Barack Obama becomes POTUS-elect

[OneThirty8]

need to pick up a copy of this

Good grief, your man won and you're still trying to play the victim?

It just doesn't make sense.

Good grief, George Bush stole two elections and presided over the ruin of our nation's economy, and you don't feel like a victim?

It just doesn't make sense.

[Eviltaco64X]

need to pick up a copy of this

Good grief, your man won and you're still trying to play the victim?

It just doesn't make sense.

Good grief, George Bush stole two elections and presided over the ruin of our nation's economy, and you don't feel like a victim?

It just doesn't make sense.

I never said I was a fan of Bush, still I wouldn't blame him for the downfall of our economy. Note that the economy wasn't doing all that bad when the bigot racist repubs (OMG NAZIS) had majority in congress, and house until 2007. But I don't see how you can sit back and play victim and claim the Republicans are cheating when the Democrats have won the majority of the elections in 2006 and the Presidential election of 2008. I'm sure that if McCain won (even though everyone including myself was sure he'd lose), there'd be conspiracies involving a close state too. Also note that recounts were only held in the three most heavily Democratic counties of Florida in 2000. But whatever, we all have our own opinions. I'm going to find several flaws with your post from my perspective, as you would from your perspective find with mine. I'm done arguing.

[Quzar]

Speaking as a florida voter who was disenfranchised in 2004 (and again this year), I can say that regardless of who it helped, the stupidity of floridians is not to be discounted.

[|darc|]

Note that the economy wasn't doing all that bad when the bigot racist repubs (OMG NAZIS) had majority in congress, and house until 2007.

This problem has been predicted by some since before the Democrats took over Congress.

[Eviltaco64X]

Note that the economy wasn't doing all that bad when the bigot racist repubs (OMG NAZIS) had majority in congress, and house until 2007.

This problem has been predicted by some since before the Democrats took over Congress.

Still, even if it were the Republicans, it's not like the Dems have been making it better by any means necessary. I always thought what caused a lot of this mess was them letting people get houses when they clearly couldnt afford them.

[Christuserloeser]

Isn't it a bit more complex than that ?

[pavelbure]

you guys are too funny. get over yourselves already. he won.

Uh, yeah... In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote. Unfortunately for our nation, the Supreme Court saw fit to award Florida's electoral votes to George W. Bush after people working on his behalf made such a valiant effort to disenfranchise thousands of Florida voters.

oh god, would you fuckin read up on the electoral college and how it is used to elect a president and not the popular vote.

[Jeeba Jabba]

Yay for liberalism. demand accountability from your mayor when your favorite restaurant closes down.

[spaceshipcrayons]

When will the "change" bullshit end? I can't believe the amount of suckers who fall for this scam. He's just another puppet (for the New World Order) who wants to steal your hard earned dollars and support the same agendas presidents have for decades. I don't even support McCain and I don't fall for this deception.

I think it's hysterical how blacks say they're "Americans" now, when two weeks ago they were still "African Americans".

And what the hell is everyone so proud about? Proud they'll get to see less of their paychecks? Proud they'll have more surveillance? Proud of more corporate bailouts being paid for by the tax payers? Proud of more inflation from a monetary system based on debt and made up money?

[|darc|]

Yay for liberalism. demand accountability from your mayor when your favorite restaurant closes down.

And who was the fiscal conservative on the ticket? It wasn't Obama/Biden, but it sure as hell wasn't McCain/Palin, either.

[hey911]

Yeah, Obama won, and I'm happy about. Not to say that the state of bipartisan politics in the USA isn't worn thin, or worn out.
It would be nice to see a viable alternative party put into play, but the indies and greens aren't making much headway.

As a supporter of conservationism, "Down with global warming", I ask you to look as these politicians (Republican & Democrat) environmental histories: http://www.lcv.org/campaigns/dirty-dozen/

Or, search specifically to see your own State Rep's: http://www.lcv.org/scorecard/

By the way, Palin has a horrible environmental record, with supporting drilling for oil and with endangered species advocates.
Biden on the other hand has gotten the thumbs up from environmental groups.

[Jeeba Jabba]

Yay for liberalism. demand accountability from your mayor when your favorite restaurant closes down.

And who was the fiscal conservative on the ticket? It wasn't Obama/Biden, but it sure as hell wasn't McCain/Palin, either.

there wasn't one.

[|darc|]

Well, Paul was on the ticket, and I would have voted for him if not for the absolute need to elect Obama.

[spaceshipcrayons]

As a supporter of conservationism, "Down with global warming", I ask you to look as these politicians (Republican & Democrat) environmental histories: http://www.lcv.org/campaigns/dirty-dozen/

Just one more form of population control. Controlling you in the name of saving the planet.

[OneThirty8]

you guys are too funny. get over yourselves already. he won.

Uh, yeah... In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote. Unfortunately for our nation, the Supreme Court saw fit to award Florida's electoral votes to George W. Bush after people working on his behalf made such a valiant effort to disenfranchise thousands of Florida voters.

oh god, would you fuckin read up on the electoral college and how it is used to elect a president and not the popular vote.

OK, here I am going to highlight the part of my post that you apparently had difficulty seeing.

Unfortunately for our nation, the Supreme Court saw fit to award Florida's electoral votes to George W. Bush after people working on his behalf made such a valiant effort to disenfranchise thousands of Florida voters.

