Skip to main content

Obama Wins: But is this the ugliest win in presidential history?

I'm not a historian so I can't even answer my own question, but one has to wonder if this might go down as the ugliest 'win' in US Presidential history.

The reason I say this is the following - if the projections on Huffington Post site (as for 11:43pm Eastern) hold, it looks like Obama has won the electoral college (and hence the Presidency) yet could still easily lose the popular vote. 

(note: as of 12:12am, while electorally Obama is at 290 electoral votes, Romney still holds the popular vote). 


In addition to potentially losing the popular vote, more states voted for Romney. If you didn't take the electoral college into consideration you'd have thought Romney won (the map is covered in red more so than blue).  

One has to wonder if this is perhaps the ugliest win in US Presidential history as a result. 

From a PR perspective this is about as bad as it can get for the next four years. 

The best case scenario would have been a decisive win for either Obama or Romney.  Then the media and the narrative in the country would have changed. 

A split decision like this means partisanship will only get worse in Washington (if that's even possible). The media narrative will continue to be as toxic as it has been for the past four years (with Rep media trashing the president and Dem media excusing poor leadership). 

Even if Obama manages to squeak out the popular vote when all is said and done, he's got a giant mess on his hands. Half the country does not want him as president (so much so that they voted for Romney, who almost no one was genuinely enthusiastic about).

So there you have it, four more years of Obama. Those that love him will be happy. Those that don't will be disappointed. 

But the real story in my opinion is not whether people are happy or not, rather, it's the ramifications of such an ugly win.  This spells another four years of toxic partisanship that will make getting anything done almost impossible. 

The PR challenge for Obama is the same now as it was in 2008, can he unify a country whose political and economic fabric seems to be on the verge of tearing itself apart at the seams?

Only time will tell. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Featured Post: Where Can You Buy My Books?

Interested in purchasing one of my books? Below are the links that will take you to the right place on Amazon. A Manufactured Mind On Amazon On Kobo On Barnes and Noble On iTunes Obey On Amazon On Kobo  On B&N  On iTunes  The Fall of Man Trilogy Days of Judgment (Book One) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes System Crash (Book Two) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes A Fool's Requiem (Book Three) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes
Post a Comment
Read more

E-cigarettes: A PR battle Health Canada cannot win?

So I've now been using an e-cigarette (e-cig) for two months and thought I'd talk a bit about how I see the upcoming battle between Health Canada and e-cigs going. First though, let's do a quick overview of what exactly an e-cig is. Basically an e-cig vaporizes liquid that contains nicotine. The vapor is then inhaled. People who use e-cigs are called vapers (not smokers). Because the liquid is atomized (ie. vaporized), not burned the way tobacco is, vapers do not consider themselves 'smokers' in anyway. An e-cig is comprised of basically three components: The tank - this is the component that holds the juice (sometimes referred to as e-juice or e-liquid). The atomizer - this a coil and wick unit that atomizes the juice. When the coil is heated (from the battery) it atomizes the juice that has soaked into the wick. The battery - batteries for e-cigs come in various capacities (some last 8 hours, others 40+ hours, depending on their size).  The ba...
3 comments
Read more

More evidence of the Internet Revolution

Bell ushers in new era with CTV deal  So Bell has purchased CTV.  Not really that big a deal under normal circumstances, except when you realize why they did it... Driving convergence this time, the Internet-enabled mobile devices such as smart phones and computer tablets are threatening home television’s lock on viewers. Bell, like its rivals, wants to offer more content to its subscribers, however they receive the signal. Viewers are increasingly interested in watching their favourite shows on their phones while they ride the bus or sit in the park, and the cable and phone companies that have served as middle men between viewers and broadcasters were in danger of being marginalized. You know what sort of worries me about this kind of acquisition? It's clearly an attempt to own (control) content. When they say marginalized what they really mean is service providers being nothing more than dumb pipes - providing connectivity to the internet and nothing more. As ...
Post a Comment
Read more