U.S. 2012 Election: Obama Wins!

[04Stefan07]

Obama wins, currently 303 to Democrats and 206 to Republican.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-07/live-blog-us-votes/4357244?WT.svl=news0

[TrevorW]

Honestly not surprised

[brian nordstrom]

:question: I will take Obama over Romney any day , look at the state of the world's economy was in when Obama came to power 4 years ago ( The rich fled and left us holding the baby , so to speak ) , even after all this time without the " Bush's " , Romney would have dug us deeper into the mire finantially wise .
At least the Obama camp thinks of the people , and they have spoken ! YEA, ! , not the dollar,! :thanx: people of the free world, I salute you :thumbsup: .
Brian.

[iceman]

Seriously? Some of the posts in this thread :rolleyes: had to be deleted.

Keep it civil or just don't post.

[JB80]

Well, I don't suppose NASA is in any better shape than before which wasn't great, although with that said it's not worse off either like it could of been.
Shame really.

[brian nordstrom]

:rofl: Brian survives , cool thanks Iceman .
But seriously ......
...you believe Obama's the better man for the job as well , dont ya ? along with the voting public of the USA . ;) .
Brian.

[Forgey]

There is an article on Astro Watch about the election which says,

Romney or Obama? Election Result May Not Affect NASA Much.
The outcome of presidential election is unlikely to have a profound impact on the future direction of American spaceflight and exploration, experts say. While Republican candidate Mitt Romney has revealed few details about his space plans (http://www.space.com/17869-space-policy-obama-romney-debate.html), a Romney Administration probably wouldn't dramatically alter the path NASA is currently pursuing under President Barack Obama, according to some observers. "There are unlikely, as a result of the election, to be seismic changes," said space policy expert John Logsdon, a professor emeritus at George Washington University.

You can read the whole story here:
http://astrowatchblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/romney-or-obama-election-result-may-not.html

[trek1701]

I agree Mike; makes you wonder what the purpose of this thread was in the first place.

[JB80]

Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing that was on space.com too.
It's a pity though the damage has already been done in the last term, both candidates were bad news for NASA really. The seismic changes had already been announced.

[Larryp]

:)
The problem for many americans, Brian, is that Obama stands for big goverment. And the american people do not like the goverment controlling their lives-just look at the uproar when he introduced a very limited form of Medicare. Americans are by and large against their tax money being used to prop up people who do not contribute. Just ask my ex-wife, who is american.
Ronald Reagan tapped into the american psyche when he made his famous quote ( The most feared words in America are" I'm from the goverment and I'm here to help")

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug: Will we see the 'Cola / Westpac " banners on the next generation of space flights ? this probably will be the only way its gonna happen , using NASA's expertise in these things . ;) .
There are a lot of experienced people out there worried , as you guys say .
The way of the future , sorry to say .
USA 's gotta sort its Health / Poor / Housing / Enviroment / Military , ( eg. people ) ... the list goes on and on and on first .
Brian.

[astroron]

As was remarked on the election coverage this morning, they don't want government to interfere with their lives until something like Sandy comes along, then they say where is the government:shrug:
Without large government you don't have the resources to combat such disasters.
The GFC was coursed by lack of government control.
The American public has been brainwashed by the anti socialist/ Communist rhetoric of the republican party.:(

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug: I hear you Larry , but when you have a budget of $4 trillion , you cant just give it to people , I live up here in the NT and this happens with the Indiginous ( mining royalties ) and the shambles they are in is sad to see . they want to , (as your wife says) run their own lives.
All I am saying is the money should be used for the good of all not just the rich!!! thats Capitlisim .:( . This dont work for all ,a proven fact , then human greed sets in ... on and on .. .
They ( capitilists ) have had the run in USA for way to long before Obama and sad to say :confused2: people have been brain washed into beleiving throwing money at the problem, cures it , its happening here in OZ as well mate .
I hear you , but the best man for this BIG ! job won .
Brian.

