2012 US Presidential Election.

[Smoking Guns]

Alabama got lucky as shit, shouldn't have one that.  They only win natty titles when a Dem is in office.  Carter, Clinton, Obama.... 

Blutarsky, if you don't want Obama, and you live in FL, you must vote for Mitt, cause GJ won't carry FL.  So don't waste your vote if you are in a swing state.  In Alabama you can vote GJ all day long, cause Mitt will carry it 80/20 or so. 

[tim_m]

A win is a win though no matter how lucky!

[pilferk]

Alabama got lucky as shit, shouldn't have one that.  They only win natty titles when a Dem is in office.  Carter, Clinton, Obama.... 

Blutarsky, if you don't want Obama, and you live in FL, you must vote for Mitt, cause GJ won't carry FL.  So don't waste your vote if you are in a swing state.  In Alabama you can vote GJ all day long, cause Mitt will carry it 80/20 or so. 

No vote is ever wasted.  That's the beauty of the process.

Voting for a candidate who isn't going to "win" isn't wasting a vote.  It's voicing your opinion.  No matter which state you are in.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Alabama got lucky as shit, shouldn't have one that.  They only win natty titles when a Dem is in office.  Carter, Clinton, Obama.... 

Blutarsky, if you don't want Obama, and you live in FL, you must vote for Mitt, cause GJ won't carry FL.  So don't waste your vote if you are in a swing state.  In Alabama you can vote GJ all day long, cause Mitt will carry it 80/20 or so. 

That is the exact reason I am back and forth on my vote, Smoking Guns. I agree with Johnson's positions more than Mitt. I don't agree with Romney on the social issues. But it is going to be VERY close and 4 more years of Obama IMO will do permanent damage to this country financially.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Here is an indicator on where we are headed today. Feel better?

Obama, Romney Tie in Dixville Notch
By Z. Byron Wolf | ABC OTUS News ? 5 hrs ago

 The first votes are in!

Ten of them, anyway. And it's an Obama, Romney tie.

The small hamlet of Dixville Notch in New Hampshire distinguishes itself every primary and general election by voting right at midnight.

This year ten voters showed up and they split evenly - five votes apiece - for President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

More: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-romney-tie-dixville-notch-060345664--abc-news-politics.html

[Smoking Guns]

Pilferk, I agree in principal, but find myself agreeing with Lance from the Last Word on MSNBC in that voting for a guy with no chance in a swing state will do nothing unless we go to a popular vote one day. The future of the country depends on swing states, Gary won't win, we know this. So now it's about who you Want to lose the most. That was his point. I kind if agree unless you just want to show support that will never matter for the 3rd party man.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Pilferk, I agree in principal, but find myself agreeing with Lance from the Last Word on MSNBC in that voting for a guy with no chance in a swing state will do nothing unless we go to a popular vote one day. The future of the country depends on swing states, Gary won't win, we know this. So now it's about who you Want to lose the most. That was his point. I kind if agree unless you just want to show support that will never matter for the 3rd party man.

Pretty accurate there. I think we should scrap the electoral college and go to the popular vote. Anyone voting Republican in California or Democrat in Alabama does not really have any bearing on the result unfortunately. Does not seem fair.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Just got back from voting. Ended up casting mine for Mitt Romney.

Lesser of the 2 evils. Johnson's foreign policy stance was the determining factor between the 2.  I like the theory of staying out of other countries business but he was a bit too isolationist, what happens on the other side of the world does affect us and we have to be involved ( not militarily) with guiding some events. Just because we stay completely out of a situation does not mean another power will not step in.  

[WAR41]

As a NY resident, my vote means pretty much nothing so I did vote for Gary Johnson.  I do hope one day we have a legit 3rd party candidate who is a threat.  #BeThe5Percent

I am so curious to see the results of this election.  I think it might be a long night!

[rebelhipi]

i hope for sake of planet earth that obama wins.

[Smoking Guns]

By the way I was referring to Lawerence O'Donnel. He said that about voting.

[pilferk]

Pilferk, I agree in principal, but find myself agreeing with Lance from the Last Word on MSNBC in that voting for a guy with no chance in a swing state will do nothing unless we go to a popular vote one day. The future of the country depends on swing states, Gary won't win, we know this. So now it's about who you Want to lose the most. That was his point. I kind if agree unless you just want to show support that will never matter for the 3rd party man.

