2012 Elections in the USA

[QUOTE=Dickhead; 428943]People like me and Jackson want the same thing at the end of the day but have come to view each other as such polar opposites that we can look at the same set of conditions and circumstances and come to completely opposite conclusions. That is a fuck of a lot better situation than Stalin or Stroessner or even Plutarco Calles, where we would both have to come to someone else's conclusion or get shot. It is like Keynes and Hayek, fundamentally different starting points. Sometimes the US pisses me off but the political process here is better than in most places. We just had an election and last I heard out of a country of 310 million or whatever it is, the difference in the popular vote is 90, 000 or something like that, an amazingly small difference. Yet there will not be a revolution either way. That whole electoral college thing is bullshit but we will have to live with that.

Now I suggest both sides move to the center for the sake of sheer efficiency, because the extreme shit is not going to happen.[/QUOTE]The difference in the popular vote was more like 3 Million, once the West Coast returns came in. Obama had OVER 50% of the vote, and Romney had less than 48. 5% overall. It wasn't that close at the end of the day.

I think that because Republican economic policies are beneficial to less than 50% of the population, they had to reach out to fringe elements. Although it might be true that Democratic policies tend to be more beneficial to the lazy, that is just tells you that laziness is more popular than Bible spewing. It is also a lot more fun. So here's to the lazy, the shiftless, the takers, the underemployed and the unproductive by choice. Think how much more lazy and shiftless and unproductive we will be with all this weed floating around.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;428949]The difference in the popular vote was more like 3 Million, once the West Coast returns came in. Obama had OVER 50% of the vote, and Romney had less than 48. 5% overall. It wasn't that close at the end of the day.[/QUOTE]Regardless of who you favored, it is a good thing that the electoral winner carried the popular vote, and also that they got a majority and not just a plurality. If it had gone the other way I still would have wanted that to happen. But yeah, looking at the final results, nowhere near as close as I thought it would be. Virginia? Shocking.

If only American college students were as smart as their Israeli counterparts:

[url]http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/264609-romney-polls-far-ahead-of-obama-in-israel[/url]

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;428865]It is proof positive that the unproductive portion of the population has taken over and the rest of us are enslaved.[/QUOTE]For reals? Enslaved? Keep looking at the world through those rose-colored glasses in your alternate universe, wherever that is. Go ahead and keep listening to your odious, hate–filled speak of radio hosts Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Glenn Beck. Keep closing that tent of yours. Together with the likes of Sarah Palin, Bachmann, Sununu, Bolton and the rest of the Looney-tune neocons: I hope you all had a great night's sleep last night.

The reality of what happened last night clearly was the end result of the extreme wing of the GOP hijacking the Republican Party. Witness the 'reasonable' Republicans like General Colin Powell and John Huntsman clearly distancing themselves.

Let's face it; the Republican Party has become the party of primarily; grumpy, older, white men who are dying a slow death. Sure, there is a sprinkling of Hispanics and other minorities but one has but just look at the broad face of Romney's supporters. There is very little diversity that one can tell. Quite similar to the vast array of female bleach-blond anchors of Fox News TV network.

Speaking of the Fox News on 2012 Election night coverage: It was absolutely delightful seeing Megyn Kelly and fellow anchor, Bret Baier slowly change their disposition, posture and facial expressions as the evening wore on.

And who can forget watching GOP pollster guru and strategist Carl Rove on Fox News last night sweating it out and desperately trying to recalculate and refute the odds and reality? Sorry, Mr. Rove, the ghosts of 2000 didn't show up in Ohio in this election.

Maybe one day, you'll recognize that those Independent voters are mainly intelligent moderates who can't stand your agenda.

I voted for Obama but was on record of thinking that Romney would win. I thought with 7. 9% unemployment rate people would get in the poll booth and say it is just time for a change and vote for Romney.

I think Republicans underestimated Obama as an opponent. Sununu called Obama "lazy". Frequent calls for Obama to release his college transcripts meaning people thought they were inadequate. On my Facebook page and even here, people were calling Obama incompetent. Romney should have acted like a SEC football coach playing Nichols State."Nichols State presents a real challenge for us the week." Is "pride goeth before a fall" in the Bible? I haven't read one in awhile. The truth is that every contested state except possibly Florida, Obama won. You cannot believe your own bullshit as my Dad would say.

Romney needed to more transparent in my mind. He had a tax plan but would not show it to anybody. He remained a private banker instead of evolving into a a politician. One person I read described Romney's style as transactional. To his God and Family, he is a rock with unwavering principles but in business and politics, he is more of a deal maker.

As Borat would say..... [size=+2][i][b]High Five ! [/b][/i][/size]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVRV0Nww8R4[/url]

Congrats to the Republicans also for a hard fought campaign. The Republican Party clearly pulled out all the stops, threw everything they could at Obama, but still came up short. That says a lot.

It was a broad win / gain for Obama and Democrats:
- Electoral College by 300+
- Popular Vote by 2%
- Pickup 2 seats in Senate
- Pickup 4 seats in House

Romney was a good candidate for the most part, and probably would have made a good president. I think he's more a practical centrist than a conservative, but he would have been compelled to lean right in his policies, and that was a big part of why he did not win. Republican positions on taxes and defense spending do not enjoy majority support.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;428904]The USA stock futures markets are now only very slightly in the negative (like -0.2%) and all the international stock exchanges are significantly in the positive, for those who were wondering what the rest of the world thought of this election.[/QUOTE]USA stock markets were down 2.4% on the day after the election. European markets were down around 1.4%. Commodities were weaker and interest rates were lower as the markets anticipate the possibility of another recession if the USA goes over the fiscal cliff. Comments from the president of the European Central Bank also played a part in the declines.

The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;428994]The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.[/QUOTE]The futures went up then they went back down. They were lower just before Draghi's comments hit the wires than when Obama was declared the winner. Given that most people thought Obama would win before Tuesday night (it was already priced in) and given that USA markets performed worse than European markets yesterday and also so far today, I believe the election results did have a negative effect on prices. Draghi's comments would have been more relevant to Europe, the election results more relevant to the U.S. I thought Obama would win, but now that I know he did, I'm selling stocks faster than I was before. There are other people like me.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;428994]The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.[/QUOTE]Precisely.

Even FOX News Business agrees.

"History Shows Stocks, GDP Outperform Under Democrats"

- By Matt Egan.Published September 04, 2012.

Stock performance and big business (corporate) profits soared under the 1st term of the Obama Administration.

[QUOTE=Moveon;428998]"History Shows Stocks...Outperform Under Democrats"[/QUOTE]Good, if you believe there are correlations between Democrat presidents and stock market performance that will repeat going forward then maybe you should buy shares from the poor misguided suckers who are selling, like me. There's no use arguing over it, profit from it.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;428999]Good, if you believe there are correlations between Democrat presidents and stock market performance that will repeat going forward then maybe you should buy shares from the poor misguided suckers who are selling, like me. There's no use arguing over it, profit from it.[/QUOTE]The problem is, and the markets also finally realized, that we have pretty much the same jokers in Congress who created this fiscal cliff in the first place. That being said, I am hopeful that the Teabaggers have been chastened by the election results, and I certainly see some nuance in what Boehner has said since the election. But Boehner didn't cause the problem the first time, Eric Cantor did. But Cantor must have seen his state of Virginia go for Obama, and also the Democratic Senatorial and Gubernatorial candidates as well - although he himself was re-elected pretty easily.

What I actually expect will happen with respect to the fiscal cliff is that there will be a pretty quick deal to undo the cliff and pass a continuing resolution, but no substantive deal to really crack the deficit, with both revenue enhancement and major cuts - thus, Congress will again kick the can down the road. And unfortunately, other than using the bully pulpit hopefully more effectively than he did last time to leverage his just re-confirmed public support, Obama can't really do much about that, the ball is in Congress's court.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;429001]The problem is, and the markets also finally realized, that we have pretty much the same jokers in Congress who created this fiscal cliff in the first place. That being said, I am hopeful that the Teabaggers have been chastened by the election results, and I certainly see some nuance in what Boehner has said since the election.[/QUOTE]What about the joker in the White House? It takes two to tango. Like Obama, Tea Party members were re-elected so I don't know if they should be chastened. The best path would be if Obama could come off his politically popular "fuck the rich (i.e. small businesses) with higher tax rates" platform, which is only going to raise about $70 billion to fund a $1 trillion deficit, from what I've read. If Obama can abandon the higher tax rates and instead accept lower spending combined with a "fuck the rich with fewer write-offs and tax preferences" platform, there would likely be a solution, and we'd all be better for it. Except maybe the hedge fund managers, and the lazy bums Dickhead has referred to.

One possible plus about an Obama victory, maybe now that he's not trying to win re-election he'll be more likely to work with House Repubicans on solutions for the deficit and entitlements.