[Colin_Fraser]

Close result. Boils down to Obama won but 48% of the people don't want him :shrug:

[Larryp]

Brian, the thing that made America the world's economic powerhouse was small goverment and lack of interference in business-unlike us. I can remember reading in The Financial Review back in 1985, that 41% of our tax paying workforce worked in goverment/para-goverment administrative jobs compared to 21% in the USA. These people do not generate any wealth for a country, and the more you can reduce the number of public servants and employ people in manufacturing/service jobs the better. I have no idea what the comparison figures are now, but I imagine they are worse.
Its no good saying get rid of the capitalists, because its the capitalists who provide jobs. People who start up businesses should be encouraged by goverment-not hounded by a pile of rules and regulations which cost heaps of money to comply with, as they are here.
USA's financial problems were not caused by capitalists anyway, but by a dodgy banking/financial system. Just look at the big companies they took down with them-General Motors for instance.
This started with the Clinton presidency, when lending institutions were encouraged to lend money for housing to people who had no way to repay it. This led to more and more creative financial rubbish to try to hide the bad loans and as you know, brought the whole world down.
And I didn't say you should just give people money-quite the opposite.

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug: Unemployed 7% ? , more millioneers /capitar than any where else in the world ( except Iran ) come on the USA has already had it fair shair or white collar criminals bailed out by the 'Bush/
Romney' administration to the tune of $100's of Billions , its a rich boys club and as me and others are saying here , Brain washing works( just ask the average american :question: ) .
The best man WON !, we will discuss this again in 2016 , and Larry I look forward to it mate , your darling is welcome too .
;).
Brian.

[brian nordstrom]

:thumbsup: Gotta love Democracy. , thats why we are " Living in a free World ".
( PS. our political system we have here in Australia aint Democracy )
Brian.

[Larryp]

Brian, I have edited this post since your reply, and I would ask you how many people would have a job if it wasn't for capitalists

[brian nordstrom]

:lol: Every " Hunter Gatherer " out there ?
Serfdom , Larry aint my cup of TEA as the English say .
Brian.

[Larryp]

I have no idea what you mean, but I think we should agree to disagree and leave it at that

[brian nordstrom]

:) YEP! , I mean hows about forgetting about Money (capitalisim ) and get back to the basics , Hunting and Gathering .
Brian.

[Larryp]

I don't think I would make a good hunter/gatherer at my age, Brian!:rofl:

[brian nordstrom]

:D My 3 son's , 1 daughter , 4 grand kids will look after me ok , I think .:D.( 3 hunter's and 1 gatherer with 4 helpers , nice ) .
Brian.

[mithrandir]

So? Here in Oz over 50% of the voters did not want a Labor government but we still got landed with one.

Obama got over 50% of the popular vote. You can win a presidential election with a lot less than that. In essence you need to win the large states to get 270 electoral college votes as most states are winner takes all.

[LewisM]

Same situation in the USA as it is here - the opposition is worse than the powers that be, so what choice do you have? :)

Honestly, if there was an election here tomorrow, I have NO clue who I would BOTHER to vote for! All as worthless as each other.

The USA will eventually sort itself out again. We will too

[LewisM]

There are good and bad points to every political system/type. NONE is perfect - if it were, we'd all strive for that Utopia (oh dear, I hear Karl Marx rolling over in his grave, murmuring...)

[strongmanmike]

Well I've said it before and I'll say it again, irrespective of what cherry picking issues and problems may suggest, overall guys, our quality of life in Australia is the best in the World and is projected to be so for decades to come and much better than the US.

Look Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_future_Human_D evelopment_Index_projections_of_the _United_Nations)

Look here to understand the Human Development Index (http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/human_development.htm)

So whether we are being headed up by a ghastly Fabian or a failed Catholic Priest who can't string too words together, in a global sense we should be alright for some time to come :thumbsup:

:lol:

[PCH]

Too right Mike. I'm from pommieland originally, and I weep at the way it's going.

