53.4 percent of the vote -- his lowest -- in his last race in 1944.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-03/final-tally-shows-obama-first-since-56-to-win-51-twice.html

Prez Obama twice did better with his electorate than Prez Reagan managed to do twice with his electorate of the time.

McCain got 44.5% of the vote which is what the Republican party nominee for president will be looking at the day after the election in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, if that much.

Edited by Publicus for Chinese made computer spacing.

Lets see illegal aliens voting in states where there is not voter ID, Dead people voting, deliberate voter fraud of various and sundry methods, paper ballots lost or supplied, voting machines missing in trunks of cars, people who have since been prosecuted for voting multiple times. Invention of the mother of elections...

....and that's not all the Republicans are doing to prevent Democratic party voters and votes. Since early voting was instituted for instance voter participation has steadily increased but Republican controlled states always do everything they can to stop and eliminate early voting.

It is a long standing truism that the greater the participation is of the electorate in an election, the better the Democratic party does. In their elections, respectively, the D FDR got 54%, the D Obama got 53% whereas the R McCain got 44%, the R Goldwater in 1964 came out somewhere in minus territory (!), the R Sen Robert Dole in 1996 got 40.7% and so on and so on.

R's negativity in this election contributed mightily to suppressing the vote by negatively turning off so many voters who decided they had better things to do.

The vote of the majority of the small 38% of voters who participated in this election is the opposite of a mandate so Prez Obama has every right and cause to obstruct the Republican majority in the both houses of the congress. I expect the Republicans to howl all the more which they can go ahead to do as we pivot and move toward the 2016 general election.

[JDGRUEN]

Getting the vote and support of illegal aliens voting illegally, Democrats fighting Voter ID everywhere, dead people voting by proxy I guess, voter fraud at every level from paper ballot votes found in trunks of cars, Democrats going to jail for voter fraud, rigged voting machines that flip to democrat when republican is chosen and dozens of other way to rig the vote could have a little something to do obama's wining margins. But of course Leftist don't know about this because they watch MSNBC and read the NY Times... Blinders on full max.