America, Where To?

Published in Bursa
(Romania) on 12 November 2012
by Cristian Pîrvulescu (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by George-Cristian Samoilă. Edited by Peter L. McGuire.
Once the results for the electoral college in the state of Florida were released, Barack Obama's victory became even more definitive. The president secured 332 electoral votes; Mitt Romney obtained only 206. Compared to the 2008 elections, when he became president on a wave of hope, Obama only lost two states, Indiana and North Carolina, both traditionally right-wing, but he won, with a slight majority, the elections in Ohio, Virginia and, finally, Florida. Even the popular vote was more in favor for Obama than polls suggested: he won 50.06 percent (65,713,086 votes) against Romney’s 47.9 percent (58,510,160). In 2008, with a much more significant number of voters (131,257,328 compared to this year's 122,146,119) Obama received 69,456,897, 52.92 percent of all votes, which shows a slightly less dramatic drop than most researchers were estimating. The shock of this reelection for the radicals in the opposing camp was so great that Karl Rove, former counselor and consultant for George Bush Jr., contested the results of the Ohio election on Fox News despite evidence and some tea party representatives posted messages, as in Cincinnati, where they were deploring the “suicide of the entire nation” or elsewhere in Ohio, where there were fears of the country entering socialism in a few months.

These reactions, beyond the frustration of those that considered this election the chance for the definitive exit of America from the Roosevelt era, prove the ideological reasons behind Obama's reelection. If in 2008 Obama's victory was considered historical especially because of his African-American origins, in 2012 his victory is an indisputable ideological achievement. Beyond the balancing acts and the compromises made by the U.S. president, particularly in the last two years of office, after the Congress elections of 2010 when the Republicans won a majority in the House of Representatives, the majority of Americans sent a clear message concerning the direction the U.S. should take.

It wasn't just the Republicans that were unsatisfied by the results in Obama's first term, but also what could be called the left wing of the Democrats, for whom the president's concessions toward Wall Street interests and major multinational companies were too large. Despite this, the majority of them continued to vote for Obama. No matter what left-wing critics of Obama say, Obamacare — the new health care system so heavily criticized by far right-wing Americans with Paul Ryan (the republican vice-president candidate) in the lead — was validated through the election. Such a reform wasn't successfully completed by Roosevelt or Bill Clinton, who attempted similar programs. After these elections, for the Republicans — who bet on economic radicalism and accepted the ideological supremacy of the tea party movement — the time has come for a reevaluation and adaptation to an American society for which democracy is at least as important as capitalism. For the Republicans, a series of local victories against religious conservatives, who also have determined the direction of the party in recent years, will have consequences. Todd Akin, the man that claimed the female body can “shut down” pregnancy in case of rape, as well as ultra-conservatives Richard Murdock and Scott Brown, were defeated by representatives of left-wing Democrats like Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren or Tammy Baldwin, the first senator to openly declare her homosexuality.

Obama isn't the one to blame for the gap separating America today in such a brutal manner, but the Republicans, who, ever since Reagan, have tried to drag the world back to where it was before the Great Depression. To Obama, this second term is an essential one, as he has only four years to accomplish unfulfilled promises, especially economic ones and those concerning international policy, but also to prepare America for another Democratic president. And, with a hostile House of Representatives, he has a long way to go.


Odată ce s-a făcut public şi rezultatul alegerilor pentru marii electori din Florida, victoria lui Barack Obama a devenit şi mai categorică. Cu 332 de electori faţă de doar 206 de electori obţinuţi de Mitt Romney. Deja faţă de alegerile prezidenţiale din 2008, când era ales preşedinte pe un val de speranţă, Obama nu a pierdut decât două state, Indiana şi Carolina de Nord, ambele tradiţional ancorate la dreapta, dar a câştigat, cu o diferenţă mică, alegerile din Ohio, Virginia şi, în final, Florida. Şi votul popular a fost mult mai clar în favoarea lui Obama decât anticipau sondajele de opinie: 50,06% (61.713.086 de voturi) faţă de 47,9% (58.510.160). În 2008, la o prezenţă la vot mult mai importantă, de 131.257.328 faţă de doar 122.146.119 anul acesta, Obama obţinea 69.456.897, adică 52,92 % din totalul voturilor, ceea ce arată o scădere mai puţin dramatică decât estimau majoritatea cercetătorilor. Şocul acestei realegeri pentru radicalii din tabăra adversă a fost atât de mare încât Karl Rove, fostul consilier şi consultat al lui George Bush Jr., a contestat rezultatul alegerilor din Ohio la Fox News în ciuda evidenţelor, iar unii reprezentanţi ai Tea Party au postat masaje, precum la Cincinnati, în care deplângeau "sinuciderea întregii naţiuni" sau, ca în Ohio, în care vorbeau despre trecerea "în câteva luni a ţării la socialism"!
Aceste reacţii, dincolo de frustrarea celor ce considerau aceste alegeri ca şansa ieşirii definitive a Americii din era Roosevelt, probează substanţa ideologică a realegeri lui Obama. Dacă în 2008 victoria lui Obama era considerată istorică mai ales datorită originii sale afro-americane, în 2012 victoria sa este o indiscutabilă reuşită ideologică. Dincolo de echilibristica şi compromisurile pe care le-a făcut preşedintele american, mai ales în ultimi doi ani de mandat, după alegerile congresionale din 2010 când republicanii preluau controlul Camerei Reprezentanţilor, majoritatea americanilor au transmis un mesaj clar legat de direcţia pe care ar trebui să o ia America.
Nu doar republicanii au fost nemulţumiţi de rezultatele primului mandat al lui Obama, ci şi ceea ce s-ar putea numi aripa stânga a democraţilor, pentru care cedările preşedintelui american în faţa intereselor Wall Street-ului şi ale marilor companii multinaţionale au fost prea mari. Cu toate acestea, majoritatea acestora au continuat să voteze Obama. şi orice ar spune critici de la stânga lui Obama, Obamacare - reforma sistemului de asigurării de sănătate atât de criticată de extrema dreaptă americană în frunte cu Paul Ryan, candidatul la vicepreşedinţie al republicanilor - a fost validată prin alegeri. Or, o astfel de reformă nu a fost dusă până la capăt nici de Roosevelt, nici de Bill Clinton, care, la vreme lor, au încercat reforme asemănătoare. După aceste alegeri la republicani, după ce au mizat pe radicalismul economic şi au acceptat supremaţia ideologică a Tea Party, a venit momentul reevaluării ideologice şi adaptării la o societate americană pentru care democraţia este cel puţin la fel de importantă precum capitalismul. Pentru republicani o serie de victorii locale împotriva unor reprezentanţi ai aripii conservator-religioase, care, de asemenea, a impus linia partidului în ultimii ani, vor avea consecinţe. Todd Akin, bărbatul pentru care "corpul femeii se închide în caz de viol" precum şi ultraconservatorii Richard Murdock sau Scott Brown au fost învinşi de reprezentante ale aripii de stânga a democraţilor precum profesoara de la Harvard Elizabeth Warren sau Tammy Baldwin, prima senatoare care şi-a afirmat deschis lesbianismul.
Nu lui Obama i se poate reproşa fractura care desparte astăzi America de o manieră atât de brutală, ci republicanilor, care au încercat de la Reagan încoace să întoarcă prin orice mijloace lumea acolo unde se afla înainte de Marea Criză. Pentru Obama, acest al doilea mandat este unul esenţial, căci nu are decât patru ani pentru a-şi realiza promisiunile neonorate, mai ales pe plan economic, dar şi în politica internaţională, dar şi pentru a pregăti America pentru încă un preşedinte democrat. Şi, cu o Cameră a Reprezentanţilor ce îi rămâ­ne ostilă, va avea destul de multe dificultăţi.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Austria: The US Courts Are the Last Bastion of Resistance

       

Spain: Trump, Xi and the Art of Immortality

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Poland: Marek Kutarba: Donald Trump Makes Promises to Karol Nawrocki. But Did He Run Them by Putin?

Topics

Spain: Charlie Kirk and the Awful People Celebrating His Death

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Russia: Trump the Multipolarist*

Turkey: Blood and Fury: Killing of Charlie Kirk, Escalating US Political Violence

Thailand: Brazil and the US: Same Crime, Different Fate

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Related Articles

Romania: Trump Hopes That All American Troops in Afghanistan and Iraq Will Be Repatriated by May

Romania: America’s Allies Might Miss Donald Trump

Romania: Sow the Wind and Reap the Whirlwind

Romania: Dispute between Trump and Macron Renders Trans-Atlantic Relationship Uncertain

Romania: A New Step to Hell: Donald Trump Unilaterally Denounces Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty