American 2008 Election

[GreekMan 246]

there we go^

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: ricb OK greekman, but you said the Republicans would step down if they didn't have support. George Bush's approval rating is the lowest this century. His disapproval rate is over 60%. quote>

The current approval rating for the Dem-controlled Congress is 9%. Bush is still more popular than the current batch of legislators, evidently.

I've been gone awhile, so I can't possibly catch up to all that's happened. My vote will end up being a protest vote for Ron Paul. Obama and McCain both support the NAU, an end run around American sovereignty. I cannot in good faith support either one.

The protesters were anarchists, irrelevant at best. Their time ended in Chicago at Haymarket Square in the 1880s. It came at the end of a hangman's rope.

IMHO the regular American is screwed no matter which gasbag gets the win. I was impressed by Obama walking on water to the podium, and feeding those 85,000 with just a few loaves and fishes. Quite the dog and pony show. But styrofoam columns? That's not very green!

BTW hi again everybody!

[confused04 14]

Congress as a whole gets a 9% approval rating, and yes, its Dem-controlled, but it doesn't mean its all disapproval of the Democrats. Its abysmally low for the whole of Congress, not just the party in power. Before the Dems took control, Congress had a 16% approval rating (back in 2006) so a meager drop of 7% isn't half bad. Almost all Congresses lose approval shortly after their election because voters say "WTH! I voted you in, do everything you said X(" So really its not a particular party at fault for Congress... its just Congress being sucky.

The Daily Show was reporting from St. Paul this week and I have to say... good job

The Colbert Report was also fantastically hilarious.

Anywho... I think Jon Stewart sums of Palin and some of the hypocrisy that I believe surrounds her nomination.

[Wrightguy0 40]

Originally posted by: GreekMan hmmm

ricb; we will see what happens on election day.....

either way it's a win-win situation

black president or

oldest president and the first female VPquote>

 

Actually, it's not a win win as you say,  McCain is old, and has been battiling cancer off and on for years, if he were to die in office, you (america) would end up with a frighteningly inexperienced woman who's shown she's easily corrupted. Think of the damage Palin could to to america in the year it takes to call an election. just because she's the first woman VP doesn't mean she's the best woman for the job.

[screamingman12 30]

Originally posted by: Wrightguy0

Originally posted by: GreekMan hmmm

ricb; we will see what happens on election day.....

either way it's a win-win situation

black president or

oldest president and the first female VPquote>

 

Actually, it's not a win win as you say,  McCain is old, and has been battiling cancer off and on for years, if he were to die in office, you (america) would end up with a frighteningly inexperienced woman who's shown she's easily corrupted. Think of the damage Palin could to to america in the year it takes to call an election. just because she's the first woman VP doesn't mean she's the best woman for the job.quote>

Exactly...

[Zelgadis 638]

Originally posted by: Wrightguy0

Actually, it's not a win win as you say,  McCain is old, and has been battiling cancer off and on for years, if he were to die in office, you (america) would end up with a frighteningly inexperienced woman who's shown she's easily corrupted. Think of the damage Palin could to to america in the year it takes to call an election. just because she's the first woman VP doesn't mean she's the best woman for the job.quote>

Indeed correct.

Except for one thing.

You can't "call an election" in the US.  That means if McCain dies after only, say, 8 weeks in office, then we're stuck with Sarah Palin for the next 4 years minus 8 weeks.  And unless she engages in an impeachable offense during that time, there isn't anything anyone can do about it.

As for McCain, he keeps talking about change and how much of a maverick he is...  I guess once upon a time he was a maverick, but I'm finding very little difference between his policy positions from Bush.  He used to, at least, have some environmental cred, but in selecting "drill baby drill" Palin, all that has gone out the window...

ISF

[confused04 14]

Originally posted by: zelgadis

Originally posted by: Wrightguy0

Actually, it's not a win win as you say,  McCain is old, and has been battiling cancer off and on for years, if he were to die in office, you (america) would end up with a frighteningly inexperienced woman who's shown she's easily corrupted. Think of the damage Palin could to to america in the year it takes to call an election. just because she's the first woman VP doesn't mean she's the best woman for the job.quote>

Indeed correct.

Except for one thing.

You can't "call an election" in the US.  That means if McCain dies after only, say, 8 weeks in office, then we're stuck with Sarah Palin for the next 4 years minus 8 weeks.  And unless she engages in an impeachable offense during that time, there isn't anything anyone can do about it.

As for McCain, he keeps talking about change and how much of a maverick he is...  I guess once upon a time he was a maverick, but I'm finding very little difference between his policy positions from Bush.  He used to, at least, have some environmental cred, but in selecting "drill baby drill" Palin, all that has gone out the window...

ISFquote>

Agreed, in my younger days, I supported McCain because he was at one point a very liberal Republican and opposed Bush on many issues...

His nickname was for years "the Democrats favorite Republican" because he tended to be socially liberal and very environmentally conscious. But in order for him to win the Republican nomination, he had to placate the far right and their religious creed. Had he not, it would have just been a free ride for ANY Democrat into the White House and the Republican party knows that. Its a shame that his very illustrious career as the gap bridger and maverick is no longer. He's reversed his position on things that made him famous like the Bush Tax Cuts.

[hamsterTK 93]

Yep I was too young to vote but both in 2000 when he ran and also in 2004 I remember people around me talking about how they were giving Gore/Kerry the lesser of two evils vote while saying if the old moderate-right McCain ran it would be different. Oh well.

I saw that thing on the Daily Show too. To think he was kinda pro-choice and had something to say about the enviroment.

[TV-VCR 15]

This whole "lipstick on a pig" thing makes me want to slap McCain. Seriously.

They're saying Obama is the smearer? It's the republicans that are smearing it! They're the ones who smeared Obama's comment all across the floor. Once again the republicans are trying to win the election by using scare tactics and taking things out of context.

[packerfan386 3]

When The Tide Turned At MSNBC

In a must-read in the New York Observer, Felix Gillette gets the story behind the story of MSNBC's decision to take Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews off the political anchor desk for the rest of the campaign.

While MSNBC president Phil Griffin has spent the last 48 hours trying to tamp down rumors, Gillette details the open dissension and behind-the-scene maneuvering that led to the change.

First, the rumors. The New York Post reported that GE Chairman Jeffrey Immelt facilitated the change because "a lot, maybe thousands" of shareholders called to complain. "This makes me so mad, because it's so untrue," Griffin tells Gillette. "Somebody is spreading rumors. It's wrong. It's getting into the echo chamber."

As for the internal strife about the Olbermann/Matthews pairing and its reflection on NBC News, Gillette reports on an early August dinner in Washington, hosted by GE chairman Immelt:

...according to sources,

Andrea Mitchell

, the veteran political correspondent and wife of

Alan Greenspan

, noted on behalf of her colleagues that there was some ongoing uneasiness about having Keith Olbermann-MSNBC's liberal pundit and caustic anchor of their hit show Countdown-co-anchoring (along with Hardball's Chris Matthews) the network's coverage on big political nights. What happened to the traditional firewall between news and opinion? There were risks involved with blurring the distinction.

A few weeks later, anchor tensions came to a boil on the air, at the DNC. Executives had a plan to make sure it didn't happen at the RNC. Gillette writes,

MSNBC and NBC executives looking to restore order were planning a meeting to take place on Tuesday in

St

. Paul on the second day of the Republican convention, where producers and talent could smooth out their grievances behind closed doors, and hopefully reestablish some team unity. But over the weekend, Hurricane Gustav descended on the Gulf Coast, and the staff scattered between New York,

St

. Paul, and New Orleans. As a result, the meeting never happened.

And, as has been written on this blog, at the end of the day, it comes down to the bottom line. Griffin tells Gillette,

"MSNBC just had its biggest year ever in terms of revenue, and is contributing - I don't want to tell you the number - but let's just say, a significant part of the revenue base of NBC News, which helps make this division better able to cover news around the world. It's all working. I know that a lot of people love to follow whisperers and disgruntled people. The issue is, the others would die to have a cable-news network help with their revenue, give them an opportunity for airtime, which is oxygen, and to help create a better news-gathering operation. quote>

 From: http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/

Now this is a good soap, the situation over at NBC News

It's 9/11... God Bless America and Let Us NEVER Forget that Awful Day!

[Easy Bakes 253]

Al Franken wins a Primary election In Minnisota.

Is it just me or does Norm Coleman look like the late Phil Hartman?

 

[Duke87 1,070]

This is too good to not share:

[hamsterTK 93]

Actually I bet Peggy Hill would be more of a liberal...just a hunch from a long time fan.

Though regardless of what side she was for, she does tend towards ignorance and arrogance, often in a comical fashion...

[belfastuniguy 18]

Actually I bet Peggy Hill would be more of a liberal...just a hunch from a long time fan. quote>

Agreed

[TV-VCR 15]

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

Too funny duke.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy

 

Actually I bet Peggy Hill would be more of a liberal...just a hunch from a long time fan. quote>

Agreed

quote>

I don't watch that show so I can't comment.

But I did see Tina Fey & Amy Poehler play Sarah Palin & Hillary Clinton on Saturday Night Live.

[belfastuniguy 18]

That was hilarious

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

 

I still cant see 1/2 the stuff you post.

[TV-VCR 15]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

 

I still cant see 1/2 the stuff you post.

quote>

Well, stop using Internet Explorer 6 then. Use 7, Firefox 3, Opera 9, or whatever suits your taste.

[hym 358]

Originally posted by: TV-VCR

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

 

I still cant see 1/2 the stuff you post.

quote>

Well, stop using Internet Explorer 6 then. Use 7, Firefox 3, Opera 9, or whatever suits your taste.quote>

 

IE7 doesn't solve anything.  Barring an oddball exception, IE can't view PNG images on ST...period.

Now, you can try clicking on the Quote button and see if the image will display in the message window.  It's doing that for me, and I'm surfing on IE7 at the moment.

More on topic, it's roughly 6 weeks till the election.  If you still need to register to vote or need something like an absentee ballot, make sure you know how the process works so you don't wind up being denied your chance to vote because you missed a deadline or something stupid like that.  Registration deadlines are available here.  (I know most people already know this, but some of the first time voters may not, so it warrants being mentioned.)

[TV-VCR 15]

Originally posted by: hym

Originally posted by: TV-VCR

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

 

I still cant see 1/2 the stuff you post.

quote>

Well, stop using Internet Explorer 6 then. Use 7, Firefox 3, Opera 9, or whatever suits your taste.quote>

 

IE7 doesn't solve anything.  Barring an oddball exception, IE can't view PNG images on ST...period.

quote>

Really? Well, just more proof that Internet Explorer belongs in the Recycle Bin.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: TV-VCR

Originally posted by: hym

Originally posted by: TV-VCR

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Duke87 This is too good to not share:

quote>

 

I still cant see 1/2 the stuff you post.

quote>

Well, stop using Internet Explorer 6 then. Use 7, Firefox 3, Opera 9, or whatever suits your taste.quote>

 

IE7 doesn't solve anything.  Barring an oddball exception, IE can't view PNG images on ST...period.

quote>

Really? Well, just more proof that Internet Explorer belongs in the Recycle Bin.quote>

 

Is thats something micro soft didnt put in?

[TV-VCR 15]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Is thats something micro soft didnt put in?

quote>

I doubt they even know what internet standards are (here's something worth a look). Heck they can't even get anti-phishing right.

Back on topic, here's an interesting read.

[Meg 368]

Want to skip all of the nonsense and see who you agree with, based solely on what the candidates have to say on the issues? 

Try the ABC News Political MatchoMatic

It doesn't tell you who made the statement (although it's pretty obvious in some cases).  It just lists the issues and quotes both of them on that issue.  Click on which statement you agree with and see the results.

[Micah 16]

Good link. Though it almost had me tied, it went to the candidate that I'm tilting towards anyway.

There was a qoute in there that did shock me because I was so sure that McCain said it, but I was completely wrong.

[confused04 14]

I predictably matched with Obama all but twice.

Hym: Too bad you have to register in advance... I don't I can, and I will try. But if push comes to shove, Minnesota has same-day registration so as long as I have an ID and a bill with my address... to which I do, I can register and vote. Thats why Minnesota ranks 1st for voter turn out.

[JanYpe 17]

I got 9-4 in favour of Obama, which is about what I'd expected.

This may have been explained before, but why exactly do you have to register yourself to vote in the States? Doesn't that leave room for barriers between the public and the election?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: JanYpe I got 9-4 in favour of Obama, which is about what I'd expected.

This may have been explained before, but why exactly do you have to register yourself to vote in the States? Doesn't that leave room for barriers between the public and the election? quote>

 

To keep people from going from one poleing place to another  and voteing several times.

Your registered at one poling place, they look up  your name, if it is not on the list you cant vote.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: JanYpe

This may have been explained before, but why exactly do you have to register yourself to vote in the States? Doesn't that leave room for barriers between the public and the election? quote>

 

To keep people from going from one poleing place to another  and voteing several times.

Your registered at one poling place, they look up  your name, if it is not on the list you cant vote.

quote>

The last few elections, I worked as a "unit judge", which basically means that I did the boot-up and shut down process on the voting machines and, while the polls are open, make sure the foot traffic is flowing smoothly.  (I'll skip the parts about the process control and verification procedures.)

Recently, the county mailed me a letter asking me to come back for training as a "check-in judge", which basically means that I'm one of the people who looks up each voter and verifies they are registered before sending them to (the line for) a voting machine.

EB is right:  each registered voter is assigned to a polling place.  Polling places are usually at the local schools but I have also seen them in community centers, assisted living facilities, and nursing homes.  My precinct votes in the gym of the local elementary school.  When I was a kid, the check-in judges would look each voter up in this huge book and, if the voter wasn't in the book, they didn't get to vote.

These days we have these nifty little computer screens that, to my surprise, contain the list of registered voters for the entire state of Maryland, not just my precinct.   If the voter is registered in my precinct, I can code them an access card so they can vote on the machines right there in the gym.  If they are registered in a different precinct, I can tell them which precinct that is so they can go there.   If they do not want to leave -- or they are not on the list of registered voters at all --  I can give them the option of voting by provisional ballot.

Provisional ballots are paper ballots.   The votes on provisional ballots are processed but obviously not as quickly as those on the voting machines.  After election day, people go through the stack of provisional ballots to determine why the voter was voting provisionally.  Depending on the answer, the vote may or may not be counted.

Using EB's example:  let's say that some guy goes from polling place to polling place, trying to vote multiple times.  He will only get to a machine in one polling place: the one where he is registered.  At other polling places, he would be given a provisional ballot.  After the polls have closed, provisional ballots are sorted and cross referenced to determine which are valid and which belong to some bozo trying to game the system.

The idea behind provisional ballots is that it gives the voter a chance to vote even if there is a problem with the computer lists.  Basically it's a case of "go vote over here; we'll sort it out later"

[JanYpe 17]

Well yeah, I get the "you're only allowed to vote once" side of it. What I'm mostly wondering about was something you mentioned yourself:

-- or they are not on the list of registered voters at all -- quote>

From this, and other posts, it looks like you're not automatically listed as a voter anywhere and have to claim that right on your own initiative for some reason. To use myself as an example: for every election since my 18th birthday I simply got my voting card in the mail about three weeks before the election, telling me where my polling place was, what part of government this election was for, when the election was etc. I didn't have to register anywhere beforehand, because I was registered 18 years earlier as a newborn citizen in [county]. If I'd moved to [county 2] in the time between my birth and that first election, that move would have been registered and I would automatically have been a voter in [county 2]. To me it seems like there isn't much of an advantage to having to register for each election, while there's lots of room for abuse. (ie manupulating people to not register so their vote goes uncounted)