US Presidential Election
- Thread starter Colossus
- Start date
Youngster Joey
Strata Poster
I will update this later however I don't really want to post this until everything is resolved. I will say that the youth vote is important again
Youngster Joey
Strata Poster
Over here the talk is Obama won but the Rominee has yet to concede.
Intricks
Strata Poster
Obama won, Romney is being whiney, we got out first openly lesbian Senate lady from wisconsin, washington and colorado legalized pot, maryland/maine/washington legalized same sex marriage.
My facebook feed is now nothing but whines from romney voters, gloats from obama voters and sarcasm from those who wanted johnson
My facebook feed is now nothing but whines from romney voters, gloats from obama voters and sarcasm from those who wanted johnson
I don't care about the president, I was over that after Ron Paul lost and the disaster that was his campaign came to light, but was glad to see a couple congress and other liberty candidates win and also marijuana legalization in Colorado and Washington.
Was hoping Gary Johnson could get the 5% he needed, but 1% isn't too bad.
I atleast hope 4 more years of Obama will keep bringing more "conservatives" to a more libertarian way of thinking.
Was hoping Gary Johnson could get the 5% he needed, but 1% isn't too bad.
I atleast hope 4 more years of Obama will keep bringing more "conservatives" to a more libertarian way of thinking.
SaiyanHajime
CF Legend
America is catching up to that moral contemporary way of thinking the rest of the western world has.
Thanks for making the right choice, America. I can't imagine how awkward it would have been if you had chosen to go backwards.
Thanks for making the right choice, America. I can't imagine how awkward it would have been if you had chosen to go backwards.
tomahawk
Strata Poster
It really won't be known for a few days/weeks who won the popular vote. CBS is reporting that Romney won the popular vote so I am sure MSNBC and CNN will report the opposite and Fox will say it is all rigged.
While some of you may see it as the right step, I don't. Higher taxes, unemployment rate still high, especially when you account the people who are working jobs under their pay grade, like myself, and just the constant blaming of Bush. Well, he can't do it anymore. He was in last term, that is all he did, and I'm sure he will continue to do it more. Nothing is going to get better, pot is getting legalized so all the stoners are happy.
Opinions are opinions and I know I won't change anyone's, and nobody will change mine.
While some of you may see it as the right step, I don't. Higher taxes, unemployment rate still high, especially when you account the people who are working jobs under their pay grade, like myself, and just the constant blaming of Bush. Well, he can't do it anymore. He was in last term, that is all he did, and I'm sure he will continue to do it more. Nothing is going to get better, pot is getting legalized so all the stoners are happy.
Opinions are opinions and I know I won't change anyone's, and nobody will change mine.
One of the biggest problems with both the US and UK political system is timescales. The time required to make changes in policy work are beyond the scope of a single term in office.
So as the party in charge, you have to try and make changes, or do things, that have an immediate effect - you're looking at re-election over what's good for the country. If you balls it up, who cares? The next party in will take the blame and have to clean up your mess. Get it right and make a big impact and you get in again.
The biggest issue though is that people in power never actually have any idea what life is like in the daily life of most people. They're so detached it's unreal. How much of the campaign funds for the US election could have been used to fund schools? Give grants to local businesses to help them compete and stay afloat?
It's all down to the rich supporting people who will help to make them richer, it's how politics works. The end result is always the same. The rich ensure they keep their money, the poor are left scrabbling for food and the middle earners take the brunt of it by paying the most to keep the economy running.
I always look at what a party/leader is offering and make an informed choice. While my own ideals tend to lean certain ways politically, I'm not averse to voting for somebody I normally wouldn't vote for if I think they will do some good.
The question has always got to be - are you voting one way because you truly believe they can make a difference, or because "it's always the way I vote, and always the way my family has voted"?
Romney came across as a small minded bigot. He'd have done very well as president, and it's likely he would have been very popular for the way the outspoken Americans seem to think. However, Americas quieter voice is much too liberal for somebody like Romney to get in, and they're the people voting.
Could he have made the country richer and stronger with his policies? Possibly, we'll never know. However, his attitudes towards other human beings was appalling, and you just can't get away with that. The world has moved on and away from that attitude and America has too (that quiet majority) and it's that which has lost him the election. People just can't risk having somebody with such strong "anti" ideals running the country.
BTW, pot is a great painkiller, side effects are low compared to opiates and it's well worth considering if you have a bad back
So as the party in charge, you have to try and make changes, or do things, that have an immediate effect - you're looking at re-election over what's good for the country. If you balls it up, who cares? The next party in will take the blame and have to clean up your mess. Get it right and make a big impact and you get in again.
The biggest issue though is that people in power never actually have any idea what life is like in the daily life of most people. They're so detached it's unreal. How much of the campaign funds for the US election could have been used to fund schools? Give grants to local businesses to help them compete and stay afloat?
It's all down to the rich supporting people who will help to make them richer, it's how politics works. The end result is always the same. The rich ensure they keep their money, the poor are left scrabbling for food and the middle earners take the brunt of it by paying the most to keep the economy running.
I always look at what a party/leader is offering and make an informed choice. While my own ideals tend to lean certain ways politically, I'm not averse to voting for somebody I normally wouldn't vote for if I think they will do some good.
The question has always got to be - are you voting one way because you truly believe they can make a difference, or because "it's always the way I vote, and always the way my family has voted"?
Romney came across as a small minded bigot. He'd have done very well as president, and it's likely he would have been very popular for the way the outspoken Americans seem to think. However, Americas quieter voice is much too liberal for somebody like Romney to get in, and they're the people voting.
Could he have made the country richer and stronger with his policies? Possibly, we'll never know. However, his attitudes towards other human beings was appalling, and you just can't get away with that. The world has moved on and away from that attitude and America has too (that quiet majority) and it's that which has lost him the election. People just can't risk having somebody with such strong "anti" ideals running the country.
BTW, pot is a great painkiller, side effects are low compared to opiates and it's well worth considering if you have a bad back
madhjsp
Giga Poster
The Republicans have got to amend or abandon some parts of their platform, or they won't be winning any elections for a very long time. Their voting base depends too heavily on the religious right, which is quickly becoming a group with less and less clout. Their social policies are the ones in need of the biggest adjustment; they must become more moderate on issues such as abortion or marriage equality, for instance. Whether they like it or not, the social landscape has been and will continue to shift towards a favorable view of those issues, and they need to react accordingly or the Democrats will continue to chip away at their voters. Adapt or die, so to speak.
They can still remain a relevant and powerful party if they work to fix that problem. Until they do, they'll lose the support of mostly politically moderate voters who might otherwise be inclined to choose them for other reasons, such as their economic or foreign policies.
They can still remain a relevant and powerful party if they work to fix that problem. Until they do, they'll lose the support of mostly politically moderate voters who might otherwise be inclined to choose them for other reasons, such as their economic or foreign policies.
bmac
Giga Poster
Intricks said:
According to this Obama has the popular vote now.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/electio ... n-results/
Snoo
The Legend
Spot on both Danny and Phil.. I live in a house with Republicans and some of their feelings towards other human beings make me sick. It's quite sad tbh. They catered to this and catered to that and it lead to them not even close to winning because they missed the social needle of the country.
As you can tell by the above link.. Obama won the places where 'moving foward', to borrow an Obama slogan, is what's happening while those places that prefer backwards ideas compared to how modern man views the world, went Romney.. and he didn't just win in some of those states.. he DESTROYED.
As you can tell by the above link.. Obama won the places where 'moving foward', to borrow an Obama slogan, is what's happening while those places that prefer backwards ideas compared to how modern man views the world, went Romney.. and he didn't just win in some of those states.. he DESTROYED.
Snoo said:
Are you looking at a different link to me??? You're really not giving credit to just how close it actually was. Apart from Washington, it's pretty much tit for tat on the "big swings". Where Obama gets say Hawaii on 71%, Romney picks up a Utah with 73%. In reality, Obama just won more of the 50(ish)% to 40odd% States. I think that page shows us that it was actually pretty close...
Snoo said:
I think it speaks volumes when you see how the rest of the world reacted. My internet feeds (being mostly UK based) were just full of people being so relieved that Romney didn't get in. I know he doesn't care about the rest of the world, and the US should run the country the way they think, but it's got to be a PR disaster of all proportions if you're internationally hated.
Then again, so was GWB and he got a second term (which I think the world is still reeling from :lol: ).