RWG1: OBAMA WINS U.S. ELECTION

[Shundi]

JohnG, you're from Mass? Where abouts? I'm originally from Weston/Sudbury.

[omni]

Yeah, I just read that you did in the other thread, good for you as this was way too important for USA and the world to not vote. I voted for the right man who has won tonight and that's coming from a republican voter in the last four elections.

[JohnG]

I am from Cambridge - north Cambridge near the Somerville line. Between Porter Sq. and Davis Sq.

Omni, I have voted Republican in more elections than Democrat. For me, this time was a no-brainer, though I like McCain - too bad he didn

[bruce79]

Thanks God , I have 2 passports and 2 Permanent Resident Cards in different countries.

But I love my USA, and today is worst day in all 19 years that I live here.

BUT!!! Let's wait and see. In 5-6 months everything will be clear.

Is this really the worst day in the last 19 years you've lived here. Wow, were have you been for the last 8?

[Luthier]

Is this really the worst day in the last 19 years you've lived here. Wow, were have you been for the last 8?

Mostly in Asia, enjoying local scenery and some other delicious thingies there... hehehe...

Agreed, last 8 years weren't a Christmas Holidays, but I expect much worse from today.

I wish I'm wrong... honestly.

[downtown]

It's ignorance and anti-intellectual thought like that which makes me both fear and pity the US.

[Luthier]

Let just wait and see. I sincerely hope he able to work with Congress and get things done.

Btw, I didn't vote for him but I still hope he will be a good President.

Mr Obama has promised a tax cut to 95% of Americans and plenty of other things that will cost money too - like better access to health care for the 45 million people here without insurance, and an army of new teachers, with improved salaries, for the school system.

None of that will be cheap - and Mr Obama is inheriting a budget deficit running into hundreds of billions a year and a national debt which is about to go above the $11 trillion (

[downtown]

Do you have anything original to say or are you just going to stick to republican talking points?

[AllergyDoc]

The U.S. steps into a huge vacuum by electing a complete unknown. "He's going to govern from the center." "He's going to get the economy going." "He's going to bring us all together."

This is said based on his rhetoric only, not based on anything he has ever done.

Today's election is a big thumb's down for George Bush. He allowed the country to be spent into near bankruptcy and the Republican party is paying dearly for it. Was it his fault? That'll be argued for months, but it occurred under his watch and he had the veto power to stop it from happening.

"8 years of failed policy." People have suddenly forgotten that the economy was zipping along for about 6 years of Bush's presidency, maybe even more. If it weren't for the recent stock market/mortgage/credit crisis, Barack Hussein Obama would be a footnote. Everyone profited by the real estate run-up. EVERYONE. Government collected more taxes and spent it. Local business profited by the increase in spending. The average Joe profited when his property values soared. My in-laws live in a paid-off house because they kept trading up as real estate values skyrocketed.

Well, the pendulum swings. BHO will get his 4 years and will have his hands full. He'll likely take much of the heat for the mess he's walking into. In 4 years he'll be judged for his handling of this mess and weighed in the balance.

See you all in 4 years.

Edited November 5, 2008 by AllergyDoc

[bruce79]

"8 years of failed policy." People have suddenly forgotten that the economy was zipping along for about 6 years of Bush's presidency, maybe even more. If it weren't for the recent stock market/mortgage/credit crisis, Barack Hussein Obama would be a footnote.

I think these thoughts are quite contradictory...you'd have to be quite foolish to consider the "recent stock market/mortgage/credit crisis" independent of the 6 or more years our economy was "zipping along" under Bush's presidency.

[downtown]

That's very true that Mr.Obama will likely get blamed for much of the economic blunders of the Bush administration, but only by conservative pundits and no-nothing-Joes. I'd also argue that the couple years of what you call economic growth (although many americans will disagree with you), was a result of the Bush administration's policy of favoring the wealthy and large corporations. If anything, the couple years after his election was a result of the Clinton administration's economic policy, which I dare say saw exponential economic growth, moreso than the Bush administrations. So yes, we will see in 4 years if Obama can manage to undo the corporatism and financial recklessness of the republicans.

Let's not forget the ridiculous expenditures of the Bush administration and the shift from a balance budget to one your children will be unlikely to pay off.

