[ebuddy]

I believe this would be the 2nd thread I've started in the PWL, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

Congratulations to Obama in his landslide victory over McCain. I had thought it possible that the polling was misleading, the lead overplayed, and the predictions zealous. I was wrong. While some were arguably being zealous there can be no mistaking the strong turnout for Obama. The numbers have yet to be fully tallied, but I think we will find an unprecedented number of young people participating, an unprecedented number of minorities participating, and an unprecedented number of participants overall. Congrats again to President-elect Barack Obama. While I didn't support his political campaign, I'm proud to be among those witnessing this most historic event.

I am profoundly happy for African-Americans and feel strongly that there can be no more effective a testament to the opportunity in this country than to see a fellow African-American proudly hold one of the most important positions in the world. I likewise welcome all the new-comers to the process. A process that was intended to serve you and your choices in leadership. Your choice has been made.

I remain cautiously optimistic for this term for several reasons.
Many newcomers to the process means many more exposed to differences in ideals. I believe strongly in general conservative principles and believe that when they are followed are effective. While I respect the office of the Presidency and now place my hope that this new Administration will be successful, there will be mistakes. I look forward to the numerous minorities and newcomers also emboldened by this recent accomplishment entering the discourse from the right of center. Your voices of strong individualism will be necessary now more than ever.

America will have new leadership and a new opportunity to mend many of the problems this country faces. An opportunity for government to operate with more transparency, integrity, and discipline. An opportunity for government to lead by example and communicate our hope more effectively abroad. America will have an opportunity to see new ideals in action and new solutions to old problems.

While there will be many disagreements along the way. I hope our overall level of discourse will be elevated, our ad homs put away, our ability to dissent respected, and our views taken at the face value of their merit, not having to first pass through assumptions of racism, partisanship, and vitriol.

There's a lot of work to be done and I don't envy even the man that has conquered seemingly insurmountable odds to attain this position. Congratulations to Obama. Congratulations to all those who once thought their odds were stacked against them for reasons beyond their control. Congratulations to the Democrats who've shown more party unity this past few weeks than perhaps at any other time in their history. Congratulations to a nearly flawless campaign and to the overwhelming majority of Americans who supported it.

I pray for our leadership and Obama is now among them. May you lead from a solid foundation of the ideals of freedom, the principles of democracy, and may you represent the absolute best this country has to offer.

I'll be behind you every step of the way and critically examining every move you make to ensure you do. My voice is small, but my hope is big. Good luck Obama and congratulations.

[Mithras]

Classy, sir.

[memento]

I wish all the best for our next president, regardless of who he is. But landslide? hardly. It was a clear victory (and I'm VERY thankful for that), but far from a landslide.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by memento 

But landslide? hardly.

[Wiskedjak]

As always, to ebuddy.

I agree with memento that, while Obama clearly won by a landslide of electoral votes, he only took 52% of the popular vote (which I think is far more important) compared to McCain's 47%, which I wouldn't define as a landslide.

[besson3c]

Actually, I think it is too early to tally up the popular vote, still lots of votes to be counted, but it looks like more than a third of the nation voted! *That* is amazing!!

I also dig the fact that Obama's speech had no mention of mandates, and most are saying that he will fill his administration with Republicans. He seems dead set towards working in a bipartisan fashion, and I have no reason to believe that he will undermine this central theme of his campaign. I hope this feels comforting to Republicans, given that I remember how many felt in 2000 and 2004 when Democrats were virtually excluded.

[Timo]

Nice write-up, ebuddy.

[CreepDogg]

Agreed - nice write-up, ebuddy.

While I did support his campaign, I share your cautious optimism and will be examining his actions with a critical eye, as we should no matter who our leaders are. I am hoping and expecting that what he says about unity and accountability rings true in his administration.

[besson3c]

ebuddy, I'm just wondering... You wrote this:

I believe strongly in general conservative principles and believe that when they are followed are effective.

I'm not disputing this, but I'm just wondering... When in history do you feel that conservative principles have been most effective? Again, no insinuation here, just wondering... I still have much to learn about American history.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Well said ebuddy.

It's nice to know there are people on this board who can put partisanship aside and recognize this moment for the historical place it now holds.

It's also nice to know that there are at least some people who are willing to give Obama a chance before they call his Presidency a failure.

Time will tell, but I am optimistic that Obama will hold true to his word, put partisanship aside, and do what is best for this great country of ours, taking into full account the opinions of those with whom he disagrees.

[OAW]

Congratulations to President-elect Obama on his well-deserved and decisive victory!

A landslide victory? Even I as an enthusiastic Obama supporter can't roll with that characterization

A few stats from recent elections (Candidate, Popular vote %, and Electoral College votes)

1980: Reagan 50.7% 489 .... Carter 41% 49 .... Anderson 6.6% 0
1984: Reagan 58.8% 525 .... Mondale 40.6% 13
1988: G.H.W. Bush 53.4% 426 .... Dukakis 45.6% 111
1992: Clinton 43% 370 .... G.H.W. Bush 37.4% 168 ..... Perot 18.9% 0
1996: Clinton 49.2% 379 .... Dole 40.7% 159 .... Perot 8.4% 0
2000: G.W. Bush 47.87% 271 ..... Gore 48.38% ..... 266
2004: G.W. Bush 50.74% 286 .... Kerry 48.27% 251

Clearly the "landslide victory" was Reagan in 1984. 18% advantage in the popular vote and a complete beat down in the Electoral College. One can even say Reagan's 1980 victory over Carter was a landslide. G.H.W. Bush had a clear and decisive victory in 1992. The political landscape became much more competitive since 1992. So let's look at the 2008 numbers:

2008: Obama 52% 349 ...... McCain 46% 174

Now let's say N.C. breaks for Obama (he is currently leading) then his E.C. tally goes up to 364. It's neck and neck in MO (with McCain slightly ahead) but let's say it breaks Obama's way. That takes him to 375. It still doesn't approach the margin of the Reagan victories. In fact, even though it's a solid win .... a clear and decisive victory, it's not as decisive a win as Clinton pulled over Dole in 1996.

I guess it depends on one's age and how far back one can recall presidential elections. If one's experience is the nail-biter in 2000 and the close race in 2004 where the Electoral College votes were pretty evenly split then Obama's victory may appear to be a "landslide". But if you go back to the Reagan elections then it's a totally different ball of wax.

OAW

[chris v]

Thanks, ebuddy. I'm a little giddy today, but tomorrow, we all will still have to work together to make this thing called America happen. We're at our best when we worry less about what divides us.

Here's a toast to all the Republicans who worked their asses off for what they believe in. This democracy business requires work -- whichever side you're working for, and I know it's been a hard slog on both sides of this thing. My hat's off to all of you.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by OAW 

1980: Reagan 50.7% 489 .... Carter 41% 49

Er... 50.7 + 41 = 91.7%

Where did the other 8.3% go in 1980? That's a significant percentage given that none of this year's independent candidates showed up very significantly.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I believe this would be the 2nd thread I've started in the PWL, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

Congratulations to Obama in his landslide victory over McCain. I had thought it possible that the polling was misleading, the lead overplayed, and the predictions zealous. I was wrong. While some were arguably being zealous there can be no mistaking the strong turnout for Obama. The numbers have yet to be fully tallied, but I think we will find an unprecedented number of young people participating, an unprecedented number of minorities participating, and an unprecedented number of participants overall. Congrats again to President-elect Barack Obama. While I didn't support his political campaign, I'm proud to be among those witnessing this most historic event.

I am profoundly happy for African-Americans and feel strongly that there can be no more effective a testament to the opportunity in this country than to see a fellow African-American proudly hold one of the most important positions in the world. I likewise welcome all the new-comers to the process. A process that was intended to serve you and your choices in leadership. Your choice has been made.

