ELECTION PROGRESS

The Republicans never win when they try to out liberal the democrats. John McCain is a very liberal republican both have a socialist agenda and agree on the final goal they only differ on how to get there.
 
Last edited:
I am glad it is over too! And I live on the other side of the pond! Let's hope that we can mend the transatlantic relation to it's former status. I hope people are done with the binary choices: you are with us or against us. Pffff... what a mess he made of things!
 
Last edited:
Obama's victory is mainly endorsed outside America and nearly everyone will be glad to see the end of George W Bush. The electing of a Black President will help America cast off it's conservative, racist image and gain the International respect many Americans deserve. Obama however will be faced with insurmountable challenges and I doubt if the political situation has changed enough to be able to deliver on many of his aims on health-care, employment and the environment. The cooperations have funded him (like 'New Labour' in the UK) and they hold too many strings. True democracy must be publically funded.

Anyhow, welcome back America!
 
Last edited:
wr.jpg
 
The South African Government has hailed Obama's election victory similar to that of Nelson Mandela.

Me? I'm saying nothing!

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2421320,00.html


Obama 'another Nelson Mandela'
05/11/2008 10:06 - (SA)


Verashni Pillay
Cape Town - South Africa's speaker of Parliament was in tears at the US Consulate General's residence on Wednesday, as she compared US president-elect Barack Obama's win to Nelson Mandela's historic victory.
"I got the same feeling most non-South Africans got in 1994," said Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, calling him "another Nelson Mandela".​
 
Last edited:
Can't run a nation by only taxing the wealthiest 5%, even with the massive gap between rich and poor in America that 5% won't make enough money to pay for taking care of the daily needs of the other 95%. If Obama said he was going to increase taxes to pay for his new programs I may have voted for him, but instead he wants to cut taxes and increase spending (whose really more likely Bush in this election?) on social programs which means, in typical Democratic fashion, he'll be gutting the military to pay for his social reforms. Ask LBJ how well that worked.

[T]he Republicans want a big army and then don't send it anywhere, while the Democrats want a very small one and want to send it everywhere.
Click to expand...
If you elect a Democrat you will get a way, if you vote for a Republican you will get a recession.
Click to expand...
While neither of these rules held up too spectacularly under Bush, where we bot a war and a recession, they're both quotes from a professor of mine (he was quoting another author at the time) and for the most part have applied to American politics since... Andrew Jackson? Ok, so not that far back. I remember arguing with the young Democrats whose response to the invasion to Iraq was "Why Iraq? Why not Haiti, Libya, North Korea, Iran, Sudan, Congo, etc." Will be interesting to see what happens under Obama's leadership. My guess is the changes will be minimal because the economic forces at work that created this mess 1.) Were allowed to fester under both Democratic and Republican Presidents/Congress and 2.) Are far greater than anything any one government can control. Government may be the biggest player but this credit problem is a world wide problem, not just the US. These business played a dangerous game, they knew it, they lost. We all have to suffer because of it but that's part of life. Economies always wane and wax but in general move forward in a positive manner. But hey, the Greatest Generation defeated Hitler, their kids ruined all their hard work, and now my generation gets to spend trillions of dollars to pay back my parents' debts because they didn't understand the concept of spending only so much as you make.

Anybody see the irony that on the same day America elected its first black President states were passing amendments ending affirmative action?
 
MontyB said:
How do you come to that conclusion?

You could perhaps argue that the USA will become a better place although that would depend on your perspective and party affiliations but the world already has female leaders and coloured leaders it is nothing new outside the USA.
Click to expand...
I'm looking at it from my point of view. My world.
5.56X45mm said:
wr.jpg
Click to expand...
Oh, COME ON! The election's over, you won't lose your guns, get over it!
 
The Other Guy said:
I'm looking at it from my point of view. My world.

Oh, COME ON! The election's over, you won't lose your guns, get over it!
Click to expand...

Joe Biden wrote the original "Assault Weapons Ban". Nancy Pelosi tried to ban complete firearm ownership in San Francisco. Barack Obama supported Chicago's complete ban on the ownership of hand guns which was just ruled unconstitutional for a similar ban in Washington DC.

2nd Amendment rights are going to go....
 
Well it's not gone yet. Hang in there. I'd say screw the guns, make sure you got ammo. That's going to be harder to get.
 
Damien435 said:
Funny how a 51-49 popular victory in 2004 is a sign of Bush's failures to unify the country (The Democratic line in '04 being "51% is NOT a mandate!") and a 51-49 victory in 2008 is a sign of overwhelming public support.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure were all these figures being posted around this board are coming from, the true one is:

Mr Obama's share of the popular vote stands at 52.3%, compared with Mr McCain's 46.4%. This was also based on the highest turn-out since 1960. (was it 70%?) You have to face it, the Majority of Americans by a safe margin wanted Obama.

