2012 Election | Barack Obama | News | Twitter

Obama 'Four More Years' Tweet is the Most Popular of All Time

Tweet_obama

Racking up more than 660,00 retweets so far, a tweet from Barack Obama reading "Four more years" sent last night at 8:16 pm quickly became the most popular tweet of all time, surpassing tweets from Justin Bieber, TJ Lang, Floyd Mayweather, and Kim Kardashian.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Color me clueless, but I've never heard of TJ Lang or Floyd Mayweather.

    Posted by: Paul R | Nov 7, 2012 11:26:59 AM


  2. What a beautiful day in America, i've never felt more proud of my fellow americans. wing nut and teabagger heads are exploding all over the country. #trump #palin #victoriajackson

    Posted by: mshenko | Nov 7, 2012 12:01:29 PM


  3. It's good to see that President Obama's pledge to reach across party lines is being echoed by his party faithful....Not. The repulsive ad hominem and partisan comments posted above accurately reflect the true nature of Obama's political nature and movement: corruption of the worst type. I am always shocked but never surprised at the utter hypocrisy of the Obama camp and Obama supporters. They lambast Romney for being racist, and then turn around and discriminate against Whites, or condone such discrimination. They lambast Romney for being rich, and then "spread the wealth" to themselves, or say nothing when it is their own making the money. There was a deafening silence from the Democratic quarters when Jay-Z spent $150K on a champagne-glass fountain for an Obama fundraiser. Americans are going hungry and yet Obama gladly attended that fundraiser. What about Jay-Z's millions? How about Steven Spielberg's or David Geffen's billions? Or Bruce Springsteen's many millions? All of their money was earned through and by corporations. Yet many Dems are silent. They criticize Romney for intolerance towards women and Gays, and then turn around and mock Romney's religion, while giving Obama a pass on all of his discrimination against Women and Gays. He enforced discrimination against Gay people for several years. He is still "as President" against Gay marriage. He has done nothing to compensate the more than 14,000 people hurt by DADT--many of whom he discharged. He is still prosecuting Lt. Dan Choi in two separate cases. Obama refused to attend (White and Gay) Frank Kameny's lying-in-state, but went to some little known (Black) rapper in New York's funeral. Again, Obama is racist and homophobic. He is no more the embodiment of MLK, Jr. than George Wallace was. Obama treats women so badly in his own White House that he was forced to sponsor a dinner for his female staff to try to give some semblance of caring about them. Millions of Americans are also still out of work, and receiving nothing from the Obama administration, because they don't fall into one of his favored constituency groups. And, of course, Amb. Stevens and the three other Americans murdered in Libya still remain dead due to outright negligence on Obama's part. Obama also continues his war against free speech in this country, enforcing measures that even the most ardent Democratic supporters are crying foul about. The truth is that Obama won not because he was morally superior to Romney or a better governor of the Nation, but because he simply bought more votes through government spending and was a better liar. I think if the commentators above were to carefully read the news from across the nation and the world, they would see that even many of Obama's supporters simply thought him the "lesser of two evils." There can be no real pride or congratulations in that--no matter how much President Obama and his supporters shamefully gloat. In fact, anyone who supports equality, justice, and good government had to have been saddened for America at Obama's re-election. And it will only get worse, as now Obama has no reason to improve or to do what is right. He is lame duck starting today.

    I truly feel sorry for President Obama and his supporters like his commentators. No matter how much they call their critics names (like Beyonce ridiculously calling 49% of Americans "MITCHES", i.e., "BITCHES") they can't change the fact that they are exactly what they accuse their opponents of being: partisan, petty, racist, sexist, homophobic, incompetent, etc. And the bad thing for them is that they know it, and can only respond by further petty name calling, which I'm sure will ensue to my post.


    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 1:32:04 PM


  4. James, please go somewhere. You lost. Get over it. We've had to hear about how horrible Obama is and how we are all doomed for a year now. MOVE. ON. We really don't care what you think anymore. America spoke, you lost, so cram it.

    Also, that photo has also received more likes on Facebook than any photo in the history of Facebook and "liking."

    Posted by: Sanderson | Nov 7, 2012 1:34:25 PM


  5. James, if you're the same JAMES E. PIETRANGELO II I think you are, thank you for serving our country and standing up against injustice alongside Mr. Choi. That being said, you lost. Your party revealed itself to be incompetent, blatantly homophobic and sexist, and woefully out of touch. The American people aren't blind, deaf, or dumb and we made the right choice.

    Posted by: MateoM | Nov 7, 2012 1:44:52 PM


  6. DELICIOUS!

    Posted by: VDUFFORD | Nov 7, 2012 1:53:03 PM


  7. PLEASE Republican trolls bots - YOU LOST THE ELECTION! Get the F-CK out of here! I don't care if you saved 100 lives of innocent children, the rhetoric in your god awful screed is pathetic, and sounds like something written by that twirp Caiden Cowger. Romney's religion is more deserving of mockery than most of them. I don't give a f-ck what Jay-Z does with his millions, and if he were white, you wouldn't either.
    Take you Fox talking points and shove them up your a--.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Nov 7, 2012 2:01:45 PM


  8. @James: tl;dr

    Posted by: endo | Nov 7, 2012 2:02:04 PM


  9. Wow Sanderson (don't know your full real name because you didn't give it as you prefer to hide behind internet anonymity), I didn't think you would make my point so readily. Let's examine your response.

    1) You didn't specifically or factually refute any of my points (because you couldn't)

    2) You told me to "go somewhere" (typical response of Obama supporters, tell other Americans to leave; again, your only possible response, because you have no real arguments)

    3) You told me "we really don't care what you think" (apparently cared enough to respond, and so lied about not caring)

    4) You told me to "cram it" (again, proving my point that Obama supporters are as crude as the next guy when it comes to treating opponents with civility)

    5) You told me "you lost" (how did I "lose" if Obama supposedly represents all Americans? and if "losing" means not voting for a homophobic racist incompetent, etc. like Obama, I think I actually "won" morally and historically)

    6) You told me "America spoke" (Such a term is relative. Under your theory, segregation was right because the majority of Americans approved of it at the time. Second, America did speak. Half of America said Obama wasn't a good president. Also, remember the 2000 election. America spoke then too, but many Democrats said it was an "injustice." Were you one of those, Sanderson (or whatever your real name is))

    7) You told me that Obama's photo had the most Facebook "likes" in history (well, you got me there Sanderson (or whatever your real name is) Obama certainly can claim that as an achievement, although his only one. You must be very proud of him. Millions of Facebook "likes"; millions unemployed; trillions in debt; 14000 DADT victims, etc. Obama should spend less time facebooking and more time working for jobs, equality, civility, justice, etc.)

    Again, Sanderson, thanks for proving my point. You really made my day. Each comment like yours further proves what Obama's next four years will be like: full of rhetoric, empty of meaning.

    We should do lunch some time Sanderson (or whatever your real name is)

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 2:05:19 PM


  10. A bunch of ridiculous lies don't deserve the time it would take for refutation. Go f--k yourself. I don't say that to ANYONE else on the internet but a POS like you who is trying to ruin this day for everyone else.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Nov 7, 2012 2:07:11 PM


  11. Dear Mateom: I thank you for your kind words. Just a couple of quick questions:

    1) You referred to "my party"; which "party" are you referring to? I don't belong to a political party. I judge candidates by uniform standards, and uniform standards are not possible if you belong to a party which by definition is partisan.

    2) You implied that the Republican Party is homophobic, sexist, and incompetent. The Republican Party platform is certainly homophobic, and many Republicans certainly are sexist and incompetent. But no more or less than the Democratic Party. For prime example, President Obama is not for Gay marriage as President. Do you realize that? Do you realize that he enforced discrimination against Gay Americans for years? Do you realize that he still prosecutes Lt. Choi? You should come to the DC courtroom where his case is being heard and see how the homopbohia is alive and well, to the point where Obama's own US Attorney won't even address Lt. Choi by his rank even though the federal judge ordered her to.

    3) You said that the American People "made the right choice." Of course, the American People didn't choose Obama at all. Half the country rejected him. His supporters voted for him, and those supporting him simply outnumbered those not supporting him.

