11.01.2012 08:55 AM

The moment Barack Obama won re-election

Right here.


  1. AP says:

    When I saw this photo it reminded me of a similar picture of George W. Bush during his 2004 re-election campaign.


  2. Kirsten says:

    Okay, I am going to say this, even though maybe I shouldn’t, because I have been thinking it since last night…after having seen the same comment re: this photo, several times. Here it is: while I concur entirely that these are the kind of pictures you PRAY for in the dying days of a close campaign, I think when people say that this is the picture that wins the campaign, it belies all of the other hard work that came before it.

    I get what you are trying to say here, good visuals win, because they communicate more than a 1000 page missive or a 30 minute speech. This picture, conveys the genuine concern Obama has for his country and it evokes a very powerful feeling. Here’s my point – it’s not the photo, it’s his authenticity. Put Romney in this same picture, you don’t get the same result.

  3. will says:

    Well spotted, Warren. It’s a very powerful image and I suspect voters in swing states will see it a few times in the final days of the campaign.

  4. Lance says:

    And here is the moment he lost it –


    • Ted B says:

      Over-dramatic a bit?

      Dude, I was the 4076th viewer of that video.

      • Lance says:

        It isn’t the fact that relatively few people watched it; it is the fact that his campaign is desperate enough to even make it. Ads like these absolutley REEK of desperation.

    • Lord Kitchener says:

      what a load of bullshit

    • dave says:

      This gives me an embarrassing flashback:
      Circa 1970 and I was school teacher in a tiny high school just north of Swan River in Manitoba. An American singing group called ‘Up With People’ came thru. They sang in Swan(I missed it). Next day, some of the singers, all 22 year old small town fresh faced mid American types, came ot our school, and a couple of them knocked on my classroom door. they asked ot talk ot my kids. I looked at my kids, all farm kid smiles eager to replace my lesson on socials with guests from afar, and I let the Americans in. Then I stood aside. but one came to me and said that the principal said that they could talk to the kids without the teacher there. To my constant embarrassment, I left my kids and went away to do some other teacher thing.
      10 or 15 minutes later, I returned, and the Americans left.
      My kids all laughed and said soemthing like: “All they did was ask questions about you. Like, do you talk about the Vietnam War? do you say nasty things about the USA? or about the USA president? We told them that you never did.” It was a time when I had weekly editions of New York Times and Chicago Trib in my classroom, along with a few Canuck papers, along the side shelves, available to the kids.
      I never did check with my principal. Maybe I felt too embarrased with myself leaving my kids with outsiders.
      It was a few years later before I came across info on USA CIA government funding of this group, and what their job was.

      Anyway, thanks for this link. Looks like they are using younger kids now.

      • Iris Mclean says:

        I remember that outfit too. Absolutely creepy, in a Youth For Christ sort of way.

      • smelter rat says:

        Interesting on 2 counts. I’ve never heard of the Up With People/CIA link before, and i don’t know of any high schools “just north of Swan River’. Bowsman? Not calling you out, just curious.

    • Tim Sullivan says:

      What was it? It’s been removed.

      • Warren says:

        It was a racist comment by JamesHalifax. He’s banned for the time being.

        • Tim Sullivan says:

          I’m looking for the “moment he lost it” vid, never anything JamesHalifax says.

          “for the time being” ? Your house, your rules, but what picture does JamesHalifax have of you smoking a cigar with Rush Limbaugh in fishnets.

  5. Alex says:

    I don’t think Obama will be re-elected because of Sandy. I think Obama “won” the election a long time ago.

    One of the most under-reported political stories is what I call Moneyball vs Truthiness. As we all know, Moneyball is the story of Oakland A’s General Manager Billy Beane, who used statistical analysis to acquire new players. This approach angered (and frightened) traditional scouts, because it threatened their livelihood. Similarly, statistical analysts like Nate Silver, Drew Linzer and Sam Wang use numbers to analyse elections, rather than engage in traditional political “scouting.” These writers have been saying for a long time now that Obama is the favourite to win.

