Guest Post: Why President Obama Was Reelected

Tyler Durden's picture

Via James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,

It’s a safe assumption to make that the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama to the office of the United States Presidency will be talked about for decades to come. In history textbooks, 2012 will be referred as a momentous election year when the nation came together and collectively decided to stick with a president through the thick. Like Franklin Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and other “transformative” presidents before him, Obama will be praised for keeping the country together in the midst of economic difficulty. In sum, he will be called a popular figure who triumphed over America’s old guard and lead the nation into a new era of solidarity and renewed social tolerance.

The lavishing has already begun with prominent voices on the left like Paul Krugman declaring the “new America” has made Obama their champion. It’s being said in major newspapers across the world that this new incarnation of the American experiment is much more attuned to the struggle of minorities and the downtrodden. They went with a President who will use the divine power of the federal government to lift the disenfranchised onto the platform of dignified living.

Like most of what passes for accepted history, this is downright propaganda. The country as a whole wasn’t frightened over sudden change by throwing out the incumbent. It wasn’t a declaration of a new, more diverse America. Shaping a new destiny wasn’t on the casual voter’s mind on November 6th.

There is a rational explanation for the President’s reelection which doesn’t invoke a deep or complex meaning. The only way to explain the outcome is in the simplest and direct prose: the moochers prevailed.

Obama’s winning tactic was to do what any respectable man does when he wishes to have something; he bought it. From cell phones and contraceptives to food stamps and unemployment benefits, the Obama administration kept the money flowing to ensure a steady turnout on Election Day. The coup de grâce was painting his opponent as a second coming of Dickens’ Scrooge that was ready to cut the voters from their trust funds.

The campaign made no attempt to hide this tactic. In an online video, celebrity Lena Dunham was tapped to extol the virtues of government-supplied birth control. The advertisement was aimed at a younger generation already guaranteed access to their parent’s health insurance till they turn 26 (and then morph simultaneously into full grown, self-sufficient adults). The video was a great demonstration of the campaign strategy but it was topped by one woman from Cleveland, Ohio who exemplified the public trough mentality on camera. Commonly referred to as the Obama-phone lady, this woman was so enraptured by her “free” cell phone and other welfare entitlements, she was determined to “keep Obama in president” to use her exact words. Though clearly dimwitted, Ms. Obamaphone was a phenomenal orator of the President’s message of goodies in exchange for votes.

Though it worked splendidly, Obama’s strategy was not brilliantly crafted from the minds of experts. It was the same bread and circus routine employed by the Romans and applied to modern demographics that relish in a victim-like mentality.  Women, the youth, blacks, Hispanics, and the elderly were all catered to through subtle patronization and outright payoffs.  It was the same tactic employed by the Roosevelt administration when the New Deal got underway. As journalist John T. Flynn wrote of the popular 32nd president:

It was always easy to sell him a plan that involved giving away government money. It was always easy to interest him in a plan which would confer some special benefit upon some special class in the population in exchange for their votes.

The 2009 auto industry bailout was Obama’s great tribute to Roosevelt. By infusing two auto giants with the federal government and still maintaining the appearance of their private ownership, the President convinced a majority in the battleground state of Ohio to put him back in the White House. Criticizing the auto bailout was the last nail in the coffin for Mitt Romney’s presidential aspirations.

None of this is to say the election of Romney would have meant the much needed axing of the welfare state and state-subsidized dependency. The army of bureaucrats tasked with cutting checks in the name of kindness would still work to expand their budgets. The wealthy interests the former Massachusetts governor looked to appease were welfare queens in themselves and would likely receive all the state coddling money can buy.

Obama won the election by catering to the worst of all human traits: envy. He demonized the rich while promising to take more of their income and give it out in the form of entitlement payments. Under his presidency, the attitude of the takers will continue to swell as they clamor for more privileges. Anybody who speaks out against the Robin Hood scheme will be called an unconscionable xenophobe and a hater of the poor. The protestant work ethic will slowly be choked into submission through deliberate iconoclasm launched by the political class and their pet media pundits.

