world

Obama's re-election celebrated around world

74 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

74 Comments
Login to comment

This election was a nail biter....we really dodged the bullet with Romney. He would have been a disaster!

10 ( +16 / -6 )

USA is headed for a major recession with Obama's second term. .......................probably one it will never recover from.......................... . . . . ..

-27 ( +5 / -33 )

Shocking to me was the voter turnout- it was far lower than 2008. President Obama got something like 9 million LESS votes and still won. Gov. Romney got less votes than Sen. McCain. Plus, there are no real changes in the Congress. The Senate remains Democratic, the House remains GOP.

Seems to me like the winners of this election were apathy and the status quo.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Semper, I think you are still in Bush mode, and the American people have spoken LOUD and CLEAR, the majority said lets give OBAMA 4 more years! A chance to clean up the mess made by the 8 years of good old boy politics from Texas on over to DC, but now the 99% have spoken with their votes, no matter how much $$$ ISRAEL tried to use against Mr.Obama and no matter how much Netinyahoo?? That dude wants a WAR with IRAN real bad, but most Americans know that after the mess in Iraq and now trying to get out of Afghanistan, America needs to FOCUS on rebuilding AMERICA, not every cotton picken country that begs for help, and I am sure that if more REPUBLICANS, like Mr.Mitt Romney DO reach out across the aisle and WORK with Mr.Obama, instead of bickering and complaining and spewing NEGATIVE propaganda that the USA is going down, that the sky is falling etc..give me a break! America can be a better country, as Mr.Obama says IF WE WORK TOGETHER, if we do not, we can go down the hellish path of Sudan, Serbia, Syria and all these other countries that are in civil wars. IMHO

3 ( +8 / -4 )

@Mirai Yes, we've avoided a car crash by sending Romney packing but let's see if Obama can now leave a real legacy in places such as Palestine. Obama and Netanyahu may have had a few cross words but he achieved nothing, to his shame, in terms of putting an end to land stealing and settlements. Let's hope now that reelection isn't an issue, we can start seeing some meaningful changes.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

People around the world cheered President Barack Obama’s re-election Wednesday and expressed hope that he will help allay global conflicts and economic woes

Yes, he has done such a good job of these over the last 4 years!

0 ( +4 / -5 )

Shocking to me was the voter turnout- it was far lower than 2008.

That is surprising to me too. Given the fact that every American i knew was so polarized by this election, you would think it would translate into more voters

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The challenge put on the table by yesterday's vote is for both sides to focus on the needs of the people. The right extreme social agenda was clearly rejected. But their fiscal ideas still have appeal to working people as the vote for congress indicated.

So it is time to put the past behind us and work together on both sides of the divide to do what is right for working people. That is where the real hope for our future will be realized or lost.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Several U.S. embassies held mock elections and threw parties as returns came in.

Aren't civil servants supposed to be non-political?

As for parties around the world, I wonder how the villagers who have lost family members to Obama's merciless drone strikes feel about this guy winning again. Perhaps they're hiding their kids in underground caves if fear of losing them to Obama's bombs.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

What is happening is there is a blue America and a red America. The question is how long can they continue to separate from each other? Will there be a time when they will not be able to co exist? Will one side or the other force themselves on the other? What happens when they can no longer compromise?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@NS

Yes, they are. But the fact is that ambassadors are political appointees for the most part, and are beholden to those who appointed them. The professional foreign service personnel who serve under them are probably just protecting their jobs. Having said that, I wonder if there would have been similar celebrations had Romney won....

Somehow, I just don't think so.

I was a big fan of Romney, no mistake. I would have preferred that he were elected. But, that didn't happen. So, I'm willing to give President Obama the chance to make things happen. He won the election fairly and deserves respect for it.

It really reminds me of the Clinton days- he was re-elected but had to deal with a GOP Congress (and Newt Gingrich as Speaker!).