I remain cautiously optimistic for this term for several reasons.
Many newcomers to the process means many more exposed to differences in ideals. I believe strongly in general conservative principles and believe that when they are followed are effective. While I respect the office of the Presidency and now place my hope that this new Administration will be successful, there will be mistakes. I look forward to the numerous minorities and newcomers also emboldened by this recent accomplishment entering the discourse from the right of center. Your voices of strong individualism will be necessary now more than ever.

America will have new leadership and a new opportunity to mend many of the problems this country faces. An opportunity for government to operate with more transparency, integrity, and discipline. An opportunity for government to lead by example and communicate our hope more effectively abroad. America will have an opportunity to see new ideals in action and new solutions to old problems.

While there will be many disagreements along the way. I hope our overall level of discourse will be elevated, our ad homs put away, our ability to dissent respected, and our views taken at the face value of their merit, not having to first pass through assumptions of racism, partisanship, and vitriol.

There's a lot of work to be done and I don't envy even the man that has conquered seemingly insurmountable odds to attain this position. Congratulations to Obama. Congratulations to all those who once thought their odds were stacked against them for reasons beyond their control. Congratulations to the Democrats who've shown more party unity this past few weeks than perhaps at any other time in their history. Congratulations to a nearly flawless campaign and to the overwhelming majority of Americans who supported it.

I pray for our leadership and Obama is now among them. May you lead from a solid foundation of the ideals of freedom, the principles of democracy, and may you represent the absolute best this country has to offer.

I'll be behind you every step of the way and critically examining every move you make to ensure you do. My voice is small, but my hope is big. Good luck Obama and congratulations.

Even though you have differing opinions with others on these boards, myself included, you have always been respectful and dignified. For that, I congratulate you.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Person Man 

Er... 50.7 + 41 = 91.7%

Where did the other 8.3% go in 1980? That's a significant percentage given that none of this year's independent candidates showed up very significantly.

In 1980 you had the first significant inroad by an independent candidate. John Anderson captured 6.6% of the vote. Approximately 2% went to other candidates and there's your other 8.3%. None of them got any electoral college votes though.

OAW

PS: I think I'll update my previous post to reflect the Anderson totals.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

ebuddy, I'm just wondering... You wrote this:
I'm not disputing this, but I'm just wondering... When in history do you feel that conservative principles have been most effective? Again, no insinuation here, just wondering... I still have much to learn about American history.

"most effective" is subjective. I said "effective". The Contract with America was an effective conservative movement. We can discuss ideological differences in a different thread if you want to learn more about American History. My only point was to indicate that one possible outcome of more people involved in the process, is more people exposed to various ideology including conservatism.

[ebuddy]

A number of people have popped in to challenge the notion that this was a landslide. My post while genuine was a follow-up to a post in another thread where I indicated that if I was wrong about my view that this electoral breakdown was going to be close, I'd admit it. I should've qualified that this was an electoral landslide.

[- - e r i k - -]

Indeed ebuddy, you are the one person I have the most differing opinions from on this board that I respect the most. Kudos for being always full of class and willing to take change in stride.

We agree on one thing, despite the election high, I too am also cautiously optimistic for America. There is no doubt that this is the best thing to happen to your country and world politics for a very very long time. But change will not be sudden, nor radical (as some of the Chicken Littles of your side wrongly fears). Obama himself made this quite clear in his speech.

He is not without faults, nor is he that much different from other politicians (I doubt we will see the Kevin Rudd-like straight off the bat repealing of previous government mistakes. And even that wasn't such a big deal.), save for charisma and image.

But that perception can make a huge difference on the world stage.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

A number of people have popped in to challenge the notion that this was a landslide. My post while genuine was a follow-up to a post in another thread where I indicated that if I was wrong about my view that this electoral breakdown was going to be close, I'd admit it. I should've qualified that this was an electoral landslide.