I am educated. I'd wager that I'm at least as well-educated as you think you are. I do know how the electoral college works. You, on the other hand, do not seem to know how to formulate an intelligent response to something you just read and still have in front of you. Would it not make sense to infer that because I mentioned the popular vote as well as the electoral votes that were given to Bush and tipped the election in his favor, I might be implying that the process by which we select the President of the United States is flawed? Is it not possible that I was also implying that although George Bush ended up with enough electoral votes to become President, there were a large number of those that he did not earn fairly?

Also:

oh god, would you fuckin read up on the electoral college and how it is used to elect a president and not the popular vote.

Is there anybody who believes that the electoral college is used to elect a popular vote and not the president?

[Ex-Cyber]

Also:

oh god, would you fuckin read up on the electoral college and how it is used to elect a president and not the popular vote.

Is there anybody who believes that the electoral college is used to elect a popular vote and not the president?

Possibly Sarah Palin, who was almost "in charge of the United States Senate". I hope Joe Biden doesn't abuse that authority.

[Christuserloeser]

When will the "change" bullshit end? I can't believe the amount of suckers who fall for this scam. He's just another puppet (for the New World Order) who wants to steal your hard earned dollars and support the same agendas presidents have for decades.

"another puppet for the New World Order" ? - sounds like something you could read at rense.com, or some other Nazi website.


But let's just pretend I'd take you seriously for a second: If you call him a puppet you basically say that he's got no personal vision, nor any moral views whatsoever. At the same time you imply that the president of the United States should rule as a dictator, king or kaiser. - But he's part of an elected administration. His power is split among several democratic institutions. There's the senate, the president's own party, federalism, etc. pp. - All there to prevent him from ruling like some kind of a king.

I wonder where you take the observation that the new president will "support the same agendas presidents have for decades" ? - I admit that upon a closer inspection his agenda doesn't seem all that revolutionary as some of his speeches might suggest, and he's certainly no socialist or communist as some label him, but overall I have the impression that his agenda actually might be a "change" of direction of about 180° on quite a lot of things.

Yay for liberalism. demand accountability from your mayor when your favorite restaurant closes down.

Not sure I understand this comparision: If my favorite restaurant closes, it hardly won't affect other restaurants (quite the opposite actually, they'd benefit from me as a new customer), nor the country's economy (and thus everyone living there).


Now, I am not and never been a fan of spending billions of tax payers' money to save a private company, but I strongly support buying out a previously privately held company to save it from bankruptcy, thus saving the infrastructure in its region to allow a slower transition. - Even more so if it's a bank and its bankruptcy affects half of the world's infrastructure. - In fact I think that all banks should be held by the state, regions, towns or cooperatives.

I also would support strict regulations on what's possible in terms of financial transfers, credit loans, insurance, company mergers, stock market trades, etc. pp.


Actually, now that I am thinking about it, I heard this comparision a lot, but it's still wrong: A country's economy isn't a company. The German words would be "Betriebswirtschaft" (administration of a company) and "Volkswirtschaft" (administration of a country's economy, that's what Marx wrote about). There are at the very least two significant differences between the two: A) A company can't print its own money. And B) A country can't kick out 30% of its citizens if it runs into the red.


The major problem with capitalism itself is that its sole purpose, its only goal is to make profit out of everything (and nothing) - and that as quickly as possible, but at least faster than others. That's its nature. - That also means that neither the bank managers nor anyone else is to blame for anything - they only did what's been necessary to increase profit. The only one to blame is the democratically elected government, the administration. If they don't do what they've been elected for - representing the interest of the voters, setting rules to stay in control over any privately held companies - I can't understand how anyone could blame the banks, the managers, or the Chinese.

[hey911]

A lot of people are actually arrogant enough to think that human expansion is their birthright, and that the rest of planet is their playground. If people need to be controlled to stop them from destroying the world around them, then so be it...

The fact is that who ever ended up being elected, would still have to deal with the financial fallout from wall street. It had nothing to do with Obama's policies, and some have blatantly misquoted his tax plans. The middle class would be the ones to prosper, and not the wealthiest 10% like the usual Republican agenda...

McCain's campaign saw fit to try to scare the middle-class American populace into believing that they would see more taxes, when the fact is, that is total BS and they would receive the greatest tax breaks.

The "trickle down" economic effect pioneered in the days of Reagan, disastrously, needs to be lead to a shallow unforgiving grave. It's time to stop catering to these self serving supposed "public servants", who ironically are supposed to be looking out for their constituents, and not their special interest pals.

And I'm not saying that Democratic politicians aren't infallible, or beyond corruption. I'm saying that as far as Republicans are concerned, one that isn't is an exception, and not a rule.

[toastman]

Actually 24 states have laws that make it illegal for electors to go against the will of the popular vote of the state, in the other 26 it is customary for electors to bow to the will of the popular vote.

And technically, you are voting for electors pledged to vote for a certain candidate. Current the electoral vote count stands at zero for all candidates. The Electoral College votes in December casting one vote for President and one for Vice President. For example in 200, Bush received 271 electoral votes and Al Gore received 264. Now you may notice that those two number add only 535 and not 538, because even though Al Gore won the popular vote for Washington DC, the elector refused to vote to protest DC's lack of Congressional representation.

And there have been other times when there were mistakes made on the ballots that cause really weird results (such as Vice Presidential nominees receiving votes for President).

But pretty much popular vote does much to decide an election. It's just that with lopsided representation (2 Senators for every state and 1 Representative it makes less populous states have more sway, and more populated states being technically less represented) you can lose the overall popular vote and still make the electoral vote. You need to win the popular votes in important states at the expenses of less important ones.

[Ex-Cyber]

Actually 24 states have laws that make it illegal for electors to go against the will of the popular vote of the state

A state can punish a rogue elector, but wouldn't their vote still be valid?