4 ( +4 / -0 )

What happens when they can no longer compromise?

Then it will be just like Japan.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Elbudoi Mixican : No - I never liked BUSH II.............................. He is a war monger ............ and through those wars, he crippled US's economy and brought US into big debt ...................BESIDES, I am NOT American, so I don't have a passion for one side or another ......................However, the debt and unemployment and the weakening of private enterprise in US has intensitified/ increased .............................. If one has kept up with the figures on Wall Street and sees Obama's move away from promoting private enterprise , clearly the economic situation in the uSA will at BEST flatten . . most likely get worse.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Actually, the Iraq/Afghan wars didn'T cripple the economy. In total, they cost about $150 billion per year. However, the yearly deficits have been MUCH higher than that. Even without the two wars, the economy would have still been in the toilet, and the deficits too high.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Why? A king for four years has been elected. Is the world worried about receiving its welfare check from the USA taxpayer? Yes sadly.

-7 ( +1 / -9 )

Nine MILLION voters withdrew their consent and are headee to Galt's Gulch. Lady Liberty has essentially died. She's only being nominally kept alive by machines, leeches still attached.

It's being driven at full speed directly towards the fiscal cliff.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Celebrated around the world by those that don't pay taxes to the US gov't, like the 47% in the US that don't pay taxes.

-6 ( +1 / -8 )

NeverSubmit: Perhaps they're hiding their kids in underground caves if fear of losing them to Obama's bombs.

Then it's a win-win!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Nine MILLION voters withdrew their consent and are headee to Galt's Gulch. Lady Liberty has essentially died. She's only being nominally kept alive by machines, leeches still attached.

Such hyperbole. And here I was hoping that you might, you know, learn something from this. Too much to ask, I guess...

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The liberal medias, Obama base (African American, Latinos, young voters..), and dirty Chicago style of campaign machine have reasons to celebrate Obama's victory. First cheer is for soaring deficit that might climb to $20 trillion in debt, amounting to $200,000.00+ debt burden per American family. Second cheer is for the economy with 7.9% unemployment. The third cheer is for the declining power of American empire (~ Roman Empire!). The list of party would include Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, communist China, Russia, Islamist, and those who wish to see America declines... Solving these problems will be Obama's legacy, for it might not be a good bet; base on his own record.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Especially hilarious in India, I saw a youtube clip, those Indians went SUPER HYPER on Obama, not sure why all those people are celebrating.

One thing though Bush exited in 2008 and left the country in the worst state ever. I mean who wants to walk into office and become President after the Bush era? It's like setting a mansion on fire just before giving the keys to the new owners - Here's your new home :D Lol

And everyone is expecting Obama to clean America's mess in just 4 years and bring everything back to normal.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Vast Right-Wing ConspiratorNov. 08, 2012 - 12:34PM JST

Actually, the Iraq/Afghan wars didn'T cripple the economy. In total, they cost about $150 billion per year. However, the yearly deficits have been MUCH higher than that. Even without the two wars, the economy would have still been in the toilet, and the deficits too high.

VRWC, where did you get that figure of $150?

Remember, we went to two wars with credit cards and we are still paying $32 billion a week for them. This is a debt, not a deficit.

Okay, I ask you this, VRWC, if you have $1 to spend, where do you spend it (you cannot split it for economic ideology argument)? Spending on US domestic capital investment and education for job growth? Or maybe shooting it up in the sky in the desert? This is a basic question of Economics in efficiency spending for you to understand why Bush Economics failed. Please let me know your thoughts and opinion on this. Thanks.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

U.S. elections are NOT REAL 'elections" U.S. democracy is merely the illusion of a choice. But Obama was already choosen to carry out two terms as the "democratic party" president. The 2 parties in America share power. No matter how well they act on camera. It is just an act. Its all a show. The two parties represent two opposing ideologies but in reality they are 1 party and 1 goverment. In the past they actually reversed their ideals.