This recent report of the best places to live in the world have 4 aussie cities in the top ten. No US cities made it, although a couple of Canadian ones did.
The research is based on all sorts of liveability factors including jobs/cost of living/crime/amenities and more...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertypicturegalleries/9477990/The-worlds-10-best-cities-to-live-in.html?frame=2311083

[multiweb]

Hope so. We've still go it pretty good here. :)

We need to cut down on our civil servants though and gvt size, whichever side it will be and start manufacturing and producing. We have all the raw materials and the brains to do it. I've always been amazed at the amount of smart scientists and ground breaking discoveries that originated in Australia. Must be the worries free layback life style.

The US election was pretty close. Not many states voted Obama in if you look at the map (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-21/2012-us-presidential-election-map-interactive/4272242). I guess the american 'outback' was in favour of Romney but the cities and more densely populated areas for Obama. I think Sandy helped Obama too as he did the right thing and was on the ground straight away. Romney wasn't.

[Dave2042]

I'm a political agnostic with socially moderate, somewhat libertarian view, a positive view of capitalism and markets (working in financial markets), but a recognition that government has an important practical role. Now that places me more or less in the middle, however I can see that there are reasonable positions well on either side of me, BUT...

Watching this election (and our own political machinations) I can't get over the degree to which many people accept the rhetoric of both sides despite it being totally at odds with their actual behaviour.

For example, the Republicans go on and on about small government (which I think is no bad thing), however this bears no relationship to their practical policies. They promote huge government - enormous military, a security state with astonishing powers of arrest and detention, a police state feeding off an unwinnable war on drugs and endless middle-class welfare.

On the other side, the Democrats go on and on about 'nice things' (most of which I agree with), but again this doesn't seem to mean anything in practice. Guantanamo Bay is still there, they're not getting out of any wars, there is no real attempt to stop corporate interests controlling the political process and offshore extrajudicial killings are regarded as fine.

We have the same thing here. There is a rhetorical orthodoxy that the Liberals are the hard-nosed party of economic rationalism and Labour is the party of social responsibility, but I can't see any evidence in policy implementation that either has actually been the case for a very long time.

Oh well.

[strongmanmike]

Egggs..actly :thumbsup:

[mithrandir]

Interestingly there were a few states which had referenda on different forms of legalisation of marijuana. Most of them seem to have got over 50% support, but that might not be enough to get them enacted.

The only way to win the drug war is legalise some form of access, eg on prescription. At one sweep you remove the profits from the drug cartels and introduce quality control.

[rat156]

Since when have political discussions been allowed on IIS?

I should start up a religious one and see whether he hypocrisy extends that far...

Dismayed
Suart

[iceman]

:rolleyes:

Come on Stuart.

I've already deleted some posts that were inappropriate from this thread.

If people keep it civil it can stay. When it starts getting attacking, personal or inappropriate, it goes.

Can't get much fairer than that.

[rat156]

Hi Mike,

Just pointing out that it's a bit hypocritical to have a TOS which states...



and then to allow one which has had, by your own admission, some inappropriate posts.

Particularly when you and the mods jump on other topics like a flash. I dunno, I suppose I just expect that if you make the rules then you abide by them.

I don't mind, it means that I can revisit some old threads if you allow rational discussion of controversial topics now and just delete the rants and ravings of the irrational few. I think I may have even suggested this to you in an email a couple of years ago as a fair way of controlling threads which spiral out of control.

Well done.

Cheers
Stuart

[barx1963]

Stuart
The TOS does not state that all threads about politics will be deleted. It simply asks that we avoid this as a topic. I we users choose to start up a political thread, then as long everyone is civil, and the "ranting" and name calling is avoided, all is good.
But the TOS gives fair warning that discussion will be monitored and inappropriate posts deleted and threads spiralling into bad territory will be locked.
Apart from at least 1 obviously offensive post ( I may have missed others before they were deleted) the discussion in this thread has been pretty civil, so why not let it go on.
Mike and the mods can't win, they get slammed for locking threads and deleting post, then cop when they don't.

