Obama Wins 2012 elections, Implications for India and the World

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,328
Likes
11,832
Country flag
I voted for Obama, evidently 51 percent of americans liked him better then Romny.
Can you tell wht for Obama and why against Romney?

How much did the storm help Obama?

Did the people of the US choose to go with a known evil than an unknown?
 

aeroblogger

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
247
Likes
112
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.
The American education system is so poor that you can't distinguish a socialist from a national socialist?

Wow. Just wow.
 
Last edited:

aeroblogger

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
247
Likes
112
Why Do Indian-Americans Love Barack Obama And The Democrats?
Wow, what a shitty article. But let me clarify some points for those of you who are fortunate enough to not live in the US...

Part of the reason may have to do with Obama's steadfast support of India's candidacy for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. On a more personal note, Obama is familiar with Indian culture, has close relations with India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, quotes Mahatma Gandhi in speeches, and has even branded himself an 'honorary Desi.'
I truly doubt any of this has to do with the reasons that Indian-Americans tend to be liberal.

Nonetheless, I think that Indian-American support for Obama (and Democrats in general) is built upon some false premises.

The No. 1 reason (I suspect) why Indian-Americans favor Democrats is their perception that the Republican Party is opposed to immigration.

And that's it.
Well, Democrats certainly are friendlier on immigration topics, but I think that's a smaller part of a bigger issue, which is that the Republicans are known for xenophobia. The main voting banks include religious nutcases, which generally doesn't lend itself very well to tolerance. And many measures supported by Republicans, like Arizona's SB1070 (the "Show me your papers" law), promote discrimination against minorities.

Indian-Americans are just more comfortable with voting for those who are considered more tolerant.
Forgetting for a moment that Obama has deported more illegal aliens than any administration in history,
Illegal immigrants from India have some of the lowest deportation rates in the country. Because we are not considered a common stereotype for illegal immigrants, the 200,000 illegals from India generally stay under the radar.
the Democratic Party's platform simply clashes with most of traditional Indian values.

I am generalizing, of course, but Indian culture promotes family, faith, education, sobriety, hard work, career, self-reliance and sexual morality. Such things as homosexuality, same-sex marriage and abortion (which the Democrats have made part of their core ideology for at least the past 20 years) are anathema to the majority of Indian-Americans, even those of my generation.

Thus, I am baffled as to why Indian-Americans reject the Republicans -- the party that almost perfectly matches their (our) world-view.
This is rubbish. Indians generally have a libertarian outlook on social issues - the idea that other people are free to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't affect others negatively. While I agree that many Indian-Americans would be horrified if their own children ended up homosexual, I doubt they would care if some random gay person on the street got married or not.
Regarding Obama specifically, Indian-Americans' love for him is based on some very cynical assumptions and attitudes.

I can safely say that many Indian-Americans, particularly those of the older generation, are very racist toward African-Americans. They generally believe that black people are lazy, immoral, violent and beyond hope (mirroring exactly the attitudes of the most virulent white bigots).

Obama, they claim, is an "exception."

Indeed, they refer to how "articulate," "intelligent" and "refined" he is (suggesting that most black people do not have these qualities).

An Indian taxi driver I once spoke to seemed to sum up this dichotomous perspective. This cabbie feared and detested blacks and dreaded having to pick them up as fares.

"I like Obama," he joyfully declared. "He's not like them others (blacks). He speaks good, dresses good and acts good. And he seems to like India a lot." (Blackwater da praa)
Because taxi drivers are an accurate representation of the highest-earning demographic in the country... :rolleyes:
I have a feeling that Indian-American support for Obama will not reach the 68 percent mark noted in the aforementioned survey. Moreover, if Jindal or Haley (or some other Desi politician) becomes a GOP presidential candidate in the near future, we may witness a huge switch by Indian-Americans to the Republican Party.
I wouldn't be surprised if Indian-Americans overwhelmingly supported Bobby Jindal, who is a serious contender for election in 2016. Jindal would likely bring more favorable ties with India.

However, that support for the Republican Party would promptly evaporate after Jindal's 2 terms are up.
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
Many Indian-Americans are quite neutral/indifferent towards American politics, and don't give really give a shyt about it. Especially the ones than have arrived recently from India (i.e. first generation immigrants). Of course, most first generation immigrants don't have U.S. citizenship, so they can't vote anyway.

The number of Indian-Americans who were actually born in the U.S. (i.e. second-generation and above) are quite small in number, and their opinions don't really matter. Most of them don't really give a shyt about India either, so it wouldn't necessarily "help" India if they somehow got into higher political positions. Pro-India lobbying by U.S.-born Indian-Americans is virtually nonexistent.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,606
The number of Indian-Americans who were actually born in the U.S. (i.e. second-generation and above) are quite small in number, and their opinions don't really matter.
Every citizen's vote matters.
 

