Anyone living in the US...

So anyone living in the US bother to vote today?

I've noticed some immature stuff was being done overnight, so I'm assuming that republican supporters are not happy about the odds.

But of course, I'm not in the only state dealing with weird phone calls and stupid threats. anyone else?

(Even though this is in the Off-topic section let me know if I'm just beatin' a dead horse here)

(edit)…also may I mention the near impossibility it is to find out where to go to vote on the net, because the phone lines are tied up. (some of the sites have been XSS or of the like) (/edit)

First of all, I don't live in the USA and I wouldn't want to live there, but anyway: I've got a question for you lot in the US. Why is it that you make the whole world think you guys are the most important people in the entire world? I mean, in every news bulletin in every single country, people are discussing about the polls in the US. Well, I don't care at all.

If there are votes in my country, of course that's a big thing, but that still prevents us from talking about nothing else for half a year and forcing foreign media to talk bout us. (OK, perhaps that's a bit overdone.)

That's the most important thing: it takes too damn long. You've got thousands of polls. long before you guys actually vote. All these big campaigns where the candidate visits every single state to have a speech… Total nonsense: a waist of time and money.

I don't know any other country where the campaign is such a big thing and where it costs as much money as in the US. Really: WHY?

Anyway, I don't want this to end up in a classic 'America is Satan himself' discussion, I just want something which I don't understand cleared up.

Though I will not talk/debate about politics with even people I live with, I'm only bringing to light human behavior and the fact that, just like Halloween, sites are getting hit up for fun and gain. (edit)

So anyone living in the US bother to vote today? That kind of clashes with what I just said sorry! (/edit)

Not so much for gain.

…and the campaigns are not as big as anyone makes it. Just filling for a "beauty pageant".

note: If anything I'd like to know how it(politics/living standards) works out for other countries since I'd rather leave this place one day But, thats not to be discussed here. or anywhere public for that matter.

GTADarkDude wrote: Why is it that you make the whole world think you guys are the most important people in the entire world? I mean, in every news bulletin in every single country, people are discussing about the polls in the US. Well, I don't care at all.

Then, that's not us doing it, is it? The citizens of a country don't affect the presentation of that country to other countries. We only affect the democratic process that chooses our leaders. The rest is "big business" and its influence on the presentation of political issues here.

GTADarkDude wrote: If there are votes in my country, of course that's a big thing, but that still prevents us from talking about nothing else for half a year and forcing foreign media to talk bout us. (OK, perhaps that's a bit overdone.)

No one can force foreign media to cover any particular topic. That is their choice.

GTADarkDude wrote: That's the most important thing: it takes too damn long. You've got thousands of polls. long before you guys actually vote. All these big campaigns where the candidate visits every single state to have a speech… Total nonsense: a waist of time and money.

It's called campaigning, and the candidates are basically selling their opinions and plans. As it serves to educate and influence voters actively, I can't see how it's a waste of time or money. Advertising is a common technique for those seeking to influence a large group of people in a company's favor: Why should it be different for politicians?

GTADarkDude wrote: Anyway, I don't want this to end up in a classic 'America is Satan himself' discussion, I just want something which I don't understand cleared up. Hope that cleared up some of it. Yes, the US tends to have a rather high opinion of itself when it comes to consideration of the rest of the world; however, that is not the citizens, but the media and the prominent figures in the country. Why? Don't know… ask them. As for why other countries give us so much attention, that is a question for them.

I voted early. I was in and out in no more than a minute!

I voted today. I was in and out in 8 minutes.

Zephyr_Pure wrote: It's called campaigning, and the candidates are basically selling their opinions and plans. As it serves to educate and influence voters actively, I can't see how it's a waste of time or money. Advertising is a common technique for those seeking to influence a large group of people in a company's favor: Why should it be different for politicians?

I agree that campaigning costs to much money. I think the money could be better spent, but it's not like it's going to change anytime soon and as long as it's their money and money they've raised from donations, they can do what they want with it. I also think that the US election does take a tad long but I guess when your picking the leader of your country, you don't want to rush things.

If they do a great job though, it's money and time well spent. Hopefully that will be the case with this election and the next president.

ShapeShifters wrote: I agree that campaigning costs to much money. I think the money could be better spent… If they do a great job though, it's money and time well spent.

I also think that the US election does take a tad long… but I guess when your picking the leader of your country, you don't want to rush things.

Ahh! One of my favorite three words in the English language: contradiction. I love it… get to use it all the time here. Best thing about it would definitely have to be that I don't even have to seriously respond, though; there's nothing to respond to. :)

The Electoral Collage is broken. Somebody, PLEASE fix it. :angry:

Haha just because I don't completely agree doesn't mean there is a reason to stop and that I don't understand those reasons. I just think the money and time could be more efficient.

ShapeShifters wrote: Haha just because I don't completely agree…

I just think the money and time could be more efficient. No offense, but you don't completely agree with yourself; I can't possibly expect you to agree with me. :)

Still, I respect what you think… and what you think. :P

lol no offense taken, after re-reading my post I could've probably worded it a lot better lol

Oh well, not like I or anyone else cares enough for me to actually do it :P

Anyway, no more useless posting for me.

