Barack Obama reeleito para mais quatro anos

[Victarion]

Desculpa mas não percebi :S

 

o McCain foi manipulado pelo partido Republicano. E usaram bastante a história de ele ter sido torturado na guerra do Vietnam.

 

já agora:

fifty states of grey

Editado 8 Novembro 2012 por Victarion

[Klebergol]

[The Great Ashby]

faz-me consfusão ver pessoas no facebook (em Portugal) a festejarem a vitória do Obama, será que vamos sair da crise com isto? Havará mais emprego? O IVA vai descer? Os impostos também? Para mim, sinceramente, é para o lado que durmo melhor. :confuso:

 

Se o Romney começasse uma guerra com Irão magicamente vias o preço do petroleo a bater todos os recordes de forma assutadora. De irmos da barreira psicologica do euro por litro, iamos para para a barreira psicologica de 2 euros por litro ou até mais(mais certo).

Claro que não afectava Portugal...

 

Agora se me dizem se é impossível o Obama entrar num guerra com o Irão? Não, não é 100% impossível, mas tenho sérias duvidas que não fosse o Irão a começar as hostilidades com um ataque a Israel depois os EUA a responder.

 

E se o Obama conseguir melhorar o panorama económico dos EUA, mais podem gastar eles em importações, e se a memoria não me falha, eles são um dos maiores destinos das nossas exportações.

[Su1]

[SAS_Robben]

Ao ver essa imagem agora fui ver se aquilo que tinha referido antes era verdade e é mesmo.

A maior parte dos Estados que pertenceram à Confederação e que são os estados "redneck" realmente eram no seu inicio maioritariamente Democratas.

Alabama, Texas, Carolina do Sul, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Carolina do Norte, etc...

Só mesmo a partir do meio do século passado é que se tornaram bastiões republicanos.

 

E aqueles que talvez sejam os estados mais liberais, Oregon e Washington State, votaram muitas vezes republicano.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_election_results_by_state

 

De facto é curioso e parece-me que demonstra um pouco a inversão de papeis que ocorreu entre os dois partidos.

[NIkeL]

Porra, em 1936 o Roosevelt deu grande coça.

[What]

Vai lá ver a reeleição do Reagan em 1984. :mrgreen:

[whatever]

Ao ver essa imagem agora fui ver se aquilo que tinha referido antes era verdade e é mesmo.

A maior parte dos Estados que pertenceram à Confederação e que são os estados "redneck" realmente eram no seu inicio maioritariamente Democratas.

Alabama, Texas, Carolina do Sul, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Carolina do Norte, etc...

O pessoal do KKK era democrata.

[antifa]

Embora hoje em dia já não seja tanto assim, tradicionalmente não há porque separar os partidos democrata ou républicano em esquerda ou direita.

[Sumudica by Night]

Não sei se isto já passou por aqui.

Principais contribuidores para a campanha.

 

Barack Obama

 

University of California $1,092,906

Microsoft Corp $761,343

Google Inc $737,055

US Government $627,628

Harvard University $602,992

 

Mitt Romney

 

Goldman Sachs $994,139

Bank of America $921,839

Morgan Stanley $827,255

JPMorgan Chase & Co $792,147

Credit Suisse Group $618,941

 

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contriball.php

[totava]

Não sei se isto já passou por aqui.

Faz-me um pouco de confusão ver "US Government" na lista de maiores contribuidores do Obama. Deve ser normal, mas não me parece bem.

Editado 9 Novembro 2012 por totava

[SAS_Robben]

O pessoal do KKK era democrata.

 

Por acaso desconhecia. Como as coisas mudam....

 

"Historian Eric Foner observed:

In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy. Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to reverse the interlocking changes sweeping over the South during Reconstruction: to destroy the Republican party's infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life.[42]"

 

In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

[Victarion]

claro que as coisas mudaram. e bastante. Houve um Republicano muito conhecido que afirmou, se não estou em erro, que no momento em que "lunáticos da Igreja" começassem a inundar o partido, seria o fim do mesmo. Ou algo do género. A ideia está lá.

[Lewandowski]

"Only in America can a president who inherits a deep recession and whose policies have actually made the effects of that recession worse get re-elected. Only in America can a president who wants the bureaucrats who can’t run the Post Office to micromanage the administration of every American’s health care get re-elected. Only in America can a president who kills Americans overseas who have never been charged or convicted of a crime get re-elected. And only in America can a president who borrowed and spent more than $5 trillion in fewer than four years, plans to repay none of it and promises to borrow another $5 trillion in his second term get re-elected.

 

What’s going on here?

 

What is going on is the present-day proof of the truism observed by Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, who rarely agreed on anything in public: When the voters recognize that the public treasury has become a public trough, they will send to Washington not persons who will promote self-reliance and foster an atmosphere of prosperity, but rather those who will give away the most cash and thereby create dependency. This is an attitude that, though present in some localities in the colonial era, was created at the federal level by Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, magnified by FDR, enhanced by LBJ, and eventually joined in by all modern-day Democrats and most contemporary Republicans.

 

Mitt Romney is one of those Republicans. He is no opponent of federal entitlements, and he basically promised to keep them where they are. Where they are is a cost to taxpayers of about $1.7 trillion a year. Under President Obama, however, the costs have actually increased, and so have the numbers of those who now receive them. Half of the country knows this, and so it has gleefully sent Obama back to office so he can send them more federal cash taken from the other half.

 

It is fair to say that Obama is the least skilled and least effective American president since Jimmy Carter, but he is far more menacing. His every instinct is toward the central planning of the economy and the federal regulation of private behavior. He has no interest in protecting American government employees in harm’s way in Libya, and he never admits he has been wrong about anything. Though he took an oath to uphold the Constitution, he treats it as a mere guideline, whose grand principles intended to guarantee personal liberty and a diffusion of power can be twisted and compromised to suit his purposes. He rejects the most fundamental of American values -- that our rights come from our Creator, and not from the government. His rejection of that leads him to an expansive view of the federal government, which permits it, and thus him, to right any wrong, to regulate any behavior and to tax any event, whether authorized by the Constitution or not, and to subordinate the individual to the state at every turn.

 

As a practical matter, we are in for very difficult times during Obama’s second term. ObamaCare is now here to stay; so, no matter who you are or how you pay your medical bills, federal bureaucrats will direct your physicians in their treatment of you, and they will see your medical records. As well, Obama is committed to raising the debt of the federal government to $20 trillion. So, if the Republican-controlled House of Representatives goes along with this, as it did during Obama’s first term, the cost will be close to $1 trillion in interest payments every year. As well, everyone’s taxes will go up on. New Year’s Day, as the Bush-era tax cuts will expire then. The progressive vision of a populace dependent on a central government and a European-style welfare state is now at hand.

 

Though I argued during the campaign that this election was a Hobson’s choice between big government and bigger government, and that regrettably it addressed how much private wealth the feds should seize and redistribute and how much private behavior they should regulate, rather than whether the Constitution permits them to do so, and though I have argued that we have really one political party whose two branches mirror each other’s wishes for war and power, it is unsettling to find Obama back in the White House for another four years. That sinking feeling comes from the knowledge that he is free from the need to keep an eye on the electorate, and from the terrible thought that he may be the authoritarian we have all known and feared would visit us one day and crush our personal freedoms.

 

 

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel."

 

Estes malucos do Partido Republicano, é cada coisa mais disparatada que escrevem!

Editado 9 Novembro 2012 por Abidal

[What]

Florida finally finishes vote count; Obama wins

 

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — President Obama added 29 electoral votes to his final tally as Florida finished counting its ballots on Saturday. Obama clinched the Electoral College and re-election on Tuesday without Florida.

 

The win officially gives him 332 votes to Mitt Romney's 206.

 

The state's 67 counties had until noon Saturday to finish their counts and report them to the secretary of state.

 

Florida officials said Obama had 50% of the vote to Romney's 49.1%, a margin of about 74,000 votes.

 

The win gave Obama victories in eight of the nine swing states, losing only North Carolina. He won Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Colorado and Nevada.

[htc]

claro que as coisas mudaram. e bastante. Houve um Republicano muito conhecido que afirmou, se não estou em erro, que no momento em que "lunáticos da Igreja" começassem a inundar o partido, seria o fim do mesmo. Ou algo do género. A ideia está lá.

O problema dos Republicanos é um pouco esse e dos eleitores pensarem que isto é uma luta dos ateus contra religiosos ou do bem contra o mal (do bem contra o mal x2 :mrgreen:)

[Ticampos]

Em 1860 um senador do Illinois chamado Abraham Lincoln ganhava as eleições e com isso acabaria com a escravatura existente nos estados democratas sulistas, seu partido?

 

Republicano :mrgreen:/>/>

 

O mapa das eleições de 1860 foi completamente invertido...

Onde o Obama ganhou, ganharam os republicanos, onde ganhou o Romney ganharam os democratas...

Editado 11 Novembro 2012 por Ticampos

[What]

http://disappearingromney.com/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+hnycombinator+%28HN+-+hnycombinator%29

[Ticampos]

O problema dos Republicanos é um pouco esse e dos eleitores pensarem que isto é uma luta dos ateus contra religiosos ou do bem contra o mal (do bem contra o mal x2 :mrgreen:/>/>/>/>/>/>/>)

 

Isso não é bem verdade, de que seja uma luta de ateus contra religiosos... pelos católicos americanos ( e porque não dizê-lo pelos europeus ) a América nunca teria sido tão republicana... aliás em 1960, quando o democrata e católico Kennedy foi às eleições, pelos católicos, teria ganho todos os estados com margens confortáveis, e foram eles que decidiram a eleição a favor do Kennedy.

Embora os republicanos quisessem fazer disso uma pseudo-verdade.

Editado 18 Novembro 2012 por Ticampos