Thread: Obama won re election

I have the impression that it was a lot closer for a lot longer than last election.
Contrary to the previous election, I noticed only 2 significant gaffes.

During the campaign, Romney lost moderate voters with his super rich attitude. The leaked video did damage, but also more innocent things like his remark about just moving to another house during the storm. With millions of Americans dirt poor and not being able to afford a house, let alone healthcare, that is not a smart move.

The Republican party also cost him a lot of women voters this time, with several high profile members saying such things as 'If a child is born from rape, then that was God's plan' or 'Abortion is not necessary because a women's body has ways of dealing with rape'. You can argue that Romney and Ryan didn't say those things. However, if the Republican party does not slap down or kick out the high profile morons who say such things, then those quotes reflect directly on the party, and thus on the Republican candidates.

Had Romney shown more understanding of the actual problems of average families, and had the Republican party not embarassed themselves, I feel it would have been really, really close this time.

I am just glad I am on vacation this week so I don't have to hear every person I pass tell me, "Can you believe it?" and "what is this country coming to?" ...

(completely monotone) hurray for Obama, boo the other guys, god bless america

Looking back, Romney was consistently lagging in the polls. The first problem was that he has spent his life being moderate, but running in a highly ideological primary he had to reinvent himself as 'severe conservative'. I don't think the far right ever bought it, but he steamrolled over them with huge amounts of money, so at the end of the day they had to grudgingly accept him.

He had always polled as having best chances against Obama, so the Obama campaign had long expected that race and were preparing for well over a year. And that campaign is as skillful as Karl Rove's ones (4 years ago they beat the Clinton machine, then the republicans). So, as soon as the primaries were over, they spent huge amounts of money to 'define' Romney as an out of touch plutocrat facing virtually no pushback. The whole tax return thing was ridiculous - I always thought Romney should just release them and take whatever temporary hit from low tax rates and offshore accounts, just so that it could be put behind.

The first time Romney looked viable was after that first debate when he reversed back to moderate talk. Interestingly, the conservative base suddenly got all fired up by the taste of victory, so I think Romney played that part brilliantly. He really had to deal with a pretty tricky situation - he had to be moderate to pick enough votes from the center, and at the same time keep the hyper ideological base enthusiastic.
He even managed to get the evangelicals to burry the hatchet and line up behind somebody whose religion they had labeled a cult (apparently not anymore).

I think even though he ended up a tad short, he still did amazingly well. No candidate is perfect, and he just isn't good at connecting with voters which couldn't change, but my thinking is that had he not left the Obama campaign to write the narrative for so long at the beginning he would've pulled it out. Everybody makes gaffes, the ones that have an effect tend to be the ones that 'fit' the larger narrative.

But again, after the first debate he got a pretty good bump, so if the economy didn't show good signs that may have been enough. After all that was the central premise of the Romney campaign - the economy is getting worse and worse due to Obama, hence he had to go.

At least this time around Oboma has the senate on his side so he can make the changes.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Had Romney shown more understanding of the actual problems of average families, and had the Republican party not embarassed themselves, I feel it would have been really, really close this time.

You cannot understand what you don't know. He comes from a very wealthy family so he has no clue.

The main focus of this election was the middle class. For me it was a matter of who was going to take less from my pocket. We need a new political party in the country. I have a good name and philosophy. We'll call it:

REASONABLE.......Philosophy..." If it is reasonable, we will do it."

The problem today is both parties are so busy fighting across the isle, the business of the people never gets done.


That is all.

Originally Posted by TrilliumLT

At least this time around Oboma has the senate on his side so he can make the changes.

Obama had the Senate majority for his first four years. The Republicans hoped to change that this time around but too many of their candidates got "hoof-in -mouth" disease that the turn-over did not occur. What Obama lacked the first four years and still lacks this time around is a majority in the House. So it seems, the gridlock remains and it's politics as usual.

Randy

Originally Posted by WhiteLion

Obama had the Senate majority for his first four years.

Yes, and he decided to use it for the biggest thing that he could possibly do - start a health care reform. His choice and he managed to get it through, but he completely failed with the PR.

The current positive economic signs were far from given, especially in view of the state of the global economy. I think Obama just got lucky, although I'm sure that the european leaders understand very well the implications of any potential storm over there on the US elections. The chinese too, but with a transition of their own the stability in China was pretty much ensured to be rock solid.
Still the world economy is a finicky thing and nobody can have full control, they can only bias it one way or another, that's why I think Obama just got lucky.
For good or for bad, presidents are never judged on their merit alone, doing the very best possible with a terrible hand can still be judged as failure at the ballot box.

One thing that isn't getting allot of "play" is that I believe the Supreme Court of America is due for two new appointee's. This is for some HUGE.

Clearly Obama's picks will be vastly different than Romney's would have been. Moreover, the impact on Americans because of it will in my humble opinion be quite substantial.

Oh well - that's how it goes.

Originally Posted by gugi

But again, after the first debate he got a pretty good bump, so if the economy didn't show good signs that may have been enough. After all that was the central premise of the Romney campaign - the economy is getting worse and worse due to Obama, hence he had to go.

The economy was at its death knell when Obama came into office thanks to Bush the 2nd. Only by persistent maneuvering against a House controlled by Republicans was Obama able to eek out the meager gains which are just now showing. Had he been given bi-partisan support instead intransigent politics, our country would be doing far better than it is now.