    The Truthiness crowd (hat tip to Stephen Colbert) represent traditional journalists. This group believes that the Moneyball analysts are fools, and that they are misrepresenting the election which is obviously a tossup. Just like the baseball scouts, this group believes that elections are best analysed by on the ground reporting, and then writing about what you feel in your gut. This is why a lot of reporters have been arguing that Romney gained momentum in the first presidential debate, and then kept moving forward until Sandy hit.

    The Moneyball view of the election debunks this conventional narrative. According to the stats nerds, Romney’s “momentum” peaked in mid-October, and then stalled as Obama once again continued his march towards victory. This took place well before Sandy hit. Now, it’s possible that the Truthiness view is correct, and that the fancy computers of the statisticians will be covered in egg, but I doubt it.

    However, I am curious to hear what others think.

    • George says:

      I’d both say Obama wins why fight about who is right?

      • Dan says:

        Depends on what’s the more interesting question. Some people just want to cheer for their guy and hope he wins. A lot of us want to be able to learn from the past to predict the future, let alone create the future we want.

        Moneyball FTW.

    • dave says:

      Another factor in what we see in mainstream media reporting is that mainstream media makes a whole lot more advertising money when there is a close race.

      (Watch that guy who does Power and Politics and he does not moderate, he allows guests to all natter at the same time, and then he ends it by claiming it was a great discussion. As Izzy Asper might have put it, ‘That discussion just sold a lot of soap.’)

  6. Joey Rapaport says:

    Praying that you’re right… OHIO, OHIO, OHIO…

  7. Mike B says:

    Christie put people ahead of politics, as all good elected leaders do.

    Had this cynical post been put up on a Democratic blog that Americans actually read it could have caused a real storm of trouble for Obama. Authenticity, really?

    Good thing Canadians are as inconsequential as we are!

  8. frmr Disgruntled Con now Happy Lib says:

    Awesome photo…..kind hearted, caring, warm, sincere……..lets hope it transmits into votes for the man…..

  9. dave says:

    I understand that the regime just arrested Julia Stein for a bout the 3rd time during this election campaign. So she won’t be a threat to either Obama or Romney.

  10. Steve says:

    Unhatched chickens being counted. There was no hurricane in Ohio, though I suspect Obama’s ground campaign will be drawing inferences for voters there, comparing his response to W’s in 2005 and getting Ohioans wonder what would happen if their state was hit by a disaster. And I guess I’m forgetting the storm Romney himself caused this week with the Jeeps to China ad, which probably damaged his campaign in Ohio.

  11. Dan says:

    The election was won a long time ago. When the Tea Party hijacked the Republican Party, and a moderate Republican governor from Massachusetts won the leadership nomination by hiding from every position he’s ever taken in the past.

    All the polling since then has been noise.

  12. billg says:

    Is that a picture of the next 2 presidents?
    Two pretty good men. Two pretty good politicians. Two very good orators. Would be ironic wouldnt it?

  13. Jon Evan says:

    Yeh, I think Obama should go to all the soup kitchens, all the places where people get food stamps and to all the unemployment centers and just give out his hugs in front of tv cameras! Yep, cause that’s all the hope he’s come to these four years! Clearly, his polices have not worked. C’mon, it’s all about jobs not photo-ops!

  14. Suzanne says:

    I do think Obama won the election a long time ago. What this depicts is Chris Christie’s start of his election campaign on November 7, 2012.

  15. smelter rat says:

    I nominate Jameshalifax for this week’s Golden Tulk Award. In fact, if he tries just a little bit harder he could keep that baby for the entire year!

  16. Chubsy Ubsy says:

    I’m not sure it matters who wins the election. Much like the Ontario Liberals economically, there’s going to be some harsh realities and tough decisions facing the Commander In Chief post election. I expect both Obama or Romney to take a hard right fiscally regardless of the current campaign rhetoric. No denying that is a powerful photo, though.

  17. Dude Love says:

    What we don’t realize in Canada is that approx. 30%-40% of registered voters have already voted prior to the events of Sandy and this photo. Advanced voter polling from the last election had Obama with a 25 point lead over McCain. This election Obama has a 5 point lead over Romney from advanced polls.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *