PanARMENIAN.Net - Finally, the U.S. has to decide its further steps with regard to Turkey and try to minimize Russia’s influence in Caucasus. Still, the question is, whether the U.S. president is able to settle such global issues given the ongoing crisis and extreme unpopularity of his proposals to the Congress. The House of Representatives has remained in the reign of Republicans, which means Obama’s bills may be at least hindered. At the worst, they will not even be spoken about, and even Senate’s Democratic majority won’t save the U.S. healthcare system. Meanwhile, one can’t say Obama’s victory came “fairly”. On November 11, 2012 Daniel Greenfield writes:
“Let’s face it. Obama won the election. Just like Putin and Ahmadinejad did theirs. The only difference is that unlike Iranians and Russians, Americans won’t be gathering in the streets to protest their disenfranchisement at the hands of the corrupt Democratic Party machine.
First, he received over 99% of the vote in districts where GOP inspectors were illegally removed. Next, he won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland. Well, he’s gotten another lucky break!
Mr. Obama won Wood County in Ohio this year. That’s right, Mr. Obama won the majority of Wood County’s 108% of registered voters. That’s not a typo. In 2012, 106,258 people in Wood County are registered to vote out of an eligible 98,213.
Secretary of College Democrats Morgan Holliger chimed in, “We won Wood County, we won Ohio.”
Mr. Obama did indeed win Wood County, along with its 108% of voters.”
“Half the Democratic ground game is voter turnout. The other half is voter fraud. Voter ID would make an impact on this game, but that would be just like the return of Segregation or something,” says “Voter Fraud: Obama Won 108% of Registered Voters in Ohio County” article published on perevodika.ru. This can hardly be named “intrigues of U.S. enemies”. Apparently, this is truth, which had already happened during the election of George W. Bush...
Mitt Romney would be a worse president than Obama, both for the United States and the rest of the world. Most likely, the electors who supported Obama were basing namely on this principle.
Well, we’ll not mention the unclear and sometimes even absurd system of U.S. presidential elections; the world does not perceive why the head of the state cannot be elected through direct national voting, but requires some electors instead…
Now, let’s get back to Obama. First thing he will do is change the Secretary of State. Hillary Clinton is neither worse nor better than her predecessors in the past 20 years. However, she was not quite good at international relations, and sometimes made unthinkable blunders like saying that “Senegal is the stronghold of democracy”. Clinton who launched the “Arab spring” never managed to take the lead in the process, and we are facing the consequences now. In any case, Obama is not the one to be envied now, if the U.S. further pursues experiments with the foreign policy. And the personality of the head of the Department of State will no longer matter. Obama’s current situation is well described by Winston Churchill’s phrase: “A politician must have the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year – and to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
The question is, will the U.S. president be able to explain to his people in four years why he failed in certain aspects or not? He may not have to explain anything, though; in four years, the share of the black population of the United States will grow, and this very sector will decide on the 45th U.S. president. So, George W. Bush may appear to be the last white president of the U.S.