Malcolm

[xstream]

:rolleyes: Amen,

ex-mod.

[JB80]

I don't disagree with anything you have said there to be honest and the extra funding given to the private sector can only be a positive thing but I don't feel it should be at the expense of NASA funding.

And I agree that there are other areas that need to be sorted out as well but I don't feel they need to touch NASA in the process barring massively increasing the budget. The amount that is spent on NASA is minuscule, they spend more money on air conditioning tents in Iraq and Afghanistan per year than the entire NASA budget, imagine what they could do if it was funded correctly.

It's just something I feel strongly about even though not being a US citizen NASA cuts do have global implications both fiscally and inspirationally.

Phill Plait has the best of it really.... http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/16/wait-how-big-is-nasas-budget-again/
He is amongst a few vocal supporters and there a loads of articles on badastronomy that are worth a read.

In short they should of left NASA alone.



edit: Well as I was typing.....
http://www.space.com/18380-nasa-moon-missions-obama-election.html

I hope it's not just speculation.

[rat156]

No, they can actually. If the rules are applied equally and fairly across all topics then there can be no complaints.

I have started threads in the past (not in one of the areas which are advised against) with a plea for people to keep on topic and keep civil. A few inflammatory posts later by individuals who don't want that particular topic discussed, thread closed or worse still thread removed never to be seen again.

I have joined other people's discussions, we have been debating various topics, again someone (usually from outside the core of people contributing to the discussion) posts some name calling etc, thread locked etc.

Now, it seems, that Mike and the mods are going to just delete the offending posts, an action that I applaud as long as, again, it's applied fairly.

So that's a win for free speech and, eventually, a win for the mods and Mike.

Cheers
Stuart

[TrevorW]

Too true, agree, remove the offending posts but keep the topic alive, moderation is just that.

[04Stefan07]

I thought I would start the thread since it was big news at the time. I really don't care much for politics, in fact I hate it :lol:. I only just like watching the elections.

All politicians are the same. They promise and promise but nothing gets done.

[astroron]

If nothing gets done,as you say in the above quote, then we should be still running about in bear skins,as it is the political process and and governance
good and bad that gets us where we are today.
That a politician *Theodore Rosevelt got the USA out of the Great Depression, says it all.
President Obama has even just a big a task, trying to do things with congress being a rock around his waist.
Cheers:thumbsup:

[Stardrifter_WA]

Sorry Stefan, I think that is a ridiculous statement; or at the very least, an uninformed one. Do you think that all the infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, police, defence, emergency services etc. just come in being on their own :question:

Sure, they sometimes make promises they can't keep, and we sure hear about in the news when they don't, however, media do not always tell about all the good things they do, mostly without a lot of recognition.

Like most, I too have a strong distrust of politicians, however, the alternative wouldn't be any better; such as outright anarchy or even a military junta! :eyepop:

My local member of parliament has done a lot of good in our area, and on a personal level, he had the relevant authorities shade an annoying light for me, providing me with a darker back yard, so I am happy :)

Having politicians may not be the best solution, but it is, however, the least evil solution. At least, with our political system we get the chance to make changes (read: throw them out), something a lot of countries don't get to do, at least, without force, i.e Egypt, Syria, Yemen etc.

Overall, politicians, over the years, have made Australia a much better place to live, despite their shortcomings. If you think not, try living in a poor country or one under military rule. I certainly wouldn't want to live anywhere else, except, maybe, Canada.

But, the biggest problem we face is a clear choice, as there appears to be a dearth of political talent, at the moment; or at least, that is what I think anyway.

[barx1963]

Actually it was Franklin D Roosevelt (Theodore was Franklins 5th cousin and was President from 1901 to 1909) who was President from 1932 until 1945.

Malcolm

[astroron]

Ooops:rolleyes:, of course it was.:)
I don't know what made me think of Theodore:shrug:
Cheers:thumbsup: