In the previous elections Barak Hussain Obama had won with a landslide.
While some attribute it to his "charisma", and still others to the colour of his skin, the real cause of his landslide victory were the policies of the George Bush administration and Obama's promises to change these policies.
And the proof that it was the Bush policies (rather than Obama's charisma or the colour of his skin) that had caused the Obama landslide victory is that while Obama has not lost his charisma, nor has changed the colour of his skin, his popularity has disappeared. And it has disappeared because many see his policies either not different than those of the Bush administration, or not better than those of the Bush administration. And today people are asking whether Obama can win at all.
Does the decline of Obama popularity mean that Obama cannot win with a landslide in 2012?
But what are the policies of Mitt Romney, Obama's opponent?
A reheated dish of the George Bush years - "The American Century" with a foreword by Elliot Cohen.
But the policies of the George Bush years had been rejected by the American voters who voted for Obama. They do not want Obama, because he is a "third term Bush", but will they want a Mitt Romney who will be a "fourth term super-Bush"? Many might even vote for Obama, not because they want Obama, but because they do not want Mitt Romney.
So, how can Obama get elected with a landslide?
Here follows the Obama Landslide Victory Speech:
Some 5 years ago you had elected me, because I promised you "Change", but I have not changed much.
But why did you want "change"? And what should have I changed?
At the start of this century an event took place which a British Intelligence chief described as "qualitatively not different for an IRA terrorist bombing" - a bigger blast than an Irish pub bombing in Britain, but otherwise just another terrorist act with which the British intelligence services had much experience due to their imperial past. Not the kind of thing that the British would see as a reason for a full scale war against the Republic of Ireland.
This is how a British Intelligence chief saw the 9/11 events. And had the US government of the time had similar view, they would have dealt with the consequences of this act as just another large-scale police operation. But the US government of the time chose to make this event a reason for declaring a global War-on-Terror, and starting wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Neither of the wars were necessary and both were justified by false arguments. Nor have these wars yielded any benefits for you, the people of America, but have caused twice more Americans deaths than the 9/11. And the cost of these wars to you are trillions of dollars with nothing to show for except debt and recession.
These wars, and the attempts to justify them by false arguments, have discredited America in the eyes of the rest of the world, and they have discredited the American government even in your own eyes.
And it is these policies of the George Bush administration that you wanted to change by electing me as president.
But, as you know, I have not changed much.
But when I spoke about "turning around America", I also warned you that it will not be an easy task that can be accomplished in 4 years. And it took me 4 years just to start turning America around. So, I ended the Iraq War, and started winding down the "War on Terror", and now I shall end the Afghan War. But it is not enough just to end these wars, the whole way the world is ruled (or rather "mis-ruled") today needs to be changed. And I shall proceed with this change in my second term.
This is how I shall deal with the present global chaos when elected:
Both George Bush and Barak Obama supported the War-on-Terror to show how tough they are.
But attacking smaller countries without a good reason, or throwing missiles around the world is not "toughness", it is weakness and insecurity. Bullies attack weaker people not because they are tough, but because they are week and insecure.
America is a strong powerful country. It does not need to be a global bully to show the world how strong it is.
There was no need to invent the ideology of War-on-Terror. If anybody attacks American citizens or American property, we shall deal with it as a crime. And, if any country attacks America, it will be an act of war and we shall respond as needed. But we shall not continue to chase the Specter of Global Terrorism - we do not need this paranoia.
The Middle East Conflict has cost the American taxpayer trillions of dollars, and it continues to be the major source of global violence and instability.
Abandoning the War-on-Terror, and resolving the Middle East Conflict will end a major drain on American financial resources and will enable America to end the present economic decline.
Stopping the War-on-Terror, does not mean that America will withdraw from the world scene. On the contrary, it will place America in a position of global leadership.
America shall lead the world not by senseless wars, or political intrigues, but by establishing a Global World Order based on Natural Justice and Rule of Law. And such World Order will serve best the American Interests and the Interest of all Mankind.
Your vote for me is your vote for American Revival. Romney cannot do it - he has the old Bush-like militaristic mindset - throw bombs around to keep peace in the world. But, as the Bush wars have proved it, this does not lead to peace. It is not enough to have military strength, one needs wisdom, knowledge, patience and sense of justice - none of the qualities Mitt Romney has.
Give me the Second Term - to complete the task of turning around America.
This website contains many articles on topics of current interest which will help President Obama has and his election team to answer questions - and win with a landslide.