Honestly, to me, voting IS all about principal.  It's the only way you can actually express your "voice" in the system...so best to actually say what you want.

The other thing to consider is that an increase in % for a 3rd party candidate, swing state or not, means more money for that 3rd party in the  next election cycle.  It DOES matter.  Ohio, by last poll, is showing Johnson with about 5% of the vote.  That's HUGE if it holds out, and means the Lib party could stand to see increased money, support, and profile.  In a broken (IMHO) 2 party system...I think that's a pretty good result.

I'm not big on voting to try to get someone else to lose.  I think better to vote for the guy you want to win, and agree with the most.  To me, it IS a stand on principal.

[pilferk]

Just got back from voting. Ended up casting mine for Mitt Romney.

Lesser of the 2 evils. Johnson's foreign policy stance was the determining factor between the 2.  I like the theory of staying out of other countries business but he was a bit too isolationist, what happens on the other side of the world does affect us and we have to be involved ( not militarily) with guiding some events. Just because we stay completely out of a situation does not mean another power will not step in.  

My one reservation about Johnson.  But I have larger reservations about Obama and, especially, Romney.

[tim_m]

Pilferk, I agree in principal, but find myself agreeing with Lance from the Last Word on MSNBC in that voting for a guy with no chance in a swing state will do nothing unless we go to a popular vote one day. The future of the country depends on swing states, Gary won't win, we know this. So now it's about who you Want to lose the most. That was his point. I kind if agree unless you just want to show support that will never matter for the 3rd party man.

Pretty accurate there. I think we should scrap the electoral college and go to the popular vote. Anyone voting Republican in California or Democrat in Alabama does not really have any bearing on the result unfortunately. Does not seem fair.

Something we actually agree on! I would love to ditch the electoral college and just go to the popular vote. Just look at today's election its not impossible Obama could lose the popular vote but win the electoral college or vice versa. Unfortunately though, it will never happen. The smaller states will never agree to it. I think i heard on CNN that there are like 17 states who could block it because to get rid of it they have to amend the constitution.

[tim_m]

Hope everyone voted today! No matter who you support just vote! You may not think it matters but it does. There's much more at stake then just the presidency. There's state and local elections, propositions, referendums etc at the state and local level in many states that really do matter.

[westcoast_junkie]

Have a good election americanos!

I read about your crazy voting system and 9-hour waiting in lines to vote (Headline: This is not Cuba, nor China. This is USA). Not good. And the crazy commercial campaigns reminds me of good ol' communist propaganda. What's the status on the US-democracy? 

1) The lines for early voting are nuts.  But that's what happens when you have record early voting turnout in 2008...and you REDUCE the number of hours and poll locations. I agree...crazy.  Shouldn't be AS bad, in most places, tomorrow.  With early voting, there is usually one or two polling locations open per county/district...but on election day there's usually many, many more (usually 1 or 2 per small town, and potentially  a dozen or more in the larger cities).

2) The ads are a bit much.  And I agree...largely propaganda.  Maybe not to the level of the USSR during the cold war..but I see the point.

3) The US is not a democracy.  We are a democratic republic.  There's a difference.

Fun fact: American CNN pulled a poll where they asked americans who won the last presidential-debate. 70 % or something said Romney. The same poll here showed that 90 % thought Obama was the debate-winner. Says something about difference in our thinking....

The CNN snap poll, after the 3rd debate, showed that 48% of those asked thought Obama won, and only 38% thought Romney won.  And, from the polls I saw that night and the next day...it was probably the closest margin.  Many more showed around 60% of people thought Obama won and only 30%-ish thought Romney won.

Maybe you're mixing up polls from the 1st debate (which most thought Romney soundly won) and the 3rd?

Anyway, hope the next four years will go on with a good leader for the most powerfull state in the world....in other words Obama 

It's got all the hallmarks of a nailbiter.  We might not know who wins the presidency for weeks, depending on how close the margins are.

Nothing would surprise me...anything from an Obama Electoral blowout to a Romney Electoral blowout..and everything in between.

Well, I believe a Democratic Republic should be that; democratic hence a democracy. But not easy in a big country I guess. But still think the system with electoral votes is a weird solution. It's in the american mindset I guess "All or nothing" 

You might be right with me mixing polls. I'm sure it was something about the 3rd debate, but maybe the source was something else, like a Fox poll or something. And that is something totally different.