That is the nature of the Electoral College. The popular vote could be 50.1 to 49.9 in every state and the Electoral vote can end up 538 to 0, or 269/269

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

A number of people have popped in to challenge the notion that this was a landslide. My post while genuine was a follow-up to a post in another thread where I indicated that if I was wrong about my view that this electoral breakdown was going to be close, I'd admit it. I should've qualified that this was an electoral landslide.

I don't even think what you said needed to be qualified. "Landslide" is obviously a pretty subjective term, but a 365 EV and 7% popular vote victory *is* a relative landslide in comparison to recent presidental elections. We can quibble over the meaning of landslide, but I think that the whole connotation of the word denotes a comfortable victory, which it was.

I really don't mean to gloat or sound like a know-it-all, but I'll say it again, I really don't understand why anybody would have anticipated a close race.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I really don't understand why anybody would have anticipated a close race.

Because polls are total shite, that's why

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Because polls are total shite, that's why

You don't even need the Obama/McCain polls to tell you that, all you need are:

- overwhelming polls and/or public sentiment of the dissatisfaction of Bush
- history
- a charisma gauge
- an overall excitement and buzz gauge
- a review of the money trail
- faith that people are not very bright, but that it requires making rational arguments to people to convince them of something in competition with the above

[ironknee]

can we have a group hug?

[linger]

I think America as a whole should stop the stupid bickering. Sit back and wait and see what the guy does before shouting out the end of the world. If we listen'd to those type of people, it would have ended at Bush's 2nd presidency.

Give the guy a chance. He might actually do good. It shouldn't matter if you have a D or R next to your name. I've seen good and bad Ds and Rs.

In EVERY president we have, we should ALWAYS hope for the best. Instead of the worst because that person isn't in our party...

I hope the one thing Obama does is finally do away with the whole parties attacking each other. Hire a R to office instead of a D. Mix and match.

[linger]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Because polls are total shite, that's why

I got to agree with this one. Regardless of who you voted for, the media failed us. I was an Obama voter and I even shook my head when people of the media were taking credit for helping Obama win.

Shame on them. Shame on them for giving someone that might not like Obama a reason to give an excuse to say he didn't win fairly.

I am glad my GUY got in, and I think he would have regardless of the media.. but still. They went too far this year.

They didn't even pretend. It got so bad it mad even me sick.

BTW if you want to talk about polls, the count of those who think the media is trying to control outcomes of elections etc just rose 20% this year.

We need to do something about that.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by linger 

I got to agree with this one. Regardless of who you voted for, the media failed us. I was an Obama voter and I even shook my head when people of the media were taking credit for helping Obama win.

Shame on them. Shame on them for giving someone that might not like Obama a reason to give an excuse to say he didn't win fairly.

I am glad my GUY got in, and I think he would have regardless of the media.. but still. They went too far this year.

They didn't even pretend. It got so bad it mad even me sick.

BTW if you want to talk about polls, the count of those who think the media is trying to control outcomes of elections etc just rose 20% this year.

We need to do something about that.

Why are you associating the polls and the media together? Not all polls were sponsored by a major media outlet, and many/most that weren't were showing the same sort of data. Oddly enough, the Fox News poll often showed strong Obama results.

It is not clear that sponsorship of a poll resulted in its results being skewed across the board.

[linger]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why are you associating the polls and the media together? Not all polls were sponsored by a major media outlet, and many/most that weren't were showing the same sort of data. Oddly enough, the Fox News poll often showed strong Obama results.

It is not clear that sponsorship of a poll resulted in its results being skewed across the board.

Of course all polls don't come from the media. I don't think I made that reference. But to think that there is no association between the polls and the media in general well I don't know what to tell you. I also didn't refer to any specific data. And I don't see how that would be odd for Fox news showing strong Obama results. Why? Because there was. I wasn't talking about that. I was referring to what effected the polls. And how the media lately aren't even pretending to be unbiased anymore. Patting themselves on the back for helping Obama win. Don't get me wrong, I voted for him, and I am glad he won.

But that doesn't mean I want the media doing what they did. Many Americans have become ASHAMED of the Old School Media especially. It doesn't matter what they think THEIR duty is. They are supposed to give and take fairly from both sides. And write accurate reports, and give it to both sides equally. We didn't have this happening this time around.

I mean when you have reporters actually SAYING that they helped Obama win that's being very arrogant. And attempting on legitimizing such type of shill reporting.

I am pro Obama, and it still sickened me.

[brassplayersrock²]

hi kevin

[linger]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I also dig the fact that Obama's speech had no mention of mandates, and most are saying that he will fill his administration with Republicans. He seems dead set towards working in a bipartisan fashion, and I have no reason to believe that he will undermine this central theme of his campaign. I hope this feels comforting to Republicans, given that I remember how many felt in 2000 and 2004 when Democrats were virtually excluded.

Indeed! The bipartisanship NEEDS TO GO! And I pray Obama can do away with the BS that the two sides have caused over the years.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by linger 

Of course all polls don't come from the media. I don't think I made that reference. But to think that there is no association between the polls and the media in general well I don't know what to tell you. I also didn't refer to any specific data. And I don't see how that would be odd for Fox news showing strong Obama results. Why? Because there was. I wasn't talking about that. I was referring to what effected the polls. And how the media lately aren't even pretending to be unbiased anymore. Patting themselves on the back for helping Obama win. Don't get me wrong, I voted for him, and I am glad he won.

But that doesn't mean I want the media doing what they did. Many Americans have become ASHAMED of the Old School Media especially. It doesn't matter what they think THEIR duty is. They are supposed to give and take fairly from both sides. And write accurate reports, and give it to both sides equally. We didn't have this happening this time around.

I mean when you have reporters actually SAYING that they helped Obama win that's being very arrogant. And attempting on legitimizing such type of shill reporting.

I am pro Obama, and it still sickened me.

Sorry, I was just confused how we transitioned from the polls to the media's reporting in general.

I'm not convinced that media bias is the main problem (and I was saying this well before the election too). I'm convinced that the level of substantive reporting is the problem... Instead of fixating on retarded things like wardrobes and lapel pins they should be fixating on things that actually matter - regardless of what sort of ratings they earn from doing so.

Conservatives often bitch about NPR being biased (although it is probably not at the top of their list of shitlist media companies/organizations), but in its defense it is one of few networks that will stretch out a story and give it the complexity it warrants rather than trying to squeeze a story as complicated as the collapse of our lenders to little sound bytes. It is much better to have a biased, in depth story that at least provides people with the opportunity to examine an issue at depth and come to their own conclusion than the briefest of summaries, or emphasis on fluffy stories that don't really matter.

Obviously in a perfect world we would have fair and balanced *and* substantive networks, but I think that there is far more obsession over the fair and balanced part and not enough on the substantiveness.

[linger]

I don't expect perfection. Never did. As humans we are fallible.

It's one thing to have some bias show threw, and another to GUSH over someone like he was the second coming. That almost lost my vote. I was so turned off by the whole thing. Some even admitted that sometimes it's about informing people what's the right choice to make. WTF? No, no it's not. Because one person's right choice may be another person's wrong choice.

Do I think Obama would have won without the gushing? Sure. By as much? Maybe not. I know this is the 4th time Time has called to the final end to the Reagan legacy.

But all in all I am glad that those that say my country was too racist to vote for a black man, or whatever he is (it shouldn't matter) was proven wrong.

I am proud of my country for looking past that. For not caring. While I am sure their are those that would love to lynch him, they are becoming fewer an d far between.

Times are a changin.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by linger 

I don't expect perfection. Never did. As humans we are fallible.

It's one thing to have some bias show threw, and another to GUSH over someone like he was the second coming. That almost lost my vote. I was so turned off by the whole thing. Some even admitted that sometimes it's about informing people what's the right choice to make. WTF? No, no it's not. Because one person's right choice may be another person's wrong choice.

Do I think Obama would have won without the gushing? Sure. By as much? Maybe not. I know this is the 4th time Time has called to the final end to the Reagan legacy.

But all in all I am glad that those that say my country was too racist to vote for a black man, or whatever he is (it shouldn't matter) was proven wrong.

I am proud of my country for looking past that. For not caring. While I am sure their are those that would love to lynch him, they are becoming fewer an d far between.

Times are a changin.

Your perspective is no doubt different than mine since I don't watch the mainstream media at all, but from what I read it seemed that some were gushing over McCain too, although in a different way and in a different context. I never quite understood how being a war hero would translate into making somebody a good president, this argument was never made clear to me. It demonstrates a sense of patriotism, but who has run for president in the history of the country that was genuinely unpatriotic? I think it's silly to try to come up with a patriotism-meter of some sort (a patriometer ?!)

Would you agree that there were those that gushed about McCain's patriotism and service to the country?

[linger]

You saw people gushing about McCain? Where?

I mean in the way they were doing Obama? I surely did not see it. And I am glad.

[spacefreak]

Yeah, that was the problem. Now Palin -- folks gushed over her. But not McCain. McCain's campaign got turned into the anti-Obama campaign, mostly because it was the only message that he could get through to the people. And even that was via Palin.

Is anyone here aware of McCain's flat-tax plan? Basically, folks could go through all the trouble of filling out their complicated returns, or they could instead file a simple flat tax return. The media refused to cover it, and McCain's decision to accept public financing handicapped severely limited his ability to push his own messaging.

Plenty of folks dismiss Palin, but she was the only one who could draw some headline coverage to McCain's campaign. Had McCain chosen Romney or Pawlenty, I don't think any messages would have gotten through. Romney would have been defending Mormonism (again), and Pawlenty would have faced the same "stupid and inexperienced" tripe that got thrown on Palin. Of course, neither would have had their wardrobe costs hammered into people's minds everytime the public accessed a media channel.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

Had McCain chosen Romney or Pawlenty, I don't think any messages would have gotten through.

Had McCain chosen someone who appeared qualified for the VP role, perhaps the media wouldn't have been so focused on the VP candidate.

[ironknee]

^^

wiskedjak i think you said it all.

if he picked a "safe" vp-- like obama did--it would have been closer...

god bless palin...i hope to watch her talk for a long time... wink*

[Wiskedjak]

By picking Palin, McCain made the race about the first black President or the first female Vice President; there's nothing about McCain in that race, other than to discuss that rationality of his VP candidate pick.

[linger]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

Yeah, that was the problem. Now Palin -- folks gushed over her.

I think that's why the media went on an attack mode. They didn't want her to distract from Obama.

[linger]

Originally Posted by ironknee 

if he picked a "safe" vp-- like obama did--it would have been closer...

You mean "Tommy Flanagan The Pathological liar?" Lohn Lovitz said he got the idea from watching Biden in the 80s.

I wonder now that he is in office, he will marry Morgan Fairchild... Yeah that's the ticket!

I actually liked Palin more than Biden.

But they weren't running for president.

I'd have picked Palin over McCain.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

By picking Palin, McCain made the race about the first black President or the first female Vice President; there's nothing about McCain in that race, other than to discuss that rationality of his VP candidate pick.

Again, this is where McCain's decision to go with public financing hurt him severely. He ended up having no control over the message coverage. He'd speak about his reform ideas, and all that would end up in the headlines were swipes at the cost of Palin's wardrobe.

Palin should do more interviews with Couric. Build them up, hype them, primetime sweeps week and all that... and then refuse to answer the questions. Palin could tell Couric that she'll be happy to answer the questions when asked by a qualified news anchor.

Give me a good Palin-Couric rivalry over the next year, and I'll have little need for other entertainment.