Obama Wins 2012 elections, Implications for India and the World

devil510

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
78
Likes
13
Re: What Obama's Victory Means for India

thye are using us against china moreover they are making lee way for rothchilds and rockefellars the whole thing about U.S. pushing india to increase FDI is rockefellars and rothchilds idea so that they can make more money(profit) out of india U.S. itself does not have much money to put in india.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
I believe american is one for all, including poor, differant races, differant countries, rich and poor, religions, smart and stupid.
I believed America was more for people who dont work and for the richest elite, who control the govt (both directly and indirectly) :hmm:

And this election proves me right...
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
I Live In Indiana and we went with the other guy. Obama in a baby killer and left wing extremist like Hitler. No one likes him it just democrats vote for democrats even if the candidate is the devil himself. Four more years like the last four, I can't wait.
Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here is something you might be interested in ;)

Comparison with Hitler is usually done by people without any valid points.
 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Apparantly 96% blacks thoughout usa voted for obama.

That puts even Indian "vote-banks" to shame :rofl:
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
Now coming back to the subject on hand, Obama has stressed on the importance of taxing the rich and funnelling that wealth to "the people". We all know who these people are. People who took loans recklessly. The same people who lost their homes, not unjustly or by force mind you, but through established law and financial practices. So in comes their saviour and he declares that these people should not suffer at all for their misdeeds. Let those who took risks and bet on their investing skills suffer alone. What kind of policy is this? At best both will have to suffer equally. But taxing the rich merely because they were enterprising enough to stay afloat in a sinking economy is grossly immoral and unethical.
You are wrong. What you said is exactly what is fair, moral and ethical according to Libtards. Heard of the "fairshare"??? ;)
 

devil510

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
78
Likes
13
the burden of tax is always shared unequally in term of economics it is equal because if you tax the rich they will raise the prices in market in the end you will end up paying that tax you should take atleast couple of economics class people before you engage in who should be taxed and how much they should be taxed taxing is not easy thing to figure out
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
you should take atleast couple of economics class people before you engage in who should be taxed and how much they should be taxed taxing is not easy thing to figure out
And to whom is this message intended for?

the burden of tax is always shared unequally in term of economics it is equal because if you tax the rich they will raise the prices in market in the end you will end up paying that tax
Excellent point. May be few more middle class people will think now before shouting "Tax the Rich "


Anyway, did anyone notice that the biggest losers in any socialist regime is the middle class(Lets face it, rich are not going to be hurt bad because they are RICH and poor well you know get free loads from the socialist govn.) and still you can see many middle class people shout on top of their voice for more taxes and more spending?

It will be interesting to see how things move on from here in USA:devious:
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Obama cries as he thanks campaign staff
By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 11/8/12
Politico


President Obama got emotional Wednesday as he thanked his staff at campaign headquarters in Chicago.

"I'm just looking around the room and I'm thinking wherever you guys end up ... you're just gonna do great things," Obama told his mostly young campaign staff in a video released by the campaign on Thursday night.

"And that's why even before last night's results, I felt that the work that I had done in running for office had come full circle," he said, his voice breaking up. "Because what you guys have done means that the work that I am doing is important."

"And I'm really proud of that. I'm really proud of all of you," he said, a tear rolling down his right cheek. As he wiped it away, the crowd of hundreds broke into applause. Obama also choked up on Monday night as he spoke at his final campaign rally in Iowa.

Obama recalled his time as a 20-something working as a community organizer in Chicago and "didn't know at all what I was doing." His staff, he said, is "so much better than I was."

"The most important thing you need to know is that your journey is just beginning, you're just starting," he said. "And whatever good we do over the next four years will pale in comparison to what you guys end up accomplishing for years and years to come. And that's been my source of hope."

"That's why, over the last four years, when people ask me about, 'how do you put up with this or that or the frustrations of Washington?' I just think about you," he continued. "And that's the source of my hope, that's the source of my strength and my insipration. And I know that you guys won't disappoint me because I've already seen who you guys are. And you all are just remarkable people and you've lifted me up each and every step of the way."


Obama cries as he thanks campaign staff - POLITICO.com


A truly genuine guy. I'm still in awe at what he has accomplished... the leader of the most powerful country on earth. He even stayed with his stepfather in Indonesia for sometime (not the fairytale life that some American rich boys had).
 
Last edited:

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
@The Messiah

I confess to listening to Glenn Beck. He is a screamer. And a shill for questionable enterprises.

As I have said elsewhere, Mark Levin is my guru.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

devil510

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
78
Likes
13
And to whom is this message intended for?



Excellent point. May be few more middle class people will think now before shouting "Tax the Rich "


Anyway, did anyone notice that the biggest losers in any socialist regime is the middle class(Lets face it, rich are not going to be hurt bad because they are RICH and poor well you know get free loads from the socialist govn.) and still you can see many middle class people shout on top of their voice for more taxes and more spending?

It will be interesting to see how things move on from here in USA:devious:
for everybody who is talking about taxing
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Excellent point. May be few more middle class people will think now before shouting "Tax the Rich "
Please read this enlightening excerpts from an interview with Warren Buffet...

CNBC Transcript Part 2: Warren Buffett on Taxing the Rich - US Business News - CNBC
CNBC Transcript Part 3: Warren Buffett Defends His 'Tax the Rich' Call - US Business News - CNBC
CNBC Transcript Part 4: Warren Buffett on the 'Buffett Rule' - US Business News - CNBC


And this one from an American Congress non-partisan body...


Tax hike for wealthy Americans won't kill growth: CBO | Reuters


BTW, there's nothing socialist about taxing the rich. American taxes for their richest used to be higher in the 50s, 60s and 70s...

ANDREW: I don't want to go there. Let's get back to Warren Buffett and Becky, who's in Omaha this mooning. I got a question if you'd indulge me, Warren. I've been doing a little bit of research while you've been talking. Now just about the tax rate, which you've talked about the tax rate — higher tax rate in the '50s and '60s being 52 percent, but the effective tax rate during that period on the .01 percent, and there's a study — I'll send it to you — says the effective tax rate on a .01 percent back then was actually 71.4 percent in the 1960s and 74.6 percent in the 1970s. And my question is, would those rates fly today and what would the impact on the economy be. And I ask that in the context that in the '50s and '60s some people would argue — and we had a number of people emailing already — suggesting that the wind was at our backs, if you will when you think about the economy during that period.

CNBC Transcript Part 4: Warren Buffett on the 'Buffett Rule' - US Business News - CNBC
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Why Obama Won

It's not the economy, stupid: Barack Obama has won a closely contested culture war in the presidential election

It's not the eco-nomy, stupid! That is the biggest takeaway from the recent presidential election in America.

If anything, it was really about identity. As Barack Obama was not of the right colour, his opponents felt that his elevation in 2008 was because they had not stressed identity enough. They would have dearly liked to peel his skin off, failing which they went on a tirade against his supposed "un-American" birth and breeding.

The Tea Party was the first to go live on this campaign. Officially, it had only guests and no host, but there were enough Republicans and corporates that supported and financed it. In just 30 days after Obama became president in 2008, the Tea Party was already headline news. That these activists took so little time to get their act together and out of the door shows that it was injured identity and not a failed economy that fired them.

Well before the new president could unpack his bags in the White House and his budget before the nation, the Republicans had begun their attacks on his economic programme. How did they know? More, how did they dare? When Obama became president, America was losing 8,00,000 jobs a month and its annual real corporate profit growth had slumped to -17.4%. If it had gone any lower America would have had to ask India for a bailout.

Four years on, the country added enough jobs to bring its unemployment rate to below 8%: a psychologically comforting number. By the time Obama was ready for his second term, unemployment had come down to 7.8%. This is much lower than the figures in 1983 and 1984 when Ronald Reagan, the Republican hero, was the president. In fact, in 1983, unemployment had touched 10.4%, but no Tea Party/Republican activist ever recalls this statistic.

Mitt Romney promised millions of jobs but fluffed on how exactly he would pull it off. On identity issues, however, the roadmap was clear. The many posters that the Tea Party strung up were openly racist and religious, and not just for wallpaper effect. There was no slip intended when they called the president, Obama Osama bin Laden. Nor were they masking their racism when their placards screamed for an end to "White Slavery". "Baby Killers" and "Sodomy" were the other attributes they accused the government of. There was not a trace of the economy in any of these charges.

Donald Trump was in their corner too. Hoping to wipe out Obama as easily as he brushed back his hair he claimed the president was not American-born. Rupert Murdoch, another fat cat, even urged people to see his documentary where Obama's Muslim-Kenyan background was the central theme.

Racism and religious bigotry come as part of a package that calls out to other identities as well. In this deal, women are undermined and, you guessed it, so are the migrants. The Republicans argued that it was Christian faith that made them oppose pro-lifers, or those who support abortion. Romney repeatedly said that he was a "pro-life candidate", as did his wife on a much-publicised Barbara Walters programme.

Romney also promised he would to do the right patriotic thing and end the two-year reprieve Obama had given illegal migrants. If the Republicans had succeeded in this mission it would have affected nearly 1.2 million people, mainly Latinos. Naturally, this angered the entire American-Hispanic voting popu-lation and a few others besides. It made them more pro-Obama than they would have other-wise been.

As the Republicans had repeatedly ticked the race, religion and gender boxes, they were confident that they had all the identity markers they needed to win. That is why when they talked economy it was primarily to occupy air space and waves. But the solid rock on which they stood was identity, even econo-mics was identity. If Obama had failed to make more jobs it was because the man had a dodgy middle name and a non-American heritage.

The truth is that the Republicans were hopeful that solid, white, Americans would turn out in large numbers and vote Romney to power. They were partly right in their calculations. Exit polls suggest that six out of 10 whites voted Republican, but wait, the other four went with Obama. Further, the majority of the young, as many as 60% under 30, also supported the Democrats. All of this goes to show that the Republicans were rousing not just white people, but older, white men. As it turned out, they woke up the wrong passenger.

Obama won easily in terms of electoral colleges but for some time it was not quite clear if he had the majority of the general electorate on his side. Fortunately, by the time the last results came in he had about 52% of the popular votes as well. It was a wafer-thin margin, but it was still very important. It prevented Republicans from complaining that they were swindled out of the presidency.

But that is the least of Obama's victory. The narrow lead notwithstanding, he has done something more remarkable. It is now official: 52% of Americans are neither sexist nor racist.

America now deserves to be called a superpower!

The writer is a social scientist.

It's not the economy, stupid: Barack Obama has won a closely contested culture war in the presidential election - The Times of India

*************************************

This is the best analysis I have read so far.

Remainder that I have read are generalised and cliche ridden with conclusions that are plebeian.

I have produced in full to justice to the contention and to the author's analysis.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
Re: Why Obama Won

If the author of this article has to use the word "stupid" in the first paragraph, then there is a strong likelihood that he will be able to offer little beyond rhetoric to back up his claims. On reading the entire article, I got what I had expected.

This election was about economics.

To answer the question, "Why Obama Won?" the answer is most likely to be, "Because of the scroungers."
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Re: Why Obama Won

I learn that "It's the economy, stupid" is a slight variation of the phrase "The economy, stupid" which James Carville had coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush.

Carville's original phrase was meant for the internal audience of Clinton's campaign workers as one of the three messages to focus on, the other two messages being "Change vs. more of the same" and "Don't forget health care."

If it were about the economy, then I wonder if Obama would have won given the negativity towards his handling of the economy.because it would be very difficult for people to realise that before Obama became President the first time, America was losing 8,00,000 jobs a month and its annual real corporate profit growth had slumped to -17.4%.

Obama did add to jobs and salvage the economy to the extent feasible, notwithstanding the gridlock.

I take it that when economy dips dangerously, one cannot help but want to scrounge to be ready for worse times to come, more so when the whole world is also dipping dangerously low in their economies!

It is only the über rich who can be cavalier about a dipping economy.

One wonders if the other issues beyond the economy did not affect the election of Obama.
 
Last edited:

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
Re: Why Obama Won

obama won due to.

woman votes

Non white votes

Seal 6 movie aired all over america 2 days before election


:laugh::laugh:
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top