Compare that with European elections. In the UK the ruling party typically gets in the low 40%s on a turnout of about half of the electorate. During Conservative regimes such as Thatcher I have no doubt that the majority of the electorate hated her, but the opposition was split between two or more parties.

At least with a two party system you (usually) get who most of the people wan't.
 
perseus said:
I'm not sure were all these figures being posted around this board are coming from, the true one is:

Mr Obama's share of the popular vote stands at 52.3%, compared with Mr McCain's 46.4%. This was also based on the highest turn-out since 1960. (was it 70%?) You have to face it, the Majority of Americans by a safe margin wanted Obama.

Compare that with European elections. In the UK the ruling party typically gets in the low 40%s on a turnout of about half of the electorate. During Conservative regimes such as Thatcher I have no doubt that the majority of the electorate hated her, but the opposition was split between two or more parties.

At least with a two party system you (usually) get who most of the people wan't.
Click to expand...


Absolutely.
This is where the British system falls flat.
The majority of the electorate get the party they didn't want.
 
Last edited:
Crybabies ... there is a new sheriff .............

It is only a day or two (depending on where you are), and the GOP extremists and crybabies, are already using hate, fear and bigotry to try to undercut the President Elect. Even though Obama has tried to reach across all of this garbage during his acceptance speech, there are still those who would rather complain, find fault, use half-truths, lies and innuendo to place obstacles in the way of finding new ways to address the issues that face America today.

As far as I am concerned, they have had their 15 minutes of fame and need to move aside. We can no longer abide these extremist kind of views ... America needs level heads, a new approach to issue resolution, bi-partisan cooperation and people that believe it is time to work towards what is best for ALL Americans ... NOT JUST SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS.​

I personally invite those who would rather be obstructionists, to consider moving elsewhere ... give me a call ... I will be happy to help you on your way. Your way of doing business has been judged ... and ... found wanting.

MOVE OVER, THERE IS A NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN ... AND HIS NAME IS OBAMA.​
 
The way I see it, he's going to be President anyway. Give him your support. That is a part of serving your country.
 
5.56X45mm said:
Joe Biden wrote the original "Assault Weapons Ban". Nancy Pelosi tried to ban complete firearm ownership in San Francisco. Barack Obama supported Chicago's complete ban on the ownership of hand guns which was just ruled unconstitutional for a similar ban in Washington DC.

2nd Amendment rights are going to go....
Click to expand...
I've wanted to say this for so long, and now I get to.

"If you don't love it, leave it!"
 
perseus said:
I'm not sure were all these figures being posted around this board are coming from, the true one is:

Mr Obama's share of the popular vote stands at 52.3%, compared with Mr McCain's 46.4%. This was also based on the highest turn-out since 1960. (was it 70%?) You have to face it, the Majority of Americans by a safe margin wanted Obama.

Compare that with European elections. In the UK the ruling party typically gets in the low 40%s on a turnout of about half of the electorate. During Conservative regimes such as Thatcher I have no doubt that the majority of the electorate hated her, but the opposition was split between two or more parties.

At least with a two party system you (usually) get who most of the people wan't.
Click to expand...

Actually we went 12 years with Presidents that a majority of America did not want, and my original post was written at a time when the popular vote count was 51-49 (might have been 51-48 but I doubt it, generally third party candidates don't get many votes outside of the West Coast for some reason) and thus my statistics were correct. But let's address your point. 52.3% is an overwhelming majority? When barely half the country wants something that makes it a mandate (not just an agreement) for something? With how bad Bush was the Democrats could only manage to get 52.3% of the popular vote against a party whose President had an approval rating in the 20's? (Still far superior to Congress' 9 though)

BTW, Chief, don't know if you can see this because I know you have blocked me twice, but you've had to put up with two days of whining from the right. Imagine how those around you have felt for having to put up with the same from you for the last eight years.
 
Sorry ... no cigar ..............

Damien435 said:
.......................
BTW, Chief, don't know if you can see this because I know you have blocked me twice, but you've had to put up with two days of whining from the right. Imagine how those around you have felt for having to put up with the same from you for the last eight years.
Click to expand...

-D- ..........
You can call it whining ... but ... in all of the times that I have disagreed with you, I had facts and political failure to back any possible complaint I have made. The fact that the election results were so firmly AGAINST McCain/Palin (and the GOP), is a complete repudiation of eight years of a failed GW Bush administration ... and ... a vote of NO CONFIDENCE for a 90% McCain clone of GW Bush.

THERE IS A NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN ... AND HIS NAME IS OBAMA.​

If and when Obama screws up, you will hear from me ... just as you did, when there was a Republican that did what was NOT in the best interests for America (most of the time during the last eight years).

BTW -
SORRY BUT NO CIGAR ......... when the Democrats (or a Democrat), were wrong, I said so. The same can NOT be said for some of the more partisan GOP Conservatives or Republican diehards on this forum, when a Republican politician stepped on his petard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top