TED Conversations

pat gilbert

TEDCRED 100+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

For those of you who voted for Barack Obama, what were your main reasons for voting for him?

Since this election will make a huge change in the direction of the United States for ever. Clearly the conservative view point did not resonate with half of the voters especially in the swing states. I would like to know what the reasons were for voting for Obama

0
Share:

Closing Statement from pat gilbert

Ok out of 152 comments I got 6 answers to my question.

1 answer was to vote against the rich

1 answer was to vote against Romney's intention to let the too big to fail fail and the jobs that would be lost

3 answers were because Romney did not respect women or pro choice

1 answer was because Romney represented lost jobs.

So to read into it a little with Women it was about pro choice

With men it was about jobs

In my experience this is typically what the left believes.

I do thank you for your forthright answers.

With this stuff the devil is in the details, I get a clear sense of unwillingness to look at the details.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Nov 7 2012: Not a US citizen, but I get the impression that your country is changing faster than the republicans can keep up.

    I guess Obama is the nearest candidate on offer who is more likely to represent the kind of change that people want. Also it will probably take more than 4 years to clear up the mess left behind by the Bush administration.
    • thumb
      Nov 7 2012: Yes the obvious.
    • thumb
      Nov 8 2012: Allan, Since he has been in office for four years, most of the time with a majority in both houses, the Bush excuse is no longer valid. He is accepting his own mess. Harry Trueman had it right .. the buck stops here.

      A leader see opportunities to excell and a loser looks to place blame. Time to put on the big boy pants and get on with it.
    • thumb
      Nov 8 2012: Allan, Pat, Robert,
      I agree that the US is changing, and from what I'm hearing now, AFTER the election, it seems that at least some rebublicans are ready and willing to participate cooperatively in the change.

      Obviously, since Obama won the popular vote and the electoral vote, he seems to be closer to the change people are looking for....as he was when first elected. The mess the Bush administration created in so many respects, was not created over a short period of time, and it will not be changed over a short period of time, especially when we have representatives who are unwilling or unable to work together. Working together seems to be an idea that more politicians are recognizing more now because of the election results. The situations the Bush administration created are not "the Bush excuse" Robert....they are well known facts.

      I voted for Obama because he is closer to the change I would like to see in this country. Over and over again Romney changes his rhetoric depending on what audience he is talking to. Part of the reason he lost, according to all the statistics, was because he failed to get the minority vote, and women's vote....for obvious reasons.
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Thank you for your honest answer Coleen

        To me the whole deal was about spending. My perspective is less than 50% of the viewpoints out there. I will say working together requires 2 to tango or should I say do the Hammer dance. (good one John)

        Obviously these things that are not obvious to me. Help me wrap my wits around this what are the obvious reasons.
        • thumb
          Nov 8 2012: You are welcome Pat! Honesty is much more enjoyable than the alternative:>)

          Spending is an issue for most of us I think, and while the republican party seemed to be formed on conservatism, financial responsibility does not seem to be important to them at this time.

          I totally agree with you Pat...working together requires 2 or more willing participants....which is why I said "representatives", rather than a particular party.

          The reason I said "some rebublicans" in my first paragraph, is because they have been speaking publically about more cooperation on their parts....Chris Christie and John Boehner to name a couple.

          Help you wrap your wits around the obvious? You mean regarding women and minorities?
          Based on many, many comments by Romney, it does not appear that he respects women's rights or minorities....I certainly am not the only one to notice this.
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: How soon or convientently we forget. How did the president (Bush) allocate all of those funds .. answer he could not there was a Democratic Congress who funded all of those operations. I also seem to remember that Bush went to Congress and said Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac are in great danger and the Carter / Clinton mandates to the banks need to be repealed. Barney Franks laughed and continued on.

        I doubt if anyone thinks that Nancy Polosi and Harry Reid acted openly and honorably in passing many bills. Those were back doored much the same as Obama now uses Executive Orders to get his way for things like the White House Sustainability Act (UN Article 21) without Congressional approval.

        I would agree that the House and Senate need to work together and put party aside. However to say it is all the fault of Bush and the Republicians does not inspire a team image. I could say just as easily that in the four years Obama served he ignored the problems facing America and the US economy to implement his pet projects for political reasons. If he had addressed the "Bush" problems they would have been eliminated as he had the house and Senate in his favor. Instead he spend his time suing states for doing the federal job as defined in the Constitution. By the way "these are well know facts".

        It is my opinion that Obama has divided the nation more than ever, damaged our world economic standing, foreign policy is non-existent, collasped small business, and developed a no confidence atmosphere for investment capital. But the illegals are happy .... well done.
        • thumb
          Nov 8 2012: Dear Robert,
          I have not forgotten anything. Based on reading many of your comments here on TED, it appears that you support a particular party no matter what. I respect your choice, and I have my own choice. I'm glad we agree that working together is important:>)
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Re: the House and Senate need to work together.

          And what would this look like in your opinion?
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Thank you Colleen

        Is there any single event that symbolizes your feelings?
        • thumb
          Nov 8 2012: Pat,
          I do not generally make choices based on one particular event. I do my homework, and explore all available information...so...no....there is not any single event that symbolizes my feelings regarding my choice....thanks for asking anyway:>)
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Colleen

        Just to be clear the only semi specific answer you have given me is:

        "it does not appear that he respects women's rights or minorities"

        Which by virtue of 3 out of 4 answer I have received on this thread have been from Women, it appears that Romney lost the election with women.

        I will also say he had an inability to articulate how he could be relevant to the current zeitgeist
        • thumb
          Nov 8 2012: LOL! Perhaps I am "semi specific" because I really don't want to get into a hot and heavy political debate! You asked a simple question, and I responded with a simple answer:>)

          Statistics show that Romney lost the election PARTLY because of lack of support for women's rights.That might indicate that more women voted for Obama BECAUSE of his support of women's rights, which is one reason I voted for him. The same is probably applicable for minorities.

          Actually Pat, my perception, is that Romney was unable to articulate how he could be relevant to anything or anyone except the rich. People, including politicians who hope to rule our world, need to walk their talk. I believe people are evolving to the point to be more able to effectively evaluate a person, and his/her words and actions. Fewer people are voting simply for a party, because that's what they have always done. People are caring more, and I, for one, want a leader who is genuinely caring and honestly responsive to the majority of people. Romney contradicted himself with words and actions in so many ways...so many times, to vote for him was TOTALLY unappealing to me.

          In my perception, Obama is much more consistant, and that is another reason I voted for him. I do not vote for leaders who are constantly waffling and contradicting themselves. Romney wanted desperately to be president, and appeared to say anything to gain that position. He did not seem to be in touch with the people, and that was also, according to statistics, a reason for Obama's re-election, and another reason I voted for Obama.
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Thank you Colleen

        It is not my intent to argue politics especially since there is no point now.

        FWIW I think you are right Romney did not make himself understood. Which is more apparent when you look at his accomplishments and plan and how they were not known by all of the voters. That said almost 50% of the voters did vote for him and now it looks like we are headed into ground hogs day like we did in 2008.
        • thumb
          Nov 8 2012: Dear Pat,
          I did not think it was your intent to argue politics, and you are not the only one commenting on this thread:>)

          FWIW,
          I think many people understood Romney, which may be one reason people voted for Obama...me for one:>)

          I honestly think/feel that we are headed into something more productive, because more people recognize the importance of working together toward beneficial change:>)
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Thanks Colleen
      • thumb
        Nov 8 2012: Colleen, Since I am an Independent and have never voted a straight Party ticket, I would tend to think that untrue. However, my point is and has always been, 1) Define the Bush mess; and 2) stop the blame game and get to work to overcome the problems. Whinning is not one of my favorite character traits and is certainly not one to be admired in leadership.

        Always good to hear from you. Bob.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Dear Robert,
          The statement in my first comment on this thread was for the purpose of recognizing what Obama stepped into with his first term. I believe it was unrealistic to think that he could "fix" everything right away, and I believe that to be an unreasonable expectation that some folks unfortunately had.

          Here is my statement again:
          "The mess the Bush administration created in so many respects, was not created over a short period of time, and it will not be changed over a short period of time, especially when we have representatives who are unwilling or unable to work together".

          This information is well known to many in our country, as well as many people around the world.

          My intent, was to answer this discussion question...
          "For those of you who voted for Barack Obama, what were your main reasons for voting for him?"

          One reason I voted for him again, is because I believe he and the representatives may now realize that they all need to work together.....which I stated in a previous comment.

          I personally AM stopping the blame game, which is why I did not follow through with your previous comment in which you brought up...
          "Democratic Congress who funded all of those operations... Bush went to Congress and said Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac are in great danger... Carter / Clinton mandates to the banks need to be repealed. Barney Franks laughed and continued on....Democratic Congress who funded all of those operations...I also seem to remember that Bush went to Congress and said Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac...Nancy Polosi and Harry Reid"...bla.....bla.....bla!!!

          That is all finished Robert, and it is NOT what this comment thread is about.....let it go....take your own advice and try to stop whining! I totally agree...it is NOT a good character trait, ESPECIALLY when you are doing the exact thing you advise others not to do...whining!
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2012: I do not consider stating facts as whinning. I documented my input with facts. Guess that didn't set well.

        I wish you well.
    • thumb
      Nov 8 2012: Allen, I hear people use the phrase "Bush Mess" quite often. Could you define what you mean by the Bush mess?

      Thanks.
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2012: I am speaking from a European perspective, so my view of the Bush administration may be very different to yours.

        When Bush left the presidency, he left the US in two unfinished wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Both wars were not paid for and both were unnecessary.

        Bush was a plutocrat, who believed in running both country and economy, for the benefit of the super-rich only. Some believe this is why the crash took place. In fact, Bush ran the national debt up to $11 trillion. This national debt caused the Wall Street melt down, which caused millions of people to lose their jobs.

        Now, the sabre-rattling of the republicans toward the oil-rich middle-eastern countries (notably Iran), appear from my perspective to be far more dangerous than Obama's more conciliatory approach.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Hm I'm thinking that your news source loses something when they translate the language.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Allan, Just out of curosity .. have you conducted any research into any of this to verify.

          Just wondering. Bob.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Bush was a President playing with a hot potato the whole time he was in office, not to say he doesn't deserve some of the credit for the crash but most of the policy's (sub-prime mortgage loans policy's) were actually created under Clinton and continued under Bush. Bush was handed 5.7 trillion dollars of debt and he created $4.5 trillion dollar of debt in two terms. Obama has added to this debt $6 trillion dollars and he is not even out of his first term yet. The US national debt stands at 16.2 trillion dollars. The senate has not passed a budget since Obama took office. The markets will continue to decline because of the new Health Care policy and some of us will be forced to go to part time. Obama has also extended the war in Afghanistan. But I didn't vote for either major party I keep my principles unlike Paul Ryan and voted for Gary Johnson.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Obama did get handed a mess but he in my eyes has not made things better. The country is more divided now then it has ever been I just hope we can get out of these tough times before in crash on top of are head like Greece. I was surprised that the NDAA or the Affirmative Action were not covered in the media or the debates at all.
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2012: I suspect that there is a great deal of difference in how American politics affects other countries in the world, as opposed to how American politics affects America.

        If you are only concerned about the introspective position of America only caring about what happens in America, then I could understand a predominance of republican values. But things are changing...

        I haven't done definitive research to support this, but I think the US is beginning to realise that there is a world out there, deeply affected by what happens in your political system (that's not meant to be a criticism!). Hence the increasing distaste for republican values and the rise in popularity of egalitarian, democratic values. In a country whose influence extends worldwide, democratic values are probably also the most important ones to those who are affected by it - and my opinions are no exception.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.