For some time there have been AAPL-INTC talks/negotiations. Then there was the "break-down" a month and a half back when AAPL said no more INTC chips in their products. Then O "stepped down." Now we are seeing "negotiations". These events are correlated. It's not hard to figure it out.
O's politics were not acceptable to AAPL and they had to back-peddle from INTC. There's probably not a single AAPL employee with a measurable IQ who supported Romney (in fact, that is a generally true statement of most people, but most at AAPL have high IQ's). AAPL was offended by O's statements...at very least, for not keeping it to oneself. The INTC board saw a great oppty slipping away. So, out goes O, and we're back in serious "negotiations."
In the meantime there is a strong correlation between the politics and intellect displayed on this board. You need only unignore att4glte occasionally to see how drool and republicanism are the same thing. Let the republicans scream and rant all they want. They lost, and of course, they are very bad sports. They are very bad losers...well, hey they are simply losers, period.
Please. Obama election was a farce, due mainly to better campaign organization than to actual policies. Most Americans want lower taxes & lower spending (except for the lazy). The Repubs will never go for the ridiculous higher taxes for the higher income (i.e., class warfare). Repubs are in the driver seat..Obama doesnt want the fiscal cliff & recession on his watch, so he'll have to compromise.
It is not the republicans who lost, but the American people. It is a tried and true fact that socialism does not work, yet Obama is leading us down that path and everyone is blindly marching to his magic flute. I manage a large factory in China and have 500 Chinese nationals on my team, half of whom are university-educated. They are bewildered by the aggressive moves toward socialism the US is now taking. They heard before in their own country the class warfare rhetoric from the man in charge, the media unable or unwilling to ask the tough questions due to a worship of the leader, and the term "fair share," over and over again. It led them into a multi-decade nightmare.
People laugh at Romney and the republicans for not getting elected. People should focus less on who didn't win and more on who did - A man that raised more money from wealthy donors than any candidate in U.S. history. A man who took more money from the taxpayers by force and gave it to rich bankers. A man who was the first president in history to pass a major piece of legislation without a single vote from the opposing party (how's that for bi-partisanship and reaching across the aisle), and finally a man who for the first time passed a law penalizing 100% of Americans for NOT buying something.
If you think this guy was dictatorial, legislated by fiat, was divisive and secretive beyond belief during his first term, just wait and see what happens now that he does not have to worry about reelection - assuming he doesn't overturn the 22nd Amendment by executive decree.