PDA

View Full Version : US Election



RX-149Dragonite
11-05-2012, 11:28 PM
With it happening tomorrow, for most people, let's see where Weasyl stands

Here's my list of candidates I'm voting for:

Who I'm voting for list for tomorrow:
Presidential election: Gary Johnson (write-in, Libertarian)
Vice Pres.: James P. Gray (write-in, Libertarian)
US Senate: Scotty Boman (Libertarian)
US House of Rep, 12th District: Cynthia Kallgren (Rep)
Michigan House, 53rd District: John Spisak (Rep)
State Board of Education: Todd Courser (Rep)
U of M Board of Regents: Rob Steele (Rep)
Michigan Supreme Court: Stephen Markman
And the rest of the candidates I see on the list I don't really know about, so I shouldn't make a call on them.

Wooo politics

AtomiKamikaze
11-06-2012, 03:00 AM
I'll be voting, but in NYC the US Elections are the last thing people are thinking about, even forgot today was E-Day.

Going democrat for my own reasons, (Obama/Biden), though I have nothing against Republicans at all.

Wuvvums
11-06-2012, 10:28 AM
Me and my boyfriend are going to vote. I am voting Obama and any democrat for the state senators and representatives.

Unburnt Daenerys
11-06-2012, 10:45 AM
Got a lovely letter in the mail last week informing me that my vote probably won't count due to "faulty paperwork" even though I was registered by someone at the DMV. I'll vote anyway and hope the paperwork goes through okay the second time.

Going for Obama/Biden, not terribly enthused about it though.

Nomnomnom
11-06-2012, 12:13 PM
I'm voting Democratically because, lets face it, the republicans around here aren't offering squat. If a single one of them where offering something worthwhile I would surely vote for one of them, but when your in the same state as Todd Akin, it doesn't leave much for the mind to have to debate about.

Kasune
11-06-2012, 12:28 PM
Just got back from the polls. I've got no party affiliation recorded, but I personally believe that I am a Democrat- so you can guess who I voted for.
This was my first Election, so I feel like I made a difference. :)

Rsyk
11-06-2012, 12:38 PM
I got nothing. I registered to vote, but as it got closer and closer, my disgust with everyone involved just grew. So I'm sitting this one out.

piņardilla
11-06-2012, 02:47 PM
Minnesota is a lock for Obama so I threw it to Jill Stein. Voted Dem downticket, No on Voter ID, No on a gay marriage ban, and No on renewing a .5% city sales tax.

I eagerly await hearing the lamentations of the teabaggers in the coming days.

Rsyk
11-06-2012, 04:49 PM
I eagerly await hearing the lamentations of the teabaggers in the coming days.

Every outlet I've seen is calling it in favor of their own political leanings. Regardless, half the country is going to go insane come the results. Probably more.
Should be interesting.

RX-149Dragonite
11-06-2012, 06:41 PM
I should have predicted the Democratic majority here :V

taasla
11-06-2012, 08:03 PM
Voted demo down the ticket for the LGBT and women's rights issues.

Unburnt Daenerys
11-06-2012, 09:41 PM
Went to vote, and was told that I had to fill out a provisional ballot, so it's currently sealed in an envelope and may or may not count depending on the vagaries of fate. Schrodinger's vote, basically.

So I said fuck it and just voted for Jill Stein like I wanted to.

GingerM
11-06-2012, 10:55 PM
It will be interesting, no doubt. One news item - apparently, there've been robocalls in Florida to tell voters they can vote tomorrow, though no word on who is alleged to have set up these calls. Just amazes me, though, that someone thinks those kinds of electoral shenanigans are a good idea...

RX-149Dragonite
11-07-2012, 01:00 AM
Well Obama won, sadly, and other Dems in Michigan seem to have won. However the proposals are mostly being struck down, which is great.

Hopefully the Libertarian Party ticket with Gary Johnson can get the 5% they need to get on the next ballot and to receive federal funding

Wuvvums
11-07-2012, 01:09 AM
Some of the tickets for Alabama seemed bureacrat related (like making this location a landmark and letting a municipality take out a bond) but there were some issues like removing racial school segregation from the state constitution (it has been voted down in the past) which I voted yes for and another issue was letting employers opt out of state health care programs or something similar to that (voted no).

GingerM
11-07-2012, 03:09 AM
I am not a citizen of the United States, so evidently I did not vote, but the media and people from countries abroad saw the outcome long before it happened. Is it possible to see the percentage of the nation who did not vote?
I've always found it odd (coming from Australia where voting is compulsory) that a lot of U.S. citizens choose not to place their say into the next voice and leader of their country.

That lack of voting happens in Canada as well. Unfortunately, none of our parties seem willing to take up Australia's example and make voting mandatory. I am soooo tired of people who won't - not can't, but won't - get off their butts on election night and go to the polls, but then spend time whinging about the results. If you refuse to vote, you've lost the right to whine as far as I'm concerned.

Nitro
11-07-2012, 03:57 AM
That lack of voting happens in Canada as well. Unfortunately, none of our parties seem willing to take up Australia's example and make voting mandatory. I am soooo tired of people who won't - not can't, but won't - get off their butts on election night and go to the polls, but then spend time whinging about the results. If you refuse to vote, you've lost the right to whine as far as I'm concerned.

The problem with making voting mandatory is that you end up with voters who are completely uninformed and frankly don't give a shit. Voting, for these people, essentially comes down to peer pressure or whoever's more good-looking or whatever.

As a not-citizen of the US I'm pretty happy with Obama. Not exactly Libertarian, but Democrat is a pretty good push towards that direction.

Rsyk
11-07-2012, 08:03 AM
As a not-citizen of the US I'm pretty happy with Obama. Not exactly Libertarian, but Democrat is a pretty good push towards that direction.

Not even close. Neither of our major parties right now get even close Libertarian practices, the only difference between the two is which areas of government get expanded.

Wuvvums
11-07-2012, 08:54 AM
I could see some people not voting because of the electoral college*, or because of attempts of voter suppression. There's been a lot of misinformation going around so some people who would vote might have missed their chance, or thought they could not vote because of the lies coming from the robocalls and spam mail.

*Basically our president is not decided by the popular vote but by a group of representatives in the state. Most of the states have a "winner take all" rule as far as I know meaning that if they won that state they get to take ALL the electoral votes. That's why there's a huge obsession over swing states.

Rsyk
11-07-2012, 09:28 AM
I could see some people not voting because of the electoral college*, or because of attempts of voter suppression. There's been a lot of misinformation going around so some people who would vote might have missed their chance, or thought they could not vote because of the lies coming from the robocalls and spam mail.

*Basically our president is not decided by the popular vote but by a group of representatives in the state. Most of the states have a "winner take all" rule as far as I know meaning that if they won that state they get to take ALL the electoral votes. That's why there's a huge obsession over swing states.

Yup. The suppression/intimidation stuff is usually the result of over-zealous supporters of the parties though. I've heard that a lot of people were getting harassed from both ends this year.

As for the electoral college, that's usually the reason why anyone supporting a third party doesn't vote. There's really no point.

RX-149Dragonite
11-07-2012, 09:49 AM
I've always found it odd (coming from Australia where voting is compulsory) that a lot of U.S. citizens choose not to place their say into the next voice and leader of their country.

We're talking about the same Australia that bans "violent" video games and you can't even buy a squirt gun without a parent.

As much as I hate voter apathy, forcing people to vote isn't right. There SHOULD be something like a tax incentive if you voted, or a small tax penalty if you didn't.

Rsyk
11-07-2012, 09:57 AM
We're talking about the same Australia that bans "violent" video games and you can't even buy a squirt gun without a parent.

As much as I hate voter apathy, forcing people to vote isn't right. There SHOULD be something like a tax incentive if you voted, or a small tax penalty if you didn't.

An incentive, perhaps. Penalizing people for not taking an action isn't a good idea though. It sets a precedent that's far to easily abused. If you penalize someone for not voting in the presidential election, why not extend that same rule for every election they're eligible to vote in? Or for things like not doing community service? Or donating to charity?
Granted, this is a system that's already being implemented, so we might see that kind of "motivation" in the near future anyway.

Wuvvums
11-07-2012, 10:13 AM
We do have voting incentives though. Every time we vote we get a sticker :3

RX-149Dragonite
11-07-2012, 10:24 AM
We do have voting incentives though. Every time we vote we get a sticker :3

Fuck yeah, stickers

piņardilla
11-07-2012, 10:42 AM
THE WINNER, BY KNOCKOUT: B-ROCK "THE ISLAMIC SHOCK" HUSSEIN SUPERALLAH OBAMA


As much as I hate voter apathy, forcing people to vote isn't right. There SHOULD be something like a tax incentive if you voted, or a small tax penalty if you didn't.

Aussies can still cast a blank ballot if they don't want to vote. It's only mandatory that they show up.

Rsyk
11-07-2012, 10:49 AM
Aussies can still cast a blank ballot if they don't want to vote. It's only mandatory that they show up.

How many people do you think actually do that? As opposed to people who show up and say "My friend told me party X is pure evil, I'm gonna vote against them on all counts."

Ratte
11-08-2012, 03:12 AM
Had my fucking registration forms actually arrived here and not at my house a state away I'd have cast my votes for:

No on Amendment 1 (ban on marriage equality) [Amendment 1 didn't pass]
No on Amendment 2 (requiring voter ID's) [Amendment 2 didn't pass]
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) [Incumbent, won]
Representative Tim Walz 1st District (D-MN) (Fuck if I was letting Allen fucking Quist in, the teabagging scumlord) [Incumbent, won]
President Barack Obama (D) [Incumbent, won]

I'm pretty hard left so it's hardly surprising.

GingerM
11-08-2012, 11:07 PM
I have no problem at all with mandatory voter turnout. In fact, I'm in favour of making it mandatory not only to vote, but to be informed on the issues. You still can't make someone cast a ballot ONLY on the basis of the issues, but you can certainly make it a requirement that they not vote through a miasma of ignorance.

Citizenship is a two-sided coin - with rights come responsibilities, and both the US and Canada have a pretty dismal record of insisting that the people who want their rights step up to carry out their responsibilities.

Rsyk
11-08-2012, 11:26 PM
I have no problem at all with mandatory voter turnout. In fact, I'm in favour of making it mandatory not only to vote, but to be informed on the issues. You still can't make someone cast a ballot ONLY on the basis of the issues, but you can certainly make it a requirement that they not vote through a miasma of ignorance.

Citizenship is a two-sided coin - with rights come responsibilities, and both the US and Canada have a pretty dismal record of insisting that the people who want their rights step up to carry out their responsibilities.

How do you suggest that the government forcibly educate people on the issues? More so, how do you regulate that sort of education? Do you give a neutral view of both sides of an issue? How do you make sure the government doesn't warp the information they're making it a requirement that people know?

Unless you mean requiring a test before voting, in which case you run into the exact same issues. What answers are right? I'm assuming that they get a tax penalty if they answer wrong and show ignorance, since knowledge is mandatory. But what if the government decides that the "right" answer leans a certain way? Not to mention, voting tests have historically been struck down in the United States as discriminatory practices.

It's simply not efficient. The cost of implementing these programs far outweighs the benefits, and opens the doors to all sorts of abuses of power.

RX-149Dragonite
11-09-2012, 03:35 PM
Unless you mean requiring a test before voting, in which case you run into the exact same issues.

You realize the South did tests before voting in order to keep the poorer African-American population from voting, right?

What needs to be done is an indirect incentive, like a small tax break or something.

As for the Electoral College, it needs to go away. It's really one of the only remaining mechanics of our voting system that has been relatively unchanged since the beginning of our country, and that's no good.

Rsyk
11-09-2012, 05:28 PM
You realize the South did tests before voting in order to keep the poorer African-American population from voting, right?

Well aware. That would be an example of one of those "abuses of power" situations I mentioned.

GingerM
11-09-2012, 08:31 PM
How do you suggest that the government forcibly educate people on the issues? More so, how do you regulate that sort of education? Do you give a neutral view of both sides of an issue? How do you make sure the government doesn't warp the information they're making it a requirement that people know?

Unless you mean requiring a test before voting, in which case you run into the exact same issues. What answers are right? I'm assuming that they get a tax penalty if they answer wrong and show ignorance, since knowledge is mandatory. But what if the government decides that the "right" answer leans a certain way? Not to mention, voting tests have historically been struck down in the United States as discriminatory practices.

It's simply not efficient. The cost of implementing these programs far outweighs the benefits, and opens the doors to all sorts of abuses of power.

That's the rub; I haven't yet figured out a reasonable way to implement it. One thing I *can* say that does need to happen in both Canada and the US, is that we need to start making civics (or poly sci or whatever they call it today) mandatory in schools. Personally, I think that if every schoolchild is educated from an early age as to what it means to be a citizen, the informed part will come much more easily. I am constantly amazed at the number of people I run into here who have no idea what the Canadian Constitution says, what our Charter of Rights and Freedoms says - and what these documents *don't* say, too. I've met people who seriously believe that if something is a right, the government must provide it free of charge.

If schools were required to teach students how government works and what their role as citizens is, I think both our countries would have electorates with much better bullshit filters and much more involvement.

As far as guaranteeing being informed, you've hit the nail on the head. Plus, there is no way one can make people vote only on the basis of the information; if they want to vote for a candidate because she gave a better garden social than her opponent, then they will, no matter how much they know about the candidate's position on any given issue. I wish I could think of a good way to ensure voters are informed and involved, but I can't.

I will address part of your reply to say that if such a verification system could be found, I would say that it should be restricted to ensuring the voters know what the issues are, not what answers are 'right' or 'wrong'. That would indeed be election tampering. But maybe a series of multiple choice questions - like "From the list of five statements below, identify the two which contain the Republican and Democrat positions on the subject of abortion." No value judgements to say which position is better or more moral, just can the voter identify what the parties in question have said as part of their campaign?

In the end, you're right about the problems that would be encountered trying to implement it. So all I can fall back on is educating our children.

Rsyk
11-09-2012, 09:17 PM
In the end, you're right about the problems that would be encountered trying to implement it. So all I can fall back on is educating our children.

That's kind of a so-so thing right now. It was required for me, but I passed the AP test on American Gov. well enough to not have to take a political science course in college. Not that it seems to matter much, I get enough politics in any social sciences type class I take. Professors are not very good about separating their personal opinions from the course materials...
And I'm sure I'll get a metric fuck-ton of political diatribes when I get into Sociology and Philosophy next semester.