I hope that my support was at least worth getting up extremely early. I'm still arguing with my co-workers/peers about it because they don't vote out of some epiphany of theirs stating "our votes don't count"

…imbeciles

McCain is getting his ass handed to him.

whitecell wrote: McCain is getting his ass handed to him. Got his ass handed to him. Obama won the presidency. There is some justice left in this country. :)

Zephyr_Pure wrote: [quote]whitecell wrote: McCain is getting his ass handed to him. Got his ass handed to him. Obama won the presidency. There is some justice left in this country. :)[/quote]

Yeah that was at 220 barack 145 mccain. Then the west coast closed and mccain not only got his ass handed to himself but got his ass ripped a new one.

I'm relieved, hopefully Obama will be smart and buy himself a pope-mobile of his own. This kind of motivates me!:D

In your cancer, I mean face, McCain!:ninja: (oh and if anyone noticed, the support signs for McCain didn't have Palin in em', go figure ;))

I voted! happy obama won, but more importantly, democrats won a majority in both the house and senate…so this is gonna be an interesting four years (starting jan. 20)

If things are really going to change around here, the Democrats and Republicans need to start working together. All the petty squabbling between parties isn't helping anything. Take Kennedy, for example. When he took office, he left members of the old cabinet in place because they were doing a good job. He didn't kick them out because he was in a different party, and things went swell. I'm not saying that it's the only thing that needs to be done, but it couldn't hurt, right?

I chose not to vote. I fail to see the reasoning anymore. How can someone win the majority vote and lose the election. i know it works off the electoral college but my opinion is that is dumb. like when we voted for the presidential nominees. in NJ 6 Delegates voted against what the majority voted. so what is the point in voting if your vote wont matter and in the long run its up to other people to decide for you.

Futility wrote: Take Kennedy, for example. When he took office, he left members of the old cabinet in place because they were doing a good job. He didn't kick them out because he was in a different party, and things went swell. Although I recall a Bay of Pigs Operation and a Cuban Missile Crisis that could have been avoided, but I know what you mean. Personally I think we need to abolish the parties. We should vote on the people and the issues, not the parties (which most people seem to do).

And @fallingmidget, I know what you mean too. The way things work does really make it seem like your vote doesn't make any difference, but at the very least, it serves as a placebo.

fallingmidget wrote: I chose not to vote. I fail to see the reasoning anymore. How can someone win the majority vote and lose the election. i know it works off the electoral college but my opinion is that is dumb. like when we voted for the presidential nominees. in NJ 6 Delegates voted against what the majority voted. so what is the point in voting if your vote wont matter and in the long run its up to other people to decide for you. It's due to the different weight of electoral votes based upon the number of Senators and Representatives, from that state, in Congress. Electoral votes are, by law, obligated to represent the majority of the peoples' votes. So, to simplify it as much as possible:

If you have one section where 50,000 people vote and 75% of them are in favor of one president, that one gets 1 electoral vote.

If you have one section where 10,000 people vote and 75% of them are in favor of the other president, the other gets 1 electoral vote.

The electoral votes are tied but, for the popular vote, the first president has a massive lead.

Thus, I fail to see how your vote doesn't count, since it influences whether a president gets an electoral vote or not.

if the majority vote goes to one president then that president gets 1 electoral vote then logically the ways the numbers work out shouldn't the president that gets the most electoral votes also have the majority vote since it requires a majority vote in order to receive the electoral vote.

but of course, the majority in one state/county/area/etc can be all of what people voted. If only 3 people vote and 2 pick option A, then A gets the point. then 76,000 out of 100,000 in another place vote B, B gets the vote. Essentially as Zephyr says, candidates can have a massive lead/loss of popular votes and tie, but A can also win too in that perspective. Of course, the census is meant to correct the arrangement of electorial votes. so i start to lose track of why popular votes vary greatly from the electorial votes, then you realize the census is to count heads, not potential voters

History still had some presidents elected with less popular votes than the opposition. I'm sure some one at the moment said "WTF mate?!"

electoral votes worth states candidates a & b

a=10 a b=1 b c=5 a d=2 b

3 people vote in state A 2 for a and 1 for b

10,000 people vote in state B 9,000 for b 1,000 a

5 people vote in state C 3 for a 2 for b

20,000 people vote in state D 18,000 for b 2,000 for a

so A wins with 15 electoral votes

total votes for candidates A B | 3,005 | 27,003 |

who do you think should have won A or B

i just think the process is fucked up

It was never "meant" to be fucked up, really. In theory it is supposed to work, but because the average turn-out of no more than 45% total population, you can imagine how "rigged" these elections really get. In the end, it comes down to "rabbit-out-of-arse" crowd control.

Speaking of which, didn't Rome have a habit of switching republic/democracy back and forth? Call me crazy but media today must be our new Colosseum?