[100]

Mr Obama has promised a tax cut to 95% of Americans and plenty of other things that will cost money too - like better access to health care for the 45 million people here without insurance, and an army of new teachers, with improved salaries, for the school system.

That is one of the many reasons I did not voted for him. He is a LIAR (but I guess all politicians lie). He cannot promise something he CANNOT DELIVER. Approximately 41 percent of the U.S. population is completely outside of the federal tax system. So how can he cut tax on someone that do not pay any tax?

He is a smart politician, and a good liar.

Btw, we should stop blame everything on Bush this, Bush that. It is easy to blame the president because there is one name to blame. But the Congress is equally share any problems we are having.

[downtown]

That is one of the many reasons I did not voted for him. He is a LIAR (but I guess all politicians lie). He cannot promise something he CANNOT DELIVER. Approximately 41 percent of the U.S. population is completely outside of the federal tax system. So how can he cut tax on someone that do not pay any tax?

He is a smart politician, and a good liar.

And somehow you're the only one in the room who was able to decode his obviously well thought out deception. Well done.

[AllergyDoc]

I think these thoughts are quite contradictory...you'd have to be quite foolish to consider the "recent stock market/mortgage/credit crisis" independent of the 6 or more years our economy was "zipping along" under Bush's presidency.

Not at all contradictory. Did YOU know this was coming? I think not.

I don't know where you live, but where I live, in California, two years ago the economy was zipping along. The real estate run-up was driving everything up. It was fueled by the subprime mortgages being written.

Whose fault was the subprime mortgage fiasco? Trace it back. It's origin is in politicians forcing Freddi Mac and Fannie Mae to lend to people who could not afford the loans. Who started this? Carter did. Clinton expanded it and Bush let it run unchecked under his watch. The government in general is to blame. But while the scam was running the money was good.

[AllergyDoc]

Let's not forget the ridiculous expenditures of the Bush administration and the shift from a balance budget to one your children will be unlikely to pay off.

Congress appropriate expenditures, not the executive office. The president doesn't "spend" anything, he/she just signs things.

[downtown]

I suppose what bothers me is the fact that the Joe-the-plumbers are hell-bent on securing the rights of the wealthy over the rights of the middle class and the under-class even though it goes against their own best interest. Anyone cruising this forum is obviously well-to-do but clearly not at the top of the economic ladder, which confuses my as to why they would not support tax plans which only serve to benefit them and those who need it the most rather than the wealthy. They're obsessed with protecting the wealth that they one day COULD have but WONT, and in doing so constantly vote against themselves. All this crap about wealth redistribution being dished out by the right is exactly the kind of ammunition that the left should be using. Obama isn't going to round everyone up and throw them in communist re-education camps and to suggest in any way that his tax plans are going to somehow hurt the poor or middle class is absurd and ill-considered.

Edited November 5, 2008 by downtown

[downtown]

Congress appropriate expenditures, not the executive office. The president doesn't "spend" anything, he/she just signs things.

That's kind of a non-answer. Are you telling me that Bush's administration had nothing to do with two outrageously expensive and illegal wars?

[100]

And somehow you're the only one in the room who was able to decode his obviously well thought out deception. Well done.

Not necessary in this forum, but the majority of Americans did not understood the distribution of our tax system.

[AllergyDoc]

Clinton administration's economic policy, which I dare say saw exponential economic growth,

There is some truth to what you say:

I've never been much of a fan of GWB. It's just that no one ever offered a better alternative.

[Luthier]

Not at all contradictory. Did YOU know this was coming? I think not.

I don't know where you live, but where I live, in California, two years ago the economy was zipping along. The real estate run-up was driving everything up. It was fueled by the subprime mortgages being written.

Whose fault was the subprime mortgage fiasco? Trace it back. It's origin is in politicians forcing Freddi Mac and Fannie Mae to lend to people who could not afford the loans. Who started this? Carter did. Clinton expanded it and Bush let it run unchecked under his watch. The government in general is to blame. But while the scam was running the money was good.

DOC FOR PRESIDENT!!!

Well said, Doc.

[AllergyDoc]

That's kind of a non-answer. Are you telling me that Bush's administration had nothing to do with two outrageously expensive and illegal wars?

It's not a "non-answer." It's fact. The president doesn't write expenditure bills.

Did not Congress vote to release the funds for both "wars"? Democrats voted for the wars, as well. Spread the blame around where it belongs.

Were YOU the president, you wouldn't gone after the people who, long ago during Clinton's watch, declared war on your country, and attacked your country, have gone after them with any force needed?

I have misgivings about Iraq. Save for the need to fight terrorism wherever it grows, Bush has egg on his face about Iraq. "Weapons of mass destruction" were never found and he hung his hat on that as his reason to invade. Thus the egg on his face.

The better thing would have been to support those in other countries, where terrorism grows, who oppose terrorism. But this isn't politically "sellable" either.

[bruce79]

Not at all contradictory. Did YOU know this was coming? I think not.

I don't know where you live, but where I live, in California, two years ago the economy was zipping along. The real estate run-up was driving everything up. It was fueled by the subprime mortgages being written.

Whose fault was the subprime mortgage fiasco? Trace it back. It's origin is in politicians forcing Freddi Mac and Fannie Mae to lend to people who could not afford the loans. Who started this? Carter did. Clinton expanded it and Bush let it run unchecked under his watch. The government in general is to blame. But while the scam was running the money was good.

The housing/mortgage bubble has been discussed for several years now here in San Diego, California...were I've lived for the past 8 years...after moving from my hometown in the Bay Area. Of course no one knew the extent of the crisis to come, but when the value of homes were seeing double digit annual increases, you didn't have to be an finance insider to sense there's a little something more going on. I didn't own then so it was interesting to see things with an outsider's perspective...I admit I felt a bit left out during the boom but I wasn't about to spend $600k on a 700sf bungalow...something just didn't feel right about that.

But with respects to my previous comments, to say that the economy was zipping along as it was issuing/insuring bad mortgages just seems a bit contradictory in my opinion...perhaps just conceptually as it appears that was the case for some of us.

And with regards to the president just signing things...his/her signature is the only one that counts...VETO!

[baglc1]

Hussain Barack Obama. God luck.

[Luthier]

I have misgivings about Iraq. Save for the need to fight terrorism wherever it grows, Bush has egg on his face about Iraq. "Weapons of mass destruction" were never found and he hung his hat on that as his reason to invade. Thus the egg on his face.

The better thing would have been to support those in other countries, where terrorism grows, who oppose terrorism. But this isn't politically "sellable" either.

My 2 cents about Iraq war.

We had military agreement with Kuwait, so, we're obliged to protect this country. Saddam invaded Kuwait, we hit Iraq, it was legit. It was our duty.

But elder Bush didn't finish the bastard. And what? Few months later Saddam killed thousands of Kurds, using what? Yes, gas. Weapon of mass destruction.

What Israeli jets destroyed years before in Iraq? Nuclear reactor, that was able to enrich plutonium for what? Yes, nukes. Weapon of mass destruction.

So, we had a crazy mofo with visible desire obtain and use WMD. And in who's hands this suitcase type nuke will go? We didn't know.

Now... I'd like to ask you... if you'll see your neighbor, who just came back from jail, (where he spent 10 years for rape and murder), looooooooking on your young and beautiful daughter... will you shoot the bastard? Or you'll wait til he'll kill her? I'll pull the trigger without any shadow of the doubt.

So did Bush. WMD exuse was really stupid. Yes, most in White House and Senate were sure- Saddam has it. But better show to people what Saddam did to his own people. I don't have to remind you these nightmares. Every american would put the thumb down. Kill the bastard!

Ofcourse, the war started the wrong way. Much better would be to drop 100 guys from Elite Forces on Saddam's Palace middle of the night, kill every jerk there, and immediately go home. History knows many of such a successful operations. I don't know, what idiot decided to carry full scale war. Bush? Probably. So, he paying for this stupidity. But idea of removing Saddam was the right one. Yes, WMD wasn't found, so what? I'm sure it was relocated to somewhere across the border. Maybe it's in Syria, who knows? We bombed Syrian nuclear facility recently, and I'm not sure it was built only with N. Korea help.

And, yes, Dems supported the war, including Hillary.

[TeeJay]

Oh Yeah!! If I could've voted, Obama would've got my vote