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
Many Indian-Americans are quite neutral/indifferent towards American politics, and don't give really give a shyt about it. Especially the ones than have arrived recently from India (i.e. first generation immigrants). Of course, most first generation immigrants don't have U.S. citizenship, so they can't vote anyway.

The number of Indian-Americans who were actually born in the U.S. (i.e. second-generation and above) are quite small in number, and their opinions don't really matter. Most of them don't really give a shyt about India either, so it wouldn't necessarily "help" India if they somehow got into higher political positions. Pro-India lobbying by U.S.-born Indian-Americans is virtually nonexistent.
You are raising two points.

The first is that Indian-Americans are indifferent towards American politics, which IMO is not true. Indian-Americans are a very politically active group. They have been an active part of American politics for decades; Dalip Singh Saund, Bobby Jindal, Preet Bharara, Harvinder Harry, Saqib Ali, Satvir Chaudary, Kashmir Gill, Harry Sidhu, Kamala Harris, Swati Dandekar, Aruna Miller, the list can go on endless. Indian-Americans are a very active part of American politics and a politically very well represented minority.

Your second point is that they wouldn't necessarily "help" India. That point is valid. Many see themselves as Americans first so naturally America's interests will come before India's for them. And that is fine.

If you're looking for lobbies, than lobbies run on only one thing, and that is money!
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
great news. now only thing we can do is watch how America falls deeper into economic crisis and learn from it .
The most sensible comment so far.

The fact is that people never learn. Now Obama is going to continue to tax those that work and provide benefits to those that live off the state's teat. Of course, some will call it Socialism, but this is hardly the workers' paradise - I call it the lazy man's paradise.

Also, the most physically hard working demographic, the Mexicans, will get the boot, just like they have been getting for the last 4 years.

So who gains? Just walk into any random homeless shelter and see with your own eyes.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
I think I like seeing those mega rich taxed more. The simple law on wealth is: "wealth begets wealth." In other words future success is skewed in favor of those who are already wealthy. The statistics prove this. So lower income people should not be made to shoulder the same burden (or actually higher burden) of taxes when they are already at a disadvantage against those who are already wealthy. The rich on the other hand should be made to shoulder a higher burden of taxes due to the fact that society gives them more opportunity for more success than the people below them. But this idea however is not redistribution of wealth but a way of leveling the playing field.

The worse thing that can happen in a country is a large disparity in wealth as this is a sure ingredient for social tensions.
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Wall Street sinks after election as "fiscal cliff" eyed

Effect on Indians (not Indian-Americans) would be simple. More taxation, so that those that chose not to take charge of their lives, and their truckloads of bastard children, actually get to have these hard working immigrant workers pick up the tabs.

I am not in a mood to be politically correct tonight.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
This wall street "drama" is temporary. Soon market forces will take over and bring the market up (the US economy is already on an upward trend, albeit slow).
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
I think I like seeing those mega rich taxed more. The simple law on wealth is: "wealth begets wealth." In other words future success is skewed in favor of those who are already wealthy. The statistics prove this. So lower income people should not be made to shoulder the same burden (or actually higher burden) of taxes when they are already at a disadvantage against those who are already wealthy. The rich on the other hand should be made to shoulder a higher burden of taxes due to the fact that society gives them more opportunity for more success than the people below them. But this idea however is not redistribution of wealth but a way of leveling the playing field.

The worse thing that can happen in a country is a large disparity in wealth as this is a sure ingredient for social tensions.
What a pathetic drivel.

Society gives the rich more opportunity? Really? Do you think society is a mega-charity, or what? You must be a college going kid, who has no idea how harsh this world is. Nobody gives anyone any chance. Everyone makes his own opportunity. Some do it illegally, so do it legally, but everyone makes his own bed.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
What a pathetic drivel.

Society gives the rich more opportunity? Really? Do you think society is a mega-charity, or what? You must be a college going kid, who has no idea how harsh this world is. Nobody gives anyone any chance. Everyone makes his own opportunity. Some do it illegally, so do it legally, but everyone makes his own bed.

Society is not a mega charity but an imperfect amalgamation of people that has to coexist.
 

average american

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,540
Likes
441
I voted for Obama, to me america stands together, or falls together,,, the way I saw it it Romney/Ryan were engaging in Social Darwinism, the cuts the Ryan budget would have implemented would have resulted in the death of up to million people in two fpir year terms. The republicans were backing a budget which sharply reduces taxes for millionaires while cutting public spending on education, justice and medical research.

Romney/Ryan budget cuts spread out evenly would mean cuts in aid to millions of college students, the slashing of medical and scientific research grants and over 200,000 children losing early places in school. The department of justice would have less money to combat violent and financial crimes.

"Two million mothers and young children would be cut from a programme that gives them access to healthy food. "We wouldn't have had the capacity to enforce the laws that protect the air we breathe, the water we drink or the food that we eat. Elimination of the National Health Care bill, reductions in medicaide, medicare, nursing home care and other social services would result in the deaths of hundards of thousand of people over two four year terms. Throwing half of ameridcans under the bus while cutting taxs for the rich did not sell.
 

thakur_ritesh

Ambassador
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
4,435
Likes
1,733
We should see an emboldened and assertive Obama. Not necessarily good for the US or the rest of te world. I hope he doesn't do what he did in his first year of his presidency and give countries like China more respect than they deserve and wanting to share the world with them. I am sure he has moved beyond that.

I think his first priority as always will be the US economy. I don't think he will be able to do much on outsourcing and impact Indian biz in this field. India has given them billions of dollars of defence contracts that will create many jobs. I don't expect any dramatic upturn in Indo-US ties. We are Ok right now and will continue on a steady path particularly because india will go to elections sooner or later and it will make sense for the US to wait till the next govt to do any major biz.

Agree with Ritesh on what he has said.
I think, that is a mistake he won't repeat. Unlike last time, where India was in a way deliberately ignored, the relations downgraded, and China being pushed along the high pedestal, it won't happen this time round. He will make a visit within the 1st year of the second term alongside countries like Japan, RoK, China. But then, something like this would amount to no more than theatricals, which might please the media chaps for that would make good headlines, but might not have the content one would like to see.

I am more interested in what is it he brings in substance, and from the experience we have had with him and his administration on the civil nuke deal, their reaction post the MMRCA rejection, and how India was first deliberately sidelined in Afghanistan, though he did rectify the mistake in the last 2 cases, but such experiences haven't been very encouraging because it does show an amateurish behavior at times.

Has he grown to develop a finer world view, the question remains.

At best, and which is what I would like to see, Indo-US relations should start to get stronger, at worst, they will snail across as they have. The good thing, we have invested a lot in this relationship, so may be with the continuation of the same administration now is the time to see the fruits appear for the work put in. All in all, I believe, now is the time there needs to be a push given to Indo-US relations for the better.

I voted for Obama, evidently 51 percent of americans liked him better then Romny.
Are you of sub-continent decent?

I think I like seeing those mega rich taxed more. The simple law on wealth is: "wealth begets wealth." In other words future success is skewed in favor of those who are already wealthy. The statistics prove this. So lower income people should not be made to shoulder the same burden (or actually higher burden) of taxes when they are already at a disadvantage against those who are already wealthy. The rich on the other hand should be made to shoulder a higher burden of taxes due to the fact that society gives them more opportunity for more success than the people below them. But this idea however is not redistribution of wealth but a way of leveling the playing field.

The worse thing that can happen in a country is a large disparity in wealth as this is a sure ingredient for social tensions.
Hahaha AO, you should move to India and start a career in politics. You would make a great political career here. :D
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
I voted for Obama, to me america stands together, or falls together,,, the way I saw it it Romney/Ryan were engaging in Social Darwinism, the cuts the Ryan budget would have implemented would have resulted in the death of up to million people in two fpir year terms. The republicans were backing a budget which sharply reduces taxes for millionaires while cutting public spending on education, justice and medical research.

Romney/Ryan budget cuts spread out evenly would mean cuts in aid to millions of college students, the slashing of medical and scientific research grants and over 200,000 children losing early places in school. The department of justice would have less money to combat violent and financial crimes.

"Two million mothers and young children would be cut from a programme that gives them access to healthy food. "We wouldn't have had the capacity to enforce the laws that protect the air we breathe, the water we drink or the food that we eat. Elimination of the National Health Care bill, reductions in medicaide, medicare, nursing home care and other social services would result in the deaths of hundards of thousand of people over two four year terms. Throwing half of ameridcans under the bus while cutting taxs for the rich did not sell.
North Carolina, under Democrat Beverly Purdue has seen outstanding increase in college tuition fees, far more than even the national inflation. No wonder she is on her way out. You cannot lie to the people forever. Not sure about the rest of America.
Two million mothers, and their fathers, should have considered getting some education, a job, and financial security before screwing around. There are more than 10 million single mothers with children under the age of 18. Even if a small minority of them are living off benefits, its a disgrace. (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families)
Cash for Clunkers - failure. High Speed Rail promises - failure. Federal Tax Credit for Clean Diesel Vehicles - extinct. More Democratic drivel.
One half of America refusing to part with what is rightfully theirs is not throwing the other half under the bus. Not only that, this statement is a joke. I see plenty of hard working men and women, running honest businesses, who would rather they were able to retain their employees or pay them a little more, if only they were not taxed to their necks.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top