Read some interesting prognoses today, by some guy named Nate Silver. Heard of him? His prognoses showed a 85% chance of Obama re-election. If Romney wins Ohio, Obama got 8 % chance though. He seemed like a pretty spectacular guy, who was more often right than not. Well, let's hope he's right 


To you who asked what the rest of the world hopes.....Obama! 

[Mysteron]

Just curious, what does the rest of the world think of our elected officials and who are they wanting to win?

Romney is nice but not that intelligent. Obama is Obama, nothing too spectacular, but a safe option.

The main issue is the money spent on the election, 2 billion dollars?. It is quite disgusting.

[LunsJail]

Yeah, everyone complains about the money spent but I don't think taking money out of PAC's and putting it into the economy is all that bad.

[pilferk]

Well, I believe a Democratic Republic should be that; democratic hence a democracy.

But that's rather the point...we're not a true democracy.  There's a difference.  Should be or shouldn't be isn't relevant.  It's what the country actually IS that matters.  Changing it, at this point, would be almost impossible (because the smaller states would get less say/effect on the election of the President...which they would never approve/ratify).

The United States is just that...a unification of states. We are not like other democracies...or even like many Euro countries.  While we unite under one federal government..you have to understand where the founders were coming from.  They had just been under the thumb of a giant monarchy, without any sort of representation, and they were trying to do everything they could to avoid it.  The states, at the time of unification, were very much like small countries unto themselves. If you asked people, they identified themselves as citizens of their state...LONG after the unification...NOT as citizens of the United States.  That was secondary.  The Constitution, really, was a way for those states to unite in order to regulate trade and provide for a common defense.  There are strong provisions (largely ignored, IMHO) about states rights in the Constitution.  The founders had no indications (or, really, plans) that the country would become what it is today.  Each state wanted to, for the most part, govern themselves to a large extent.  That's changed (and we can discuss whether for the better or not)..but the Constitution has not.  The framework is still there...which is what makes us a Democratic Republic.

So you're left with a dinosaur system meant to ensure that the states all got relative input into the election of the President. Not all the CITIZENS...all the STATES.

Not to mention...popular vote during the time of our forefathers would have been hard to regulate and accomplish.  It was easier for a state to count it's own ballots, and send the required number of delagates to the capitol to cast their votes for whoever that state elected.  Much easier to prevent tampering, and much easier to keep the suspicious states happy.

But not easy in a big country I guess. But still think the system with electoral votes is a weird solution. It's in the american mindset I guess "All or nothing" 

Size was only one of the issues (and much less of one at the time of the ratification of the Constitution....Manifest Destiny was barely a glimmer at that point).  You get a pretty good idea of the others in the above explanation.

You might be right with me mixing polls. I'm sure it was something about the 3rd debate, but maybe the source was something else, like a Fox poll or something. And that is something totally different.

Never, ever believe anything that comes from FoxNews...unless you see it in/on a reputable news broadcast (or, preferably, more than one).  They are squarely in the tank for the Repubs/Conservs.  Ditto with MSNBC (who are in the tank for the Dems/Liberals).

Read some interesting prognoses today, by some guy named Nate Silver. Heard of him? His prognoses showed a 85% chance of Obama re-election. If Romney wins Ohio, Obama got 8 % chance though. He seemed like a pretty spectacular guy, who was more often right than not. Well, let's hope he's right 

To you who asked what the rest of the world hopes.....Obama! 

538 blog from the NY times, right?

He's a smart guy, and I think he's got a good handle on the likely outcomes.  But, if you read his analogy about poker, you'll see he still doesn't rule out the possibility of Romney drawing "and inside straight" (in poker...that's about an 8% chance to happen).  Nobody should feel confident, given how close the polling is in many of the swing/deciding states.  I think Romney has a tough path to 270..but not an impossible one.

We may know pretty early.  If Virginia and Pennsylvania BOTH get called early for Obama, and if North Carolina lingers (as in, it's too close to call)...that's a pretty good sign for Obama.  If Virginia and North Carolina go quickly for Romney, and Pennsylvania stays too close to call for very long..that's a good sign for Romney.

[cineater]

Aw, not one phone call, nothing on the TV and nothing in the mail except Kohl's and Bed, Bath and Beyond wanting my Christmas business.