    4) Finally, you said that I lost. I think America lost, because anytime voters choose someone who is demonstrably racist, homophobic, sexist, etc., we fail as a people. A lesser of two evils is still an "evil."

    In fact, I didn't "lose" anything; no more than anyone who voted for Kerry "lost." My principles remain intact. I continue to oppose racism, sexism, homophobia, government corruption and incompetence, no matter whether the incumbent is a Democrat or Republican. And I do it on the facts, not on personal attacks.


    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 2:24:55 PM


  12. ECTHKULTIG: Thank you VERY much for proving my point. Wow, it's hard not to smile when reading such an overwhelming confirmation of my critique of Obama's political movement. You are the epitome of what he represents.

    Let's look at your telling post.

    1) You call me "Republican trolls bots." Other than pointing out that I am not a Republican, I can't decipher your words. There is no word "trolls bots" in the English language.

    2) Next, you tell me to "Get the F*CK out of here." How original! Actually a very typical response from the Obama camp--can't debate opponents, much less civilly, so resort to profane threats.

    3) You call me a "twirp." Again, thanks for making my point that Obama supporters typically resort to name-calling as the premise of their argument.

    4)You say that "Romney's religion is more deserving of mockery than most." Again, thank you for proving that Obama supporters are as intolerant and racist as anyone else's supporters.

    5) You say that I wouldn't care what Jay-Z did with his millions if Jay-Z "were white." Again, I thank you VERY much for pointedly proving the racism of the Obama movement. I feel sorry for the memory of MLK. Jr. that his philosophy has been so ill-heeded decades after his murder that simply because a White person refers to a Black person in a negative light, someone calls that "racist." By your own theory, you must be racist for criticizing me. You don't even know my record in life. And apparently you don't know that Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, and Bruce Springsteen are White.

    6) Finally, you tell me to take "you [sic] Fox talking points and shove them up your a--." Gee, Obama himself must be so proud of you. An earlier commentator told me that the "American People" had chosen Obama. I can see why someone like you would have chosen Obama. You treat Americas with opposing viewpoints the same way. What you told me to do or some version of it is what Obama tells Congressional Republicans when he wants them to pass legislation, or when Gay-community leaders press him for equality measures.

    I clearly didn't "lose" at all....

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 2:51:16 PM


  13. James, I should not have presumed your political affiliation. For that I'm sorry.

    But if Obama was as much of an evil as Romney, then who should the majority of the country given our votes to? Romney's platform promised to institute blatantly anti-gay laws. Romney promised to circumvent the reproductive rights of women won over 30 years ago. Romney's economic plan planned to give unnecessary amounts of money to the military while decreasing taxes on the upper class, at the expense of the rest of the nation. Romney would bring back the deregulatory policies of the Bush administration that got this nation into the economic situation it is in right now.

    I'll take a president who at least recognizes the legitimacy of LGBT relationships over a homophobe like Romney any day.

    So unless you have something constructive to suggest, whining about Obama doesn't really foster any meaningful discussion. Who did you vote for, and why? What motivated your decision?

    Posted by: MateoM | Nov 7, 2012 2:56:40 PM


  14. ECHTKULTIG:

    You are like the gift that keeps giving. Please, continue by your posts to remind Americans of what Obama's past four years and next four years have been/will be like: a giant "Go f--k yourself" to Americans.

    And you flatter me. You say that you wouldn't tell just "ANYONE" but a "POS like you" to "go f--k yourself." Should I expect a Christmas present from you? Of course you already are giving me the gift that keeps giving, aren't you?

    But, seriously, let's examine your rationale for another commentator's not responding to my points. You say, "A bunch of ridiculous lies don't deserve the time it would take for refutation." Well, let's look at just one of my points to see if it is true, and if it is it will refute your entire argument.

    One of my points was that President Obama--while constantly lambasting people like Romney for being rich--attended a fundraiser put on by Jay-Z at which there was a champagne-glass fountain worth $150K. Obviously, this is fact. It happened. Can't be denied. Was reported on by many news outlets. Happened on September 18, 2012, at Jay-Z's nightclub in NYC. The median income in 2011 for American families was approx. $51K. So Obama gladly accepted a vulgar display of wealth on one single occasion that cost at least three times as much as the average family has to live on in a year. Yet, Obama supporters say Romney is elitist. Romney is fabulously wealthy, but I haven't seen even him feted with a champagne tower.

    Like I said, Obama and his supporters are no different than their opponents. When President Obama took office, President G.W. Bush--as is custom--left a note in the Oval Office desk for him. I can reveal what it said. It said:

    WE ARE NO DIFFERENT. ENJOY.

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 3:17:54 PM


  15. i'm gonna call your bluff, James.

    if you're who you say you are, let's put a face to these bold comments of yours. after all, you're a brave proud american patriot, eh? ;-)

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 3:28:13 PM


  16. and feel free to let us know whom you specifically voted for :)

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 3:30:09 PM


  17. MATEOM:

    I'm not "whining." I think that is the basic problem here, is that many people who support Obama treat legitimate criticism of him as "not constructive" or, as Valerie Jarrett, Obama's Senior Advisor, once said, "disrespectful" of President Obama himself. Thus, many Obama supporters consider it fair-game to criticize Romney (or any other Republican) on an issue but sacrilege to criticize Obama on the same issue. And, of course, many Republicans and their supporters do the same thing. The result is that problems never get resolved in our society, because each side always justifies its injustices towards the other.

    My very point to you and everyone else is that if you truly want change, and if you truly want to be different than your opponents whom you revile, then you need to hold even your own preferred candidate to the same standard. Anything less perpetuates the cycle, not only in electing officials but in holding them accountable afterwards.

    You and many other Obama supporters simply don't seem to want to do that; you think the "shoe is always on the other foot." You make broad statements about how Obama is better or less evil, but broad statements don't break the cycle--only real action does. And Obama hasn't acted, and won't, for change.

    And I'm saying that no matter how much his supporters are playing up his re-election--and it borders on the absurd--Obama is objectively no different than President G.W. Bush.

    You've made a lot of broad rhetorical statements that simply are not capable of being proved or disproved, and thus don't advance the debate either. Case in point, you say: "I'll take a president who at least recognizes the legitimacy of LGBT relationships over a homophobe like Romney any day." I equally say, "I would take a candidate like Gary Johnson who believes in marriage equality and who as President would not have left marriage to the states over a homophobe like President Obama who said he 'personally' believes in Gay marriage but doesn't as 'President' and who would leave the matter to the states and who enforced anti-Gay laws like DADT and DOMA for years and who hasn't lifted a finger to help the more than 14,000 DADT dischargees whose lives remain shattered even while President Obama attends fundraisers with $150K champagne-glass towers."

    For another example, you complain that Romney would have given unnecessary money to the military and decreased taxes for the rich at the expense of the rest of the nation. That's political rhetoric. You should check out President Obama's past budgets for the military--they contained plenty of dough for the military. You should also find out how the White House avoids military contractor restrictions by having contractors admitted to the Pentagon as unlogged guests. Moreover, there's not a lot unnecessary for the military when you get down to it. There is no skimping on money for wounded veterans and their families--although certainly Obama tries, and would rather spend money to attend fundraisers with champagne-glass towers. Also, how about the millions if not billions in federal money that went to Obama supporters's failed companies. Why stop at taxes from them; why not have prevented the money from being stolen by them in the first place?

    The point I'm trying to make is that no matter how much Obama supporters like you celebrate and try to mythologize his re-election, the undeniable truth is that Obama is no different than Bush or any other president, nor are his supporters from any other president. You are happy because the candidate who benefitted you personally has won. But that same candidate hurts other Americans just like your opponents' candidate presumably hurt you and your fellow Americans when they were in power.

    Power corrupts absolutely unless vigorously checked, and Obama's supporters have not checked him. They give him a pass by blaming Republicans for everything.

    When you figuratively down your own champagne tonite in honor of Obama's re-election, think for a moment about Lt. Choi whom Obama is still selectively prosecuting like White racists did Black civil-rights leaders decades ago. And think of the more than 14000 DADT dischargees whose lives remain shattered. And think of all the White people whom the Obama administration has discriminated against based on their race. And think of all the unemployed and homeless in this country who are out of work because of Obama's policies.

    You will realize you have re-elected George Bush.




    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 4:04:24 PM


  18. guuuuurl, you be LONG-WINDED. And coming from me that's saying something. I've always said I'd never do this, but gurl you deserve yo'self some shakespeare.

    "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing"

    let's be simple and get to specifics, please.

    whom did you vote for in the election?

    would you have preferred a Romney/Ryan win?

    Do you think a romney/ryan win would have been better for not only LGBT Americans but the american economy?

    thank you, in advance, for your short and clear and direct answers to my short, clear and direct questions.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 4:09:15 PM


  19. Sorry, kiddo, the Karl Rove school of lying doesn't work anymore.
    Obama never criticized anyone for being rich or successful. He did criticize Romney for characterizing the 47% who are not rich and successful as lazy, do-nothing moochers.

    I like the little note in the oval office anecdote. Says a lot about how psychotic Bush probably was. No different...oh ok. Whatever. I guess that means Bush was a Marxist, Kenyan, Muslim?

    Look, we're not stupid...we understand the shell game. Prove Obama is just as bad as Romney and presto...the (rich, at least) gays will magically support Republicans in the next election. Except for the self-hating nuts at GOProud - LCR is a little less pathetic - it's never worked, and never will. Until the Republican base doesn't consist of about 50% of people who would like to see gays stoned to death, or whatever their silly old book written by lead-poisoned goat herders advocates. Give it up. Obama has done more for gay rights than any president ever, and Romney would have tried to reverse all gay rights advances of the past 40 years. End of discussion.

    The goose is cooked, and you're the goose. I win.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Nov 7, 2012 4:10:17 PM


  20. whenever i meet gay men who are rabidly anti-Obama it's usually because they're nutbag born-again Christians or anti-black racists.

    while i don't know any gay people who are 100% satisfied with what Obama has done, so far, for the LGBT Communities, it takes a profound act of willful ignorance to deny that President Obama is indeed the most LGBT-Inclusive President in the history of the united states.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 4:17:15 PM


  21. Just to repeat: Obama's supporters can celebrate all they want, they can, like Beyonce, call the 49% of Americans who didn't vote for Obama "bitches," but the fact will remain that Obama is no different than Bush--a fact reinforced by half of America not voting for him. If he were any different, he would have had a true majority of Americans voting for him.

    As one commentator said, Americans are neither blind, deaf, nor dumb. They vote for candidates who are not sexist, racist, homophobic, incompetent, corrupt, etc., and against candidates who are. 49% of America didn't vote for Obama, and there is a reason, because he is the Democrats' version of George W. Bush. All the champagne in the world won't change that fact.

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 4:21:35 PM


  22. James, I asked you some very clear and direct questions.

    Equally clear and direct answers would be greatly appreciated so I can best understand your stance.

    Thank you, in advance

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 4:27:26 PM


  23. Little Kiwi:

    There's no bluff to call. I'm holding all aces.... You can't beat facts. Everything I said about Obama is true. And everybody knows it's true. George Bush is laughing all the way to the bank....

    P.S., when G.W. Bush won re-election, did any of his high profile supporters call the percentage of Americans who didn't vote for him "bitches," or did Beyonce just make American history with her "bitches" comment in support of Obama? It wasn't that historical, though, was it, I mean ECHTKULTIG told me to "f-ck yourself" and "cram it up my a--" so it's pretty common anyway.

    I'm signing off of commenting for now. I think my point has been made, and made, and made, without real refutation.

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Nov 7, 2012 4:30:45 PM


  24. Jesus H.

    Those giant walls of text hurt the eyes. We haven't seen such novelizations in these parts since the days of Leland Francis (AKA Michael Bedwell).

    Learn to edit.

    Posted by: endo | Nov 7, 2012 4:31:06 PM


  25. actually, you're refusing to be clear and concise.

    i asked very clear questions that can be very clearly and easily answered.

    you seem very obsessed with Beyonce Knowles and equally obsessed with refusing to be clear in answering direct questions.

    What kind of piss-poor excuse for a soldier are you, anyway?

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Nov 7, 2012 4:33:46 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Anti-Gay Troy, Michigan Mayor Janice Daniels Gets the Boot« «