The opponents of capitalism will keep blaming money and greed for all the ills of society. They will also keep wearing fashionable clothes and coordinating protests on their smartphones while drinking caffeinated drinks that cost the same as some third world country’s average salary. They will scoff at hard work when it’s the sweat and labor of generations before them that has created the living standard they enjoy today. Under their tutelage America will be brought into its final form of, as right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh accurately defined it, a “country of children.”

Economist Thomas DiLorenzo sums up the key to Obama’s victory in this pungent bit of fine wisdom:

Every time Romney made one of his “let’s get the economy going again” speeches extolling the virtues of hard work he terrified the millions of welfare bums and parasites and motivated them more than ever to stand in line for hours to vote for Santa Claus Obama, their “savior” from having to work for a living.  (It’s always the low opportunity cost class that has the “luxury” of spending half a day or more standing in a line).

With Obama’s reelection comes the onward march of American society’s degeneration into that of the lazy, bitter masses forever on the lookout to loot a hapless minority still trying to make an honest living. The coming brave new world will be filled to the brim with self-righteous individuals eager to shuffle around the Earth’s gifts to achieve some kind of equality. In the process, none of them will produce a lick of good outside of satisfying their own disturbed need to dominate. It will be rule of the inept over the capable. Barack Obama will lead the way. He will be replaced in four years with someone that follows the same doctrine. The collective age of the country will continue to collapse till it reaches just shy of an unclothed infant wailing for succor. Except it will be grown men doing the crying and no one around to feed him because the sensible among us has already left.

The people have spoken and made it so.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
icanhasbailout's picture

Fun fact: Fewer Mormons voted for Romney than McCain.

laughnow's picture

Replace 'Bankers' and 'Corporations' with 'Democrats' and you got it straight.

eclectic syncretist's picture

Spot on my friend.  This writer is a jackass and probably a paid shill for the bankers.  For 100 years our central bank has been supporting banks in sucking off the public tit by allowing issuance of credit backed by nothing.

When the public wakes up and learns what has been going on, well turnaround is fairplay.  It's time to bleed them dry and let them die.  If you're going to make free money a policy, give it to everyone, not just a select few.  That's fair, and it is the american way.  Down with Central Banks and bills of credit.

alangreedspank's picture

Some of them anyways. But this tendency to limit your definition of 'moochers' to these shows the mentality people have to define moochers as 'someone else, not me.'

Bankers will say the moochers are the getho welfare moms, while those welfare moms will say the moochers are the bankers.

In the end, they're all sucking on the tit anyways.

ejmoosa's picture

Why?  Because fundamentals do not matter.

When you have no skin in the game but get all the rewards of the game, they will never matter.

Long-John-Silver's picture

ZeroFox News


Is this a poll of Takers (+) and Payers (-)?

Northeaster's picture

Pretty certain ZH eviscerates both Party's fairly regularly, but I think you missed the "Guest Post" in the title. I don't think it's an endorsement of the piece by ZH, just allowing another viewpoint free to post.

In the meantime, most of those that have been here long enough don't trust either side of the political spectrum. Those that can have hedged, or are hedging to the best of their ability against government/Fed stupidity, which we're surely to see more of. 

Go Tribe's picture


kept the country together?


FUCKING SERIOUSLY??????????????????????????????????????

hedgeless_horseman's picture



Hey folks here's a story about Minnie the Moocher.

And here is how the story ends...

Poor men.  Poor men.  Poor men!


Lets_Eat_Ben's picture

Obama is the champion of chump America.

buzzsaw99's picture

like it mattered. get over it already.

Rainman's picture

yeah...lean forward and eat your peas !

SokPOTUS's picture

...from the back seat...

mrktwtch2's picture

well at least we know the question is how do we make money from this unfortunate event??

Waterfallsparkles's picture

Buy Houses that you can rent to Section 8 Tenants.  The Government pays you above average rent and the Tenants stay for a long time.  Only downside is they tear the Houses up but you do get higher rent to compensate for the damage.  Plus, the Governemnt will put you thru 100 Hoops before you can rent it and a paperwork nightmare.  Their inspections are tough.  Anything to show the Landlord who is Boss.

Let the Government buy your Investment Property.

nobusiness's picture

Nailed it.  Unfortunately.

Richard Whiskey's picture

Obama will be remembered as the straw that broke the camels back.
Yet the sheep will continue to follow the Shepard.

Cheesy Bastard's picture

The sheep will continue to follow the wolf who is dressed like a shepherd.'s picture

It may very likely be recalled that the camel's back broke during the reign of Obama but Obama himself will be remembered as an ill-informed puppet.

spooz's picture

I can always trust what Mises, enabler for the elites, tells me.  Even when they have one of their hacks create confusion about what The Chicago Plan is, or tell me why insider trading is okay.

No discussion about the cronies who benefit from either party being elected, just a constant beating on the austerity for the peasants drum.

Here is the insider trading story that is written by the guy ZH chose to explain The Chicago Plan to the sheeple:

Police Commissioner Jacobs's picture

I love this and encourage all Republicans to get behind this line of thinking. Calling people lazy, shiftless parasites is a great way to get them to vote for you.

The traditional GOP message of self-reliance, small, limited government and traditional values is an appealing one that would probably appeal to many of the unproductive moochers in our country. However, when you intentionally offend people you wind up going down in flames in three of the last four national elections.


Keep up the excellent commentary.



yrbmegr's picture

A winning strategy, if there ever was one.  "You didn't vote for me, so you're a moocher.  If you vote for me in the future, I may change my mind about you."

Thulsa Doom's picture

The truth hurts, bitchez!'s picture

Are you saying that you aren't a moocher or that you're proud to be a moocher?

Darth Mul's picture

Most of the people Romney intentionally offended were never going to vote for him.


The largest bloc of potential voters he lost were the Ron Paul supporters.  Due to pressure from the Israel First wing of the party, they did all they could to denigrate his campaign.  But they went further, the Jewish Republican National whateverthefuck wouldn't invite him to their {the only ethnoreligious group} debate - because he's not sufficiently in thrall to Imperialist Zion and its 5th column here.


Further, it may be that Romney's historic level of Jewish ass kissing turned off people who are sick of seeing kids come back in body bags, or sick of seeing their kid's school crumbling, as we continue shipping money overseas.

Waterfallsparkles's picture

Not any different that Obama telling Business Owners you did not build that.

Darth Mul's picture

Do the people junking the above have an argument that Israel could not possibly have been involved?  Do they have a rejoinder to any of the links?


Or is it just that it's impolite to point out that, as to the crime committed on 9/11 - the evidence points to an operation run by intelligence agencies, including that of Israel's?


Fuck you cunts.  Wake the fuck up.  Look at the evidence before you decide that there is no evidence.



blunderdog's picture

I junked ya for being a broken-record spammer type who can't comment on topic.

Inthemix96's picture

42 million Americans, (ahem), voted for Sotero.

According to the polls I read, there are 310 million live in America.

Now in my eyes, thats not anywhere near what the most average of blokes would call a 'majority'.

Please, correct me if I am wrong, of course.

yrbmegr's picture

Who is Sotero?  I didn't see that name on my ballot.'s picture



"My name is Barry Soetoro. I am a third-grade student at SD Asisi. My mom is my idol. My teacher is Ibu Fer. I have a lot of friends. I live near the school. I usually walk to the school with my mom, then go home by myself. Someday I want to be president. I love to visit all the places in Indonesia. Done. The eeeeeeend."

ebworthen's picture

61.9 million for Obama

58.6 million for Romney

U.S. Population ~315 million.

Good point though; 25% is not a majority, and winning by 2% is not a mandate.

Both parties can get busy now arguing in public but colluding behind closed doors to tax the pants off the middle class and cut their already taxed entitlements and individual liberties further.

i_fly_me's picture

Naw ... taxes aren't going up substantially and entitlements won't be reduced meaningfully.  It never mattered who won.  All that matters is that he election is behind us.  We are now free to raise the debt-ceiling and print, print, print.

hampsterwheel's picture

which is why the Rhinos will have to compete on the giveaways to ever win  - and why Ron Paul could never get elected - and which is why the MSM uses the term "Democracy" knowing full well America is a Republic - if you can override the constitutional law (basis for the Republic) and institiute a mob rule (Democracy) then power is all yours....

Throw this in with the fiat fractional banking system - GS,JPM, BofA and you can pretty well stick a fork in the American experiement -- heard Rush already talking about 2014 - LMAO - yeah Rush keep pumping that red team blue team -

I suggest everyone google the five stages of grief and simply get to stage 5 = Acceptance - and realize the middle class is on its own - you are on your own - so prepare accordingly and change your paradigm - adapt and surivive -

- John Gault


Thulsa Doom's picture

Is John Gault the barbarian version of John Galt? If so, "Take him to the tree of woe. Crucify him!"

machineh's picture

Maybe he's the Canadian version, eh?

Pairadimes's picture

Most people put more thought into which igadget they are going to buy next.

Thulsa Doom's picture

Go Galt in combination with Cloward-Piven. Starve the beast and suck off its teet at the same time. The moochers have won, so that is all that is left for the producers. It's the only reasonable and logical response to the reality in which we live.

wonderatitall's picture

everytime i hear a conservative talk i repeat the same deal- GO ON STRIKE- do you want to work for and employ people who think you owe them? let the cafe latte , well dressed bmw driving democrat facists work....quit..end the ponzi criminal empire of blue looters


Thulsa Doom's picture

Downsize, pay off your house, get a menial low wage job, and apply for all the government benefits you can, and take advantage of the tax code. All lawful, and you'd be surprised how many benefits do not take assets into consideration at all. Convince 10% of households to do this, and you'll see a 20% swing in revenue to expenses. Burn, baby, burn!

Ricky Bobby's picture

What do you think of peasants? You think they're saints? Hah! They're foxy beasts! They say, "We've got no rice, we've no wheat. We've got nothing!" But they have! They have everything! Dig under the floors! Or search the barns! You'll find plenty! Beans, salt, rice, sake! Look in the valleys, they've got hidden warehouses! They pose as saints but are full of lies! If they smell a battle, they hunt the defeated! They're nothing but stingy, greedy, blubbering, foxy, and mean! God damn it all! But then . . . who made them such beasts? You did! You samurai did it! You burn their villages! Destroy their farms! Steal their food! Force them to labour! Take their women! And kill them if they resist! So what should peasants do?

from the Seven Samurai

I am proud to be from a long line of crafty peasants.

A Lunatic's picture

I would caution against rolling with pigs.........

mewenz's picture

I didn't vote for Obama, nor did I vote for Romney.

The idea that all those with less are somehow on aggregate lazy moochers and all those with more are somehow "hardworking protestants"

...sorry not buying it.

That's the kind of thinking that epitomizes what drove me away from your "party"

UGrev's picture

I think you're missing the point. Not all those with less are lazy, moochers; but all lazy, moochers are those with less.  It was this demographic that he bought.. easily. 

Thulsa Doom's picture

Correct. Those with more are not necessarily producers. You're either a producer or a moocher. Plenty of unproductive people with lucrative jobs voted for Obama.

mewenz's picture

plenty of lazy / moochers voted and belong on both sides, just as plenty of hard working producers did also.  Neither side uses the concept of fair and free markets or abides by anything close to "the land of opportunity"...look at the numbers on income and wealth disparity.  Are we a country that is being filled with more and more lazy people...not buying that to explain the shocking numbers.

One side simply wants to further enrich the encrusted establishment, regardless of if or how they earned it or if it makes any sense at all in terms of the overall betterment of the country.

The other side pretends to represent "the people" while allowing 1 individual, acting on behalf of the private banking system, to enrich the encrusted financial oligarchy, regardless of if or how they earned it or if it makes any sense at all in terms of the overall betterment of the country

hidingfromhelis's picture

Exactly why neither of the might as well be exactly the same, thoroughly vetted and approved candidates from the different rhetoric but virtually the same BS parties  received my vote.

i_call_you_my_base's picture

"but all lazy, moochers are those with less."

Yeah, right. You obviously haven't met a lot of rich people. They just mooch from daddy instead of the government.