To sum this up. 8yrs democrat 8yrs Republican is the cycle. its been that way for about 30yrs. But they decided to share power after FDR was elected to 4 terms as president. Hence the 22nd Amendment. which limits Presidential terms but not Congressional terms. Since 1940, there has been exactly 10 Democrat and 10 Republican term cycles since their agreement.

-9 ( +1 / -11 )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

You can count the terms cycles 2 Obama, 2 Bush, 2 Clinton, 1Bush Sr.,.etc since 1940 during FDR. FDR was voted for by the people but was bad for BusinessElites/Congress/Corporations etc.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

" Such hyperbole. And here I was hoping that you might, you know, learn something from this. Too much to ask, I guess..."

Voter participation fell dramatically. Pray tell why, oh wise one.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Hey, that Nate Silver whizz kid was right on with his prediction of Obama's win!

I wonder what his prediction is of how much bigger the U.S. government's debt will be after 4 more years of Obama...

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Former U.S. president George W. Bush accidentally voted for Barack Obama today at a polling place near his Crawford, TX home.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Though Iranian media have long said the country saw little difference between Obama and Romney on tensions over Tehran's nuclear program, that did not stop the semiofficial Fars news agency for rolling out the vivid headline, "Republican’s elephant crushed by Democrat’s donkey."

Glad to see that they haven't completely lost their sense of humor there in Iran!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Election perspective from a Prague journalist

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

Let me add that this 52% mooch mob that the Dems have created is not reversable without violent austerity. Look at Greece for reference.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Bravo, johnnybravo, well said!

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.

1) Mark Zandi (former economic adviser to John McCain, of all people) reckons that Obama's policies have "created or saved" 2.7 million jobs and added 3.4 per cent to the American GDP.

2) The US economy has been growing for the last thirteen quarters.

3) Obama's bailout saved both Chrysler and General Motors. ("Let Detroit go bankrupt" said Romney).

If those are the actions of a "mere foo"l (remember when he entered the White House the US was losing 750,000 jobs a month), then let's have more fools in politics

8 ( +9 / -1 )

There are two reasons for the fall in number of votes cast. Young, busy people did not turn out in large numbers for this election. The northeastern, highly populated areas were just hit by a terrible storm.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Though Iranian media have long said the country saw little difference between Obama and Romney on tensions over Tehran's nuclear program, that did not stop the semiofficial Fars news agency for rolling out the vivid headline, "Republican’s elephant crushed by Democrat’s donkey."

Fars News Agency's headline does not seem to be mutually exclusive with seeing no difference between Obama and Romney, so why would it stop them from running it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

JT's rabid right will learn in a few years that their prognostications of Obama's second term are no more accurate than their prediction that Romney would win. Still, a look into this mindset is fascinating, so thanks are in order.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Neversubmit:

"Perhaps they're hiding their kids in underground caves if fear of losing them to Obama's bombs."

This from someone who's main purpose in life is defending Syria's Bashir al Assad .....

Obama's drone strikes may not be perfect but it's a damned sight more humane and effective than the Bush Doctrine.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

JohnnyBravo:

It will take time and full exposure to world style socialism before people begin to get the point.

gonna be a rough ride

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

"It will take time and full exposure to world style socialism before people begin to get the point."

And a Trabant in every American garage neh?

Heh, you guys sound like Flat-earthers when you claim Obama is a socialist.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

"People around the world cheered President Barack Obama’s re-election Wednesday and expressed hope that he will help allay global conflicts and economic woes"

Replace "re-election" with "election" and it sounds like 2008. I just hope that if in eight years things are still bad, that the Democrats will say they need 12 years to clean up Bush's mess. And then 16...

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

If I were the Obamas I'd get Michelle to run for Pres in 2016, then they could just stay in the White House. She'd probably win too. Then after that one of the daughters.

I dislike their politics, but they really are a classy photogenic family, and Michelle is a great speaker.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

yasukuni

I'll refrain from snark, but I will simply agree to disagree. And yes, I do think he's Socialist leaning, if not full on.

So what else do you have?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Yes, because as everyone knows, fixing things is sooo much easier than breaking them.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

This article makes a lot of sense. When you consider it, those who hate America, Dictators and their allies, understandably rejoice at getting another 4 years of Obamas pathetic 'lead from behind' strategy.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Putin must be laughing his ass off.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

those who hate America, Dictators and their allies, understandably rejoice at getting another 4 years of Obamas pathetic 'lead from behind' strategy.

You shouldn't describe David Cameron that way.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Or, Putin must be looking foward to working with President Obama on reducing nuclear stockpiles ( especially the U.S.'s ) and CO2 emissions.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I am a political Independent. To me, the election choice revolved primarily about voting for a wealth creator (Gov Romney) or a wealth redistributor (Pres Obama). I feel as if President Obama views the role of government as Santa Claus, where the citizens come to the tree to receive their presents. Nothing is free; if the government is Santa Claus, then hardworking, middle-class Americans like me are the elves.

I hope that I am wrong about my Santa Claus analogy, for the crippling debt accumulated over the years is not just an economic issue, but by extension a national security issue. No wonder Putin and Chavez celebrate President Obama's re-election.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

spahn - I'm afraid your Santa Claus analogy is not wrong.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Mirai

This election was a nail biter.

Not really. You need 270 Electoral Votes to win. WI and PN were never battle ground states. Meaning, the bottom for the electoral college for Dems is 262. With either of the following two, we won:. NH, CO, NV, IA.

With any of OH, VI, or FL, we won.

When you include Obama led all year by a small but steady lead in OH, if you were paying attention to the date, this election was not a nail biter. It was not a foregone conclusion, but not close at all. Obama was the favorite, and by the last two weeks, the strong favorite.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I wrote the following the day before the election, on the coming Civil War in the GOP:

When Obama wins and If Obama takes Virginia, which he is strongly favored to do, the Repubs will freak out. Virginia used to be solidly Republican in Presidential elections, the GOP's base is the South, and if Virginia goes Dem, the future looks grim for Republican electoral college prospects. A two-time Obama victory in Virginia marks a trend, and new direction, in both the electoral college math, And the national political landscape as a whole.

Regardless, when Obama wins, a civil war will break out in the Republican Party pitting the old-gaurd like McConnel and the rest of the establishment Republicans, against the Bagger Republicans base of the Party. The Bagger Republicans, for all their hoopla, seem to believe to hell with winning, purity comes first. The pros and the establishment will be faces with the unhappy realization that boatloads of money can't buy elections when you got the Lugars of the party being chased out by yahoo's who think rape is gift from god, horsetrading is treason, and facts can be tortured to confess to anything.

Basically, establishment Republicans will recongize to win elections, you need a good candidate. The tea party types and FOX, on the other hand, are going to be saying things like:

"Romney was not a real conservative, but he was the only one left standing after the others crashed and burned. The liberal media (= NYT) were in the tank for Obama and refused talk about Libya all day and night. The pollsters conspired to have skewed polls that discouraged all the faint-hearted Republicans from voting. It's all the fault of Hurricane Sandy because it cost Romney three days of campaigning. Well, its the fault of Sandy plus that traitor Chris Christie, who is only looking out for his own fat ass. The voters are too stupid to realize that when Obamacare kicks in, America will instantly become Cuba."

Yep, purity before winning.

The real reason why Obama won is because:

Seventy percent of incumbent Presidents since WWII were reelected. The power of incumbency is enormous. If Obama wins Ohio, his decision to bail out GM and Chrysler may have given him a second term. Obama is a guy you could drink a beer with. Romney is aloof and looks like the guy who fired you. Not having to fight a primary, Obama spent the year on his ground game and built a huge network of field offices The decision not to deport young Latinos, combined with the GOP hostility to immigrants, handed him the Latino vote. His decision to spend a fortune in the Spring and Summer to define Romney as a heartless plutocrat worked Romney was a deeply flawed candidate with a tin ear for politics. A better candidate could have won Romney's campaign was poorly run, unfocused, disorganized, and without clear lines of authority Despite Romney's CEO experience, Stuart Stevens actually ran the campaign and made blunder after blunder Romney ran to the right of Rick Perry, saying he wasn't tough enough on illegal immigrants. That blew the Latino vote. The GOP's trivializing rape and opposing abortion and contraception was not a winner with women Romney's decision not to fight in the Summer but to hoard his pennies for a Fall offensive was foolish When the media asked about his taxes, plans and vision, Romney refused and then complained about the resulting coverage.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

And Mirai

Here is why we won in a nutshell:

CNN exit polls show: More voters in the swing states of Florida, New Hampshire, Ohio and Virginia blame George W. Bush than Obama for the state of the U.S. economy. Florida, Ohio and Virginia were still too close to call late Tuesday night.And exit polling suggests that in the critical battleground state of Ohio, 59% of voters polled approve of the federal government's aid to U.S. automakers while 36% disapprove.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

And this from WaPo

Republican leaders awoke Wednesday to witness their grim future. Without a makeover, a party that skews toward older, white and male voters faces political peril in an increasingly diverse and complex America. President Obama’s decisive victory over Mitt Romney served as a clinic in 21st-century politics, reflecting expanded power for black and Hispanic voters, dominance among women, a larger share of young voters and even a rise in support among Asians.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think the Republicans need to re-brand themselves with some new faces. They don't have a platform that resonates enough with voters in 2012. There were too many articles about abortion, too much talk about God, and they really need to bury then mantra of "going back." You can't have a party of older white guys selling the notion of returning to the glory days when the other side has the numbers with minorities and single women. Their candidate needs to survive the nomination process without damaging his chances for the national race which means they need to shift more towards the center. There is too much press time for the Tea Party and people like Donald Trump just reinforced the image of angry white men.

Personally, I think we had a minority President at a time of increasing debt and uncertainty and the Republicans simply freaked. I don't think they like the new face of America and they are countering it with hyperbole and extremism.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

yasukuniNov. 08, 2012 - 09:02PM JST

I dislike their politics, but they really are a classy photogenic family, and Michelle is a great speaker.

Yasukuni, DISLIKE? Your blog name suggests you are a non American, therefore I have a burning desire to know your reason whey you DISLIKE Obama. Please be specific and educate us. Thanks.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I am a political Independent. To me, the election choice revolved primarily about voting for a wealth creator (Gov Romney) or a wealth redistributor (Pres Obama).

Well, since conservatives often claim that the government can't create wealth, having a "wealth creator" at the helm really doesn't make a lot of sense. Yes, I've heard the argument that it's good to have someone near the top who knows what "wealth creation" is. However, it also can be argued that, through loading acquired companies down with mountains of debt, Romney and Bain Capital ended up destroying a lot of wealth too, so who knows what the final score is on that account?

I view it more like this: The American economy is like a wealth-pump that occasionally needs to be primed. Two people are vying to get their hands on the pump handle. The guy with the R on his shirt is looking around and pointing out all the folks who have reservoirs of water -- collected when the pump was working -- and claiming that, by pumping harder, water will eventually come out again. (He doesn't believe in taking water from others to prime the pump. He actually doesn't know the science of how pump-priming works and therefore does not believe in it. He believes that all the benefits come from physically working the pump-handle -- which is true enough for a working pump.)

The guy with the D on his shirt simply wants to take a bucket of water from those who have it to prime the pump and get it going. Some people call that "wealth distribution" -- even though a healthy economy makes it possible for the people who gave up their water for priming to get even more back in return.

Here is the other major difference: The guy who you are calling a "wealth-creator" -- if you've ever dealt with those types -- have a very strict and limited time horizon for expecting a return on an "investment." They manage their businesses quarter by quarter, and when things are not producing fast enough, they end up killing things off. Ultimately, they have no inherent faith in or love for anything. (Contrast that to business tycoons of the past -- like Henry Ford or Romney's father George -- guys who loved everything about building cars and weren't afraid to get down on a line and get their hands dirty.)

Nothing is free; if the government is Santa Claus, then hardworking, middle-class Americans like me are the elves.

It does matter how you view people, and their potential to use their talents to produce things of value. (And those things aren't all necessarily material, consumer things.) All of society loses when a large percentage of people don't have the opportunity. Children growing up in an environment of extreme poverty and ignorance certainly don't have it in the same way that children growing up in affluence do.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

yabits

I look at it empiracally:

Republican free market fundamentalism does not work.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

So, I posted the following, and got two thumbs down for it:

When you include Obama led all year by a small but steady lead in OH, if you were paying attention to the date, this election was not a nail biter. It was not a foregone conclusion, but not close at all. Obama was the favorite, and by the last two weeks, the strong favorite.

I welcome the thumbs down. And here's why:

'Cause I know it is true. I know it was not a nail-biter. I know it was not a foregone conclusion, but it was not close at all because Obama led in OH all year. The only people who didn't recognize the implications of this fact were either unaware of it in the first place, illinoformed or willfully ignoring it. Those who willfully ignored it did so because they are part of the right wing bubble. The bubble that makes them think Obama is a socialist, blab bla bla.

And the amazing thing about that bubble is they believe their own bs. I know it is hard for some here to understand this simple fact. But it is the truth. Even the most seemingly rational partisan Republican kind of believes in his hears that Obama really was born in Kenya. They certaily believed Romney had more than a chance. They actually believed the race was a 'toss-up."

It was not. Not on election day it wasnt. Not even before Sandy hit. The data shows "Mittmentrum" stalled after Biden mopped the floor with the Kid.

Presuming the thumbs down I got came from the partisan Republicans here, I welcome their continued rejection of reality. It means they still believe their own nonsense.

But, as I have said many times before, America ain't buying what they are selling. Americans used to, But then Bush happened.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Bleah, I thought the world would care less about our leaders that US citizens choose to put in office. Yes the US has a lot of influence (apparantly good enough to make citizens of other countries be happy about which candidate we get to choose from), but instead they should focus on what they need to improve/fix in their own governments.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Ran across this on one of the blogs that I follow:

Couldn't sum up this election and the consequences of it better than this,

As countless amounts of current workers in this economy are going to find out when they receive pink slips in the next few months. Whether the company be small or large, the decision to gear up for the new American expansion or hunker down in cost-cutting survival mode for at least another four years is being made in boardrooms and offices all over the country.

A majority of voters decided on Tuesday they do not perceive the coming debt crisis and our short and long term economic health to be as big a concern as whether gays can marry, whether abortion on demand is in jeopardy, whether condoms should be free (and whether male porn stars should be forced to wear them), and whether pot should be legalized. But business owners, being the successfully-demonized, greedy capitalists they are, their election season begins now.

And their vote is really the one that people are going to feel in the months ahead.

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/11/08/elections-have-consequences/

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

When you consider it, those who hate America, Dictators and their allies, understandably rejoice at getting another 4 years of Obamas pathetic 'lead from behind' strategy.

Interesting, interesting...Hmm...those who "hate" America...

Do you wonder why they hate America? Do you suppose it was because of something America did before Obama became president?

Or do they just hate America "because"? Do they hate America simply as an inherent part of their culture? If we assume that they are just simple hatemongers, who hate other countries for no particular reason other than to just hate them for the heck of it, then sure, it makes sense to pretend that them liking Obama means Obama makes the country weak.

Alternatively, If we assume these people have a reason (justified or otherwise) to "hate" America (in other words, if we assume they are, y'know, human), then we have another option on the table: Maybe they like Obama because he is different than the previous one that caused them to hate America.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

To me, the election choice revolved primarily about voting for a wealth creator (Gov Romney) or a wealth redistributor (Pres Obama). I feel as if President Obama views the role of government as Santa Claus, where the citizens come to the tree to receive their presents. Nothing is free; if the government is Santa Claus, then hardworking, middle-class Americans like me are the elves.

I do see some problems with this analogy. Santa Claus is not a present distributor. Santa is a present generator. He generates presents by taking advantage of low cost labor, and then giving the presents away for free to groups who are not part of the original creators.

You are quite correct that nothing is free. Particularly when it comes to the economy. Money has to come from somewhere, and ideally, it has to flow somewhere as well, or the economy becomes stagnant. Money doesn't just disappear, and new money does not have to be generated to fill the gap. The money gets hoarded, and when too many people have the money, the temptation to "generate wealth" becomes very high. But this is a failing strategy; the system is already in place that leads to the money being hoarded, and "generating" (i.e. making it up from thin air) is only going to lead to that imaginary money being hoarded as well. Trickle-down theory does not work for the very simple reason that every single business out there does as much as it can to tighten down every place where money might leak out from. The flow of money trickling down gets exponentially smaller and smaller at every level.

So, no, mythical "wealth generators" do not exist. What is needed is not new money; What is needed is for the original money to be taken out of the dam and sent back into the field. There is no way around it: Giving the market free rein to do what it will does not work, and it does not work for the very simple reason that humans are wealth hoarders. Don't forget that the economy is a human construct, and we do not have an evolutionary habit that goes beyond storing food for the winter.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Bleah, I thought the world would care less about our leaders that US citizens choose to put in office. Yes the US has a lot of influence (apparantly good enough to make citizens of other countries be happy about which candidate we get to choose from), but instead they should focus on what they need to improve/fix in their own governments.

It doesn't work that way anymore. The few countries who are global players at this point are starting to realize it. China...the way most people are looking at China today is kind of the way most countries not too long ago (and some still do) used to look at the US.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

What is needed is for the original money to be taken out of the dam and sent back into the field. There is no way around it:

And how do you propose to that? By force? Assigning a Government technocrat to be in charge of confiscation for wealth redistribution as they see fit?

Good thing America has the second admendment if that ever becomes the case.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Giving the market free rein to do what it will does not work, and it does not work for the very simple reason that humans are wealth hoarders.

I also need to address this. If that was actually the case the New York Stock Market and Las Vegas could never exist.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

And how do you propose to that?

Well, there are several interesting proposals--

By force?

Huh? No, no one has suggested for--

Assigning a Government technocrat to be in charge of confiscation for wealth redistribution as they see fit?

Ahh...are you holding a discussion with yourself?

Good thing America has the second admendment if that ever becomes the case.

I am glad you agree with you. As for the rest of us, since force was never suggested, implying the use of firearms as a counter-argument is as much a non-issue as it is silly.

I also need to address this. If that was actually the case the New York Stock Market and Las Vegas could never exist.

How exactly are you using these examples as a defense?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, there are several interesting proposals

Of which none that you haven't even named yet.

So how do actually propose to get this money that other folks have earned and hoarded for themselves back into the economy? I suppose we can looking underneath there mattresses to see if they've stashed some of the loot there to start with.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Of which none that you haven't even named yet.

Yeah, you don't seem to willing to discuss. That, and it's off-topic, as I have been so regularly reminded.

So how do actually propose to get this money that other folks have earned and hoarded for themselves back into the economy?

What, my personal plan, if I was King of the World? Mine would be along the lines of profit caps, but it gets way to complicated to discuss on a comment board.

I suppose we can looking underneath there mattresses to see if they've stashed some of the loot there to start with.

Yep, there's that feeling again, the one about you not sincerely looking to discuss...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are two reasons for the fall in number of votes cast. Young, busy people did not turn out in large numbers for this election.

The northeastern, highly populated areas were just hit by a terrible storm.

@peggydavis

You are wrong on both counts. Here's why. There was a very high voter turn out among the younger demographics (especially in the swing states) and this is precisely why Obama won. The 18 to 30 yr old bracket were NOT on Romney's side. About 70%+ of them voted for Obama as well as the minorities, women, and the LGBT community, The only demographic that really Romney had any kind of real advantage with was the white male and over 60 population (or the Fox News audience -and I am not kidding on this).

Secondly, the storm had NO affect on this election. If you look at the polls (the accurate polls -not the outliers like Gallup and Rassmussen), they showed that Obama was ahead by an average of 2-3% before the storm. The days after the storm, polls showed that Obama still had a 2-3% advantage. And I think we can all agree now that the polls (except the above mentioned outliers) were pretty damn accurate (ESPECIALLY Nate Silver -he was 100% spot on with everything. Go see what he was saying before and after the storm) Even the Fox News's, the Dick Morris's, and the Karl Rove's of the world are shamefully admitting how blatantly WRONG their predictions were.

This election should serve as wake up call for all conservatives who live in the Fox News bubble. They are simply WRONG and do not reflect the ideas and values of the majority. And as long as you keep living in that bubble, and believing in conservative propaganda, you will lose and keep losing until you completely destroy yourselves. You can have your religion, you can hate minorities and gays, you can oppose contraception all day long...that's YOUR prerogative, but you don't get to impose those restrictive values on people who don't share your value system.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Back on topic please. Please focus your comments on the global reaction.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mine would be along the lines of profit caps, but it gets way to complicated to discuss on a comment board.

Profit caps that I take it would be set by Government technocrats and would have to some sort of compliance mechanism to enforce. Usually with a threat of jail time or severe financial penalties to the offender that would willfully attempt to go over the set caps. I would also take it that the caps would have to be periodically reviewed as technology and market demands change. I think this review would come be something like a five year plan that non-elected technocrats can provide their academic expertise to determine if say toothpaste should remain with a 2 percent profit cap or rise to three percent since cavities seemed to have increased since the two percent cap went into effect 5 years ago.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Profit caps that I take it would be set by Government technocrats and would have to some sort of compliance mechanism to enforce.

Why would a technocrat be in charge of a financial department?

Usually with a threat of jail time or severe financial penalties to the offender that would willfully attempt to go over the set caps.

Nope. Again, the only one who is talking about force here is you.

I would also take it that the caps would have to be periodically reviewed as technology and market demands change.

Yep. Not inconceivable the our entire human concept of economy might well undergo a radical change in the coming century. Would be rather foolish to try to sink something into stone right now.

I think this review would come be something like a five year plan that non-elected technocrats can provide their academic expertise to determine if say toothpaste should remain with a 2 percent profit cap or rise to three percent since cavities seemed to have increased since the two percent cap went into effect 5 years ago.

Hmm...no, that's a little too involved. The government is not meant to run the business. The governments place is to moderate the way businesses run themselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nope. Again, the only one who is talking about force here is you.

How are you going to enforce this profit cap on a business then? I see no other way then some sort of force or penalty involved if the cap is exceeded. Nobody is going to volunteer cut themselves short of any profit gains that they've earned through hard work and the sweat of their brow if it had exceeded some cap set by whatever panel you have in mind to set it out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Diminishing returns.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Though Iranian media have long said the country saw little difference between Obama and Romney

The same thing for Russia - Obama or Romney - US ARMY coming to Russians borders....

So the result is not so intresting for our country...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

was to be expected ... i dont think anyone in the world was going for romney xept half the americans. Scary mofo at the head of such a huge army. He shoulda backed down a little with the threats to foreign places me thinks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites