Slashdot Mirror
At Long Last, Election Day
In 1996, a website called the Fray asked their readers to post election day experiences. Did they vote? Didn't they? How did they feel about it all at the end of another eternal campaign? The response was one of the better early interactive Web exercises, producing some real political thoughts, not the kind you get on TV pundit panels. Thousands of you have posted here recently about whether you should vote this time, or why you do or don't think politics is important. So here's our chance to happily close out our election coverage, and your chance -- all day long -- to by-pass the talking heads.
You do realize that the Green Party and the Libertarian party are pretty much the exact opposite, right?
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
It's finally over (well, for me). I voted, though I must admit that much of it wasn't a very informed vote. The entire back side of my ballot was full of boxes for judicial positions, which I had not researched. I think I may have researched the wrong candidates as well in at least one case. The information I found on the web was very convoluted -- I couldn't understand the numbering that they used.
Anyway, for the Presidential race, I voted for Nader. I was surprised to find his checkbox at the bottom. I thought that the ballot was supposed to go in alphabetical order by party name, but I guess it must have been the order in which the people registered to be in the running.
For my state House representative, I voted for Ficus.. There were two choices on the ballot -- Democratic incumbent or a young Republican college student. I'm not a Republican, and the incumbent has been there for many years.
I'm not sure if the line was longer than normal or anything, but I waited for a good while before getting to the ballot box. I expect voter turnout to be up this year, but I also expect Nader to get a better showing than he's been getting in polls lately. I could easily be wrong on both counts.
There has been a lot of worry about GWB on my campus. However, if this story is even remotely true, my companion students have overreacted to the threat. So many people said, ``I can't vote for Nader because of the Supreme Court.'' If it turns out that 90% of the vote went to Gore around here, then they need to re-examine their reasons, I think. (Obviously, 20 people is an insanely small sample)
The machine at my voting location was broken. Apparently it was brand-new (and apparently untested). Anyway, I just hope they can count everything up okay.
--
I think a skeptical attitude towards government is healthy. Government can't legislate morality, and certainly can't solve every problem (or even most problems).
But you have to wonder how much of that apathy and lack of faith stems from the total barrage of negative ads that run for a solid month prior to every election.
From any evidence that is presented over the last two weeks, all major candidates for all major offices are lying scoundrels who want to steal food out of the mouths of every senior citizen. The elections are clearly going to be won by the candidates who scare the geezers harder. And we wonder why genxers are not interested in voting?
Every election year I can't imagine it getting worse, and every election year it does. And even the "positive" ads are smarmy and insulting to anyone with any intelligence whatsoever.
It gets to the point where I'm so tired of the lying politicos that I'd rather return to the lying corporations. I believe that my local Tri-State Area Ford Dealer cares more about me than my US Senator. At least the local Tri-State Area Chevy Dealer doesn't run ads telling me how much the Ford dealers want to kill my mother.
--
Which was not often.
We did have a television for most of my childhood, but mostly inherited from wealthier relatives ("wealthier" in relative terms -- as in, "you know you're a redneck if you help your wealthiest relative take the wheels off his house."). I thought it was the greatest thing in the world when my grandfather moved a few houses down. He had actual running hot water in his house, as well as air conditioning. (We had neither in our house, this being in Louisiana, where air conditioning is quite appreciated).
I went to college because the student loans were being guaranteed by the government. I did get grants for the first couple of years, but then Ronald Reagan phased the grants almost out of existence to the point where they didn't even pay for my textbooks. No big deal, I have no problem with paying back the money I borrowed, it was a wise investment. I went to the cheapest public university in my state, since I knew I was going to have to pay every cent back. But without the government guarantee for the loan (which amounts to a government subsidy), I couldn't have gone to college. And this country would have been without at least one damn good engineer (I was chief architect and project lead for EST's upcoming enterprise product). In other words, that investment in people was a good investment on the part of this society too.
The suckiest thing about being poor is a combination of the dirt (no hot water, remember?), the smell (no air conditioning, in Louisiana, remember?), and the cockroaches. And getting sick. I was lucky to live in Louisiana. We had state-run hospitals and clinics for the indigent, unlike states such as Texas (where if you got sick, you either got well by yourself or died, my brother lost his eyesight because of Texas), but it was still an all-day wait in dirty, overcrowded facilities to be treated by young medical students who were only barely supervised by real doctors. It sucked. Especially for people with serious illnesses -- if, for example you needed some sort of serious surgery, the best they could do was ask a neighboring private hospital if they could "borrow" an operating room and equipment, otherwise you died. I'm lucky. I lived, though I'm missing a chunk out of my left foot that would be there if I'd had the luck to be born to rich parents. My brother wasn't so lucky. Between the Texas doctors refusing to treat him, traipsing home to his home town, then the wait to borrow an operating arena from a neighboring Catholic hospital, he lost his eyesight.
Being poor sucks. The fact that you think it doesn't tells me that you have never been poor. Yes, America's poor have it better than those in Mogadishu. But that doesn't mean it sucks any less.
Oh -- my father ran a shop during the day, then worked as a hotel maintenance man at night. My mother sold cosmetics and cookingware door-to-door. Just in case you were wondering if they were some kind of welfare whores (In Louisiana? Yeah, right!). Family finances finally took a turn for the better when my mother managed to get a Kiwanis scholarship to nursing school thanks to the help of one of her customers. That happy result, however, did not happen until I was nearly out of high school.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
What's this BULLSHIT about the poor having 52" color tv's? We were lucky to have a 12" black and white when I was growing up.
What's this BULLSHIT about how I should have paid my way through college on a $3.35 an hour job at Pizza Hut (let's see, I would have had to work *ONLY* 90 hours a week to pay the tuition, room, and board at the rather inexpensive public university that I attended), rather than relying upon student loans and the occasional grant? I'm still paying off those student loans, BTW, but I don't mind because it was a worthwhile investment... but without the government guarantee for those loans, *NOBODY* would have loaned me the money up-front for that investment.
Anybody who believes that being poor means being lazy has never been poor. It's a pain in the butt, usually involving 60 hour weeks sunk deep into the mud in a driving rain digging trenches to lay conduit or other such manual labor for a grand total of $3.50 an hour (what I made in that job in 1985). Later, when I taught in an inner city school, I had trouble getting parents to come to my class not because they were lazy, but because most of them were working two or three jobs trying to pay the rent on the tar-paper hovels that they lived in.
You are ignorant. The problem is, you don't even know it, and think you know it all. I knew it all too, when I was 13 years old. I grew up.
I may now be in the top income tax bracket, but you better believe I damn sure don't forget being poor. It sucked. Too bad I can't make sure you get a taste of what it's like.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
My (possibly incorrect) understanding is that most of the world wishes the US would go away and shut the hell up. Certainly I wish we would. That's why I didn't vote for either of the candidates you mentioned. Both would, in my mind, continue to infringe on other nations' sovereignty, in Europe and elsewhere. Instead I voted for Harry Browne, who has vowed to end our meddling in other nations' affairs. Note that this differs from Mr. Buchanan's isolationist policies in that diplomacy and trade relations would be considered beneficial and continued as freely as is possible.
All that aside, quite frankly I don't care what Europeans think about our President. Lord knows I don't care who you elect either. I certainly wouldn't want to live under socialism, but if you do, you have every right to choose whatever parties and politicians you like regardless of what I think. We retain the same rights. That's why there are independent, sovereign nations, so that we don't have to put up with your idiotic policies, nor you with ours. It's my sincere hope that the latter will be a reality in the near future.
Despite the fact that I'm an american citizen, I like the fact that our actions are judged and often condemed by other nations. As soon as the President is choosen by, and hence reports *to* the rest of the world, this sentiment would quickly faide into partisan politics....which is what gets us in our messes in the first place.
P.S. Vote for Nader.
Werd.
You can't escape US media, even if you're not in the US, so everyone in the world gets US election coverage. And one thing which has been stunningly clear has been the block-headed and hostile attitude which the Washington press corps has shown towards Gore.
Let's look at examples: During the first debate, when Bush was making it abundantly clear to anyone with a brain that he didn't understand his own health care policy, Gore demolished him, and all he could say in return was that Gore was using bogus figures. Did the press check to see whether that was true? Of course not, they swallowed the accusation lock stock and barrel and started dissembling about Gore's honesty!
If the press had performed its duty and actually investigated the controversy, they'd have found out that Gore's figures were true, and Bush was ignorant about his own policy's effects.
Then there are other cases where the press has absolutely slammed Gore for his honesty: He's been criticized for saying he was a role model for Love Story. Guess what? The book's author backs that up, but the press still, to this very day, uses that anecdote as an example of Gore's dishonesty.
Gore said he grew up on a farm, performing back-breaking farm labor. Another lie? The press would say, "Of course!" because he went to a Washington private school... but his parents lived on a farm, he spent summers there, and neighbors recount stories of the unbelievably hard chores his father would set for him to "harden him up." Does the press investigate that? No, they're too busy hooting about dishonesty.
The lullaby scandal? It was a joke, guys -- You can't watch the videotape of the speech he made without knowing that, but when it's reduced to dry print, the press has a field day with it, using it as another example of dishonesty.
The "invented the Internet" crap is the best one: When Gore says he "... took the initiative in Congress in creating the Internet..." luminaries of the 'net like Vint Cerf come out in support and confirm that the Internet would never have got to where it is today without Gore's work in congress. Does the press report that? Of course not, it's much more fun to have a good laugh at the things Gore never said, but which have been attributed to him anyway.
And throughout all this, Bush has had an easy ride: It doesn't matter that he doesn't know his own policies, it doesn't matter that he makes wild accusations about his opponent's honesty which are patently false, it doesn't matter that he "embellished" his military service record, it doesn't matter that he comes across as a bumbling illiterate fool -- It's almost as if those things are expected of Bush, because everyone knows he's stupid.
The first question I saw a Washington journalist ask of the local journo who uncovered Bush's DUI conviction was something along the lines of, "With all the controversy it's caused, do you wish you'd never found out about this?" OF COURSE SHE DOESN'T WISH THAT -- It's the biggest story of her life, she's a local journalist nobody has ever heard of who is having a noticible effect on the presidential campaign, why should she possibly feel guilty about doing her job?
Because the Washington press corps isn't doing theirs, I suppose, and they assume others should follow their example.
So -- Any claim of liberal bias from the press during this campaign is bullshit. They haven't had liberal bias, they've just had an attack of laziness and dishonesty. They've pigeonholed Bush as being "stupid", and Gore as being "dishonest", and they don't bother investigating or reporting any stories which might contradict the scripts they've already worked out for the candidates.
There's a web site which has lots of really breathtaking examples of press dishonesty during this campaign: www.dailyhowler.com. There are examples of press irresponsibility which benefit Bush and Gore, but the unavoidable conclusion is that the press has been overwhelmingly pro-Bush in an effort to create a close contest instead of the landslide for Gore people were predicting two years ago.
This is a distortion of democracy: People make their voting decisions based on what the press says, but the press is being outrageously dishonest. If I was actually living in the US, I'd be extremely concerned about the way the Fourth Estate has manipulated the result of this election.
-----
-----
I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.
And so it comes to this, as it always does. Most of the people feel helpless, and respond with apathy, not even bothering to vote on anything, even critical local ballot initiaves. The rest, and the national media, have locked into their brains a two-man race:
/maybe/ get some media coverage, but fail when the day is done; or vote for Bush, maybe slow gov't growth a bit, treat the nation to a bit of SS privatization, and not cripple our booming economy with over-regulation.
/support/ either one of these idiots as they stand). But the one thing you must do if you wish to retain your moral sanction to complain (complaining being one of the few originally American ideals we still cherish), you MUST vote. Proponents of and apologists for not-voting often say that by abstaining from the electoral process, you remove your sanction from the outcome, in a sort of don't-blame-me kind of way. That by having voted for someone, ANYONE, you have implicitly approved of the electoral process and are willing to accept whomever is chosen by it. Nothing could be further from the truth! By not voting, by refusing to participate in the process in any way, you are saying to those who /do/ vote, "whatever you decide is OK by me". It is /abstaining/, not voting, by which you wax complicit with the majority. But worst of all, I think, is that by not voting, by not expressing what you believe and want, you give up your moral right to complain about the results. A bumper sticker reads, "Don't Blame Me, I Voted Libertarian!". Your vote landing in one of the losers' piles gives you the sanction to later say I Told You So, when whoever did get elected does something stupid. But he who does not vote...
/like/ to catch the ball, but it isn't there. It wizzes past and the runner scores. Can we all agree that you have no right to complain that the 3rd baseman "missed your glove"? That in order to legimitately complain about anything, you would have had to have tried to alter the course of events, by attempting to catch the ball actively rather than passively? When you do not vote, you are that catcher.
/do/ vote, vote away not only their own liberties, but those of their fellow men.
Gore - rampant gov't growth, a tendency for lying that puts Clinton to shame, off the wall environmental policy, and a running mate you'd swear was a Republican
Bush - a bit less gov't growth, kinda stupid, did some drugs (like *I* care), and his running mate's ideas on energy policy would make any socialist proud
Not much of a choice, if you ask me. My own electoral choice for chief executive, Mr. Harry Browne of the Libertarian Party, likes to quip that you shouldn't vote for the candidate you feel will take you to hell the slowest. And yet, that's how most of the American voters view their choice. They see the other candidates:
Buchanan - a fervent nationalist, wants to close our borders to immigrants AND trade, and impose his religion on us
Nader - getting most of his support from his semi-celebrity status, I fear many of his erstwhile supporters have failed to read the Green Party platform, which reads like the agenda of a turn-of-the-century socialist party, plus a bunch of enviro-fascism
Browne - the only candidate really committed to the ideals on which this country was founded: individual liberty and responsibility. But considering how far we have strayed from liberty in the 20th century, the century of socialism, hardly anyone is ready for a return to a properly Constitutionally limted gov't
And so, at the ballot box, libertarians like me are left with a bitter choice: vote for Browne, express our ideals,
Or, simply not vote (the argument here is that by not voting you remove your sanction from the outcome, we'll get to that in a bit).
And whom you choose comes down to a simple dichotomy of principle. What is the purpose of the vote you cast? If you believe, as I do, that your vote is an expression of your principles, whether you believe they can win or not, you MUST vote your conscience. However if you believe that the point of the vote is to adjust your priorities until you can be on the winning side, or that you should influence the outcome in the most powerful way you can, or indeed any pragmatism-based argument, then by all means, vote the lesser of two evils (as I can't imagine what type of mind would actually
Allow an analogy. You are the catcher in a baseball game. A runner is headed for home. The 3rd baseman throws you the ball. You stick out your glove, to the spot where you'd
But back to my despair.
At the end of the day, when pragmatism does indeed rule, it IS a two-man race. Nader will get his media coverage from the liberal media monopoly, and probably end up with federal matching funds next time around, Browne's numbers will get reported on Fox News but will be otherwise ignored, and hopefully we can all forget about Buchanan and the "Reform" Party. Either Bush or Gore is going to take (and subsequently break) the Presidential Oath in January, like it or not. And when I think of that, my enthusiasm ebbs. Yes, I wore my Browne In '96 t-shirt today. Yes, I got quite excited yesterday when I saw an Elect Dr. Glazer (a libertarian candidate for state legislature) van drive by near my neighborhood (but sadly outside my district). Yes, I'm writing this post. But tonight after work and school I'll sit down on the bed and watch on television as Jefferson's tyrranny of the majority votes to steal my liberty and yours. Can you imagine that? In the Revolutionary War, thousands of colonists fought and died for the cause of liberty, so that they could be free from the arbitrary power of the British crown. The men of that era might be shocked that Americans today are so willing to surrender their liberty, but they would be absolutely appalled that the vast majority of those who
Oh, how we have forgotten our triumph! Did they tell you in school, as they did me, that the great treasure of America was DEMOCRACY? Democracy is three wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner. What if 51% of Americans decided it would be good for the economy to summarily execute the other 49%? If the measure passed, it would be uncontestable! It's the will of the people! To reject it is to reject democracy! "But surely such a measure is unconstitutional," you say. Of course it would be! But so is every gun control law. So are the bans on various drugs such as marijuana, heroin, LSD, and Mescaline. So are no-knock warrants and civil asset forfeiture. And so are all the other laws - I would wager at least 90% of federal laws - in violation of the forgotten 9th and 10th Amendments. Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court piss on the Constitution every day, so what's to stop our hypothetical Summary Execution Act? Nothing. And that's democracy.
And although it may seem like a long jump from the gas tax hike that Al Gore will surely advocate, or the erosion of abortion and religious rights George Bush will push for, to the murder of a hundred million Americans, the principle is identical: they are all acts of violence by the government against its citizens. And at the end of the day, that's what I'm left with. That my gov't attacks me every day of my life, and that my fellow men, rather than come to my aid, assist my attackers with their compliance, their inaction, and their VOTES.
MoNsTeR
Modded down more than up? Mah, wrong I'm still flying at 50. Thank you very much.
--
--
According to the polls that have been done a few times, it's something like 95% male around here. The really scary part about this is that the percentage of women I've seen around online has gone up quite a lot since I've been around, at least.
/. posters is go look in the archives for stories dealing with women in computing/gaming/etc. A lot of people seem to come out of the woodwork for stories like that, since I would suppose they are more qualified to comment than the other 95% of the /. readership.
And another good way to find female
obligatory on-topic part which is also sorta related to the parent:
I voted (via absentee ballot, since I have a math midterm today) for Gore, mostly becasue, for some odd reason, I have a great liking for women's rights. There is a huge, mostly unpublicised backlash against rights gained several decades ago that I personally think are simply logical. (I'm an engineering major. I like being an engineering major. I like being able to get a PhD. I also like being able to make my own choices about how/when I can have a family.) If Bush is elected, I really really do not want to see certain of the groups who are backing him (and miraculously keeping quiet about it -- think Christian Coalition) coming out of the woodwork. There are of course other reasons, but that is a main one -- and one that does not seem to be thought about by many people I know. Then again, most of the people I know are guys.
Oh yes, in answer to your question, I am of the female gender.
Lea
Since I dont watch TV at all, and listen to NPR (and read CNN online) for news, I was amazed at the lack of phone contact and/or direct mailing to inform people like me about the candidates. If I didnt have an interest in the race, I dont know if I would actually have any kind of an opinon one way or the other. All I recieved in the mail was the Massachusetts package of what the ballot questions were about. Usually, I recieve a phonecall or two asking for support for the candidates, or some malings about the candidates and their issues.
-=Bob
I can't even believe anyone would legitimately argue that foreign bodies should have any say in our domestic government. Even taking into account the influence that the US has on the rest of the world, only a retarded gorilla would see the US as a nation whose elected officials have to answer to anyone *but* it's citizens. There's a simple solution for people of other nations who want to vote for our President. Apply for statehood.
Seriously, get a majority of your fellow citizens in Botswana, or wherever, to petition the US for membership. We haven't had a new state in fifty years, Puerto Rico doesn't want to play, and you can be instant American citizens...
---
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. --Robert A. Heinlein
In the olden days, you had to walk over to the Democrat's table to vote for Democrats, and to the Republican's table for vice versa. Your vote was open, and it gave a large incentive for people to vote. Voting for the "correct" candidate would get you political favors in small-town America. The Mayor knew for certain that you voted for him, and you knew for certain that he'd know if you didn't.
After the institution of the secret ballot, your incentive to vote for one candidate over another is lessened. You're no longer likely to get preferential treatment based on how you voted, or discriminated against for not voting. The end result is a smaller incentive to vote, and lessened penalties for not voting.
Factor in things like the Voting Rights Act which (justly!) made more people eligible voters, regardless of whether or not they actually do vote, and you get the reasons why voter turnout has been dropping steadily for the last century.
---
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. --Robert A. Heinlein
None the less if you won't care about the rest of world, your diplomatic relations will cool down.
That'd hurt you (Europe in general, not the Czech Republic in specific) more than it would hurt us.
Wanna rely on Russia and South Africa for all your strategic metals? Think they're more sane to deal with?
That may work for CZ, with a GDP the size of our 5th largest corporation's yearly income, but the powers in Europe would have a harder time getting along without us than we would without them.
The US may have horrible flaws, and you can certainly find individual things that one country or another does better, but the fact is that where there were once two superpowers, now there is only one.
It doesn't mean we get to dictate terms to the rest of the world, nor should it; but it damn sure means you don't get to dictate terms to us.
-
"Resident" has different definitions for different purposes.
:-)
We're talking about voter registration here.
According to Title IX, Chapter 101, section 101.45, subsection 2, paragraph e, the simple act of putting your college address as where you want your absentee ballot sent to constitutes notification that you've changed your address for registration purposes.
In other words, if you have it sent to Mom and Dad's house and they forward it to you, you're a legal resident of Mom and Dad's precinct; if you have it sent directly to your dorm room, you're a legal resident of *THAT* precinct, and they are required to send you a ballot for your new precinct.
Florida has all sorts of weird differing residency laws for different purposes. A Maitland cop tried to give me a ticket once because my car was in the parking lot for more than 10 days without suddenly sprouting a Florida license plate. I was a temporary contract employee with a permanent residence in Oklahoma at the time.
And I wasn't even in Maitland; he just thought I was.
-
So how do military members (and their families) who are from florida but not stationed there vote?
The laws I read are unclear. I have no idea what the precedents are.
The law would seem to indicate that if you request a Florida absentee ballot be sent to a non-Florida location, the request should be denied. Either that, or a ballot for your home precinct sent. It's not clear.
-
When I went to my polling place today to cast my vote for an agenda I can support, instead of throwing it away by voting for Bush or Gore, I was once again reminded of one of the many signs that the Federal Election Commission and most (if not all) state Election Commissions are completely out of control.
My tax dollars go to pay for the printing of signs placed on every polling place in Florida that state that voting in the wrong precinct is a felony, punishable by a $5,000 fine and 5 years in prison.
How many people have voted in their old precinct after moving and forgetting to change their registration?
How many have moved during the "blackout period" when they couldn't change their registration if they wanted to, and still voted?
How many have voted absentee in their home city for four years while away at college?
Are these folks really as dangerous as other crimes with the same 5 year maximum penalty:
Assault with a weapon.
Battery on a police officer.
Battery of child by throwing, tossing, projecting, or expelling certain fluids or materials. (blood, urine, feces, seminal fluid)
Burglary of an unoccupied vehicle or dwelling.
Purse snatching (if you don't have a weapon on you.)
Child abuse that doesn't cause permanent injury.
Possession of child pornography.
Voting in the wrong precinct is considered to be as serious a crime as all of those in Florida. Does that strike anybody as just a tad irrational?
-
Complain to your local board of elections. Where I live, the board of elections mails every registered voter a sample ballot that has the name and address of the voter's polling place printed on it.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I was obviously referring to population, jack ass. The intent was obvious from my usage. The word, "biggest", is by no means limited to geographical size. Look it up in the dictionary if you're that much of a wank.
It's not that difficult. Most the press are card carrying democrats. The very notion of a Republican makes their hackles rise. Now add to the mix wealth, affluence, ease, being Texan, appearing to be the eternal frat-boy, non-academic outlook, etc. These are all factors that Bush can't do much about. Despite that Bush has managed to do fairly well against a somewhat hostile press, thanks largely to his people skills and powers of persuasion. Gore, on the other hand, has dropped the ball many times. We know he's stiff.
Ask yourself, what will happen when the election is over? The press will no longer feel the need to promote the Dem. candidate, especially if he's unpopular with the people. On the flip side of the coin, the press will likely lose much of their negative/alarmist _bias_ against Bush. Bush has a real chance to deal with them and Congress, no matter how it shapes up. If you don't believe those adversities can be over come, if you don't believe it can be done, look no further than Reagan (whatever your opinion on his policies is). Reagan managed to push a great deal of significant bills through a less than perfect Congress (not too much unlike Bush's record in Texas).
I really do believe that if, god forbid, Gore gets elected, he'll be utterly paralyzed by Congress and the press. Nothing would get done on his end. He'd probably go down as one of our worst Presidents in history....
Gore has slight edge, being V.P. However Bush/Cheney resurrects Bush Sr. from eight years ago, so is also continuity.
The three third parties that have made it past
one percent of the national point in the past 20 years- Anderson, Perot, and Nader- have all been personality driven. The parties themselves wane without a demagog. I suspect, however, we may be hearing more from the Greens, because they capture progressivism even without Nader.
Not to burst your bubble, but Clinton didn't run the whole show either. He had plenty of advisors that you didn't vote for. Now plenty of them jumped ship, some were indicted, and a few committed suicide, but they were still there. Albright pretty much runs the forign policy show, doing all the actual work. Clinton steps in for the photo shoots.
of course, Gore is just as big an idiot. i just disagree with those who believe that Bush is some kinda genius. i just don't see it.
They are both pretty damn smart. Neither are rocket scientists, but I think both have the intelligence to be president. The election comes down to issues with me and I tend to side with Bush on them. No disrespect to Gore, I just don't support the ideals he proposes.
Finkployd
Vice Presidents don't do as much as you imply.
They do as much or as little they (and their president) want. There is no rule that the VP cannot handle certain aspects of the office. There is NO perfect human that knows everything about politics and can preform every function of the executive branch at 100%. ALL presidents delagate and have advisors.
Correct, knowing different things doesn't mean that Bush is less intelligent. It's that Bush doesn't know things that he obviously _should_ know for this _job_, and his apparent lack of concern in not knowing them, that scares me.
You can look at it that way. I prefer to look at it as favorable to have someone who isn't arrogant enough to think that they know the best way to do everything and will defer to the best decision, policy, or idea, whether it came from them or not.
I'd vote Bush, except I make my own decisions.
How delightfuly condesending of you. Let me return with an pointless, meaningless jibe of my own:
"I'd vote for Gore but I'm not a child molestor"
You are right, that is fun.
Finkployd
self-appointed role as "Policeman of the World" (a role which Dubya's family is firmly in favour of)
Haven't been paying much attention, have you? You are a little mixed up here. The Clinton/Gore administration has placed US troops in seperate combat situations in more countries than any other administration in history. Gore is the one that supports US intervention in every little civil uprising that occures. Bush has been clear that he will only use military intervention when the vital interests of the US are at stake.
Finkployd
and Gore was about average at _the_ highest ranked school in the country.
This is stupid to argue about, since it really doesn't mean anything, but Gore's academic record can't hold a candle to Bush's. It's still irrevelant though.
eh? governor of a state is more analagous to the presidency than the vice presidency? that's nuts. what's Bush's experience with foreign countries? (and _please_ don't say mexico) Bush's constituency is one state. Gore's was a nation.
A nation in which he had 8 years to do everything he is promising AGAIN! Either way, I have two words for you, Dick Cheney. He has more forign policy experience than Gore could ever assemble from his cronies.
that the guy's any more intelligent than your average weed.
I can't understand how people can say that. Being able to deal with people, work with complex laws, and provide leadership may not be the same as memorizing tcp ports, but it is still intelligence. Just cause he doesn't know the things you know doesn't make him less intelligent. Believe me, when it comes to politics, I'm willing to bet that Gore and Bush are more intelligent than everyone on slashdot.
Finkployd
like the saying goes, If only your veins were filled with oil, the world would come rushing to your rescue.
Well, oil is pretty vital to our economy, so much that congress (and several other countries, you will remember) supported the action in the gulf. Al Gore, possibly the man who hates oil the second most in this election (after Nader) gave it his support.
Either way, I'd take a gulf war over 40 some odd military actions that had no clear goal anyday.
Finkployd
Of course I'm sure that it also makes it easier to find old ladies to run the election as well.
And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
Berke Breathed
Poor in the United States means not having any money to by food because you were shafted by the lottery tickets again. Poor in the United States means you can't afford the monthly payments on your 52 inch TV. Poor in the United States is a filthy rich compared to being poor an any third world country where there are no jobs and a crappy economy thanks to corrupt government and a ridiculous choice for the place to hang your hat.
The poor in the United States pay no taxes and get a humongous chunk of social support through federal and state governments along with the charity organizations that haven't closed up shop because of the lack of donations that result from a consficatory tax system.
The way the US is built and still is today, though not to the extent that it should be, a person is in control of their own destiny. The few times that they are forced to loose control are the times that the judicial system steps in. There is little to prevent a poor person in America to take control of his life and finances. The one condition is that he must be willing to work and earn his living, which people have been doing since the days of the caveman. If he doesn't want to work, then his parents screwed up in rasing him.
I was poor once. After being sick for 3 weeks, I was in debt, had to leave college which I was paying for myself, and had to find a full time job to catch up. I was broke off and on for 2 months, but I made it without the government's help and am doing fine.
Don't believe FOR A SECOND that the poor in America are really poor. If you do, you are also likely to believe that Columbus was evil, that no child being left behind means to lower standards of American students (otherwise you'll be discriminating against one minority or another), and that the only way to solve problems in society is through federal legistlation. Take your average American bum and throw him into the soviet union, and he will beg to come back. The only way to get by over there is if you have a job, quite possibly one you *gasp* might not like! And it'll be *gasp* a fraction of what minimum wage pays! *boo hoo*
I have little sympathy for those who faced that situation while raising children. I call them irresponsible, there is nothing more ridiculous than concieving a child (by this, I am not talking about those who have suffered rape) without planning ahead.
Both the Democratic party and the Green party seem convinced that prosperity is granted, not earned. They believe that redistributing wealth will save the poor and not hurt anyone else. They are foolish. Our corporations are loosing fast ground to corporations in other countries fast, and eventually we will see more layoffs and joblessness as a result. Sony is based in Japan for a reason. Who will pay the taxes once all the economic power gets sucked out of America?
Do you really want to help the poor? Point them to the nearest help wanted sign. America has worked hard to get the type of economy it has, don't hand the control of it from the people to liberals in the government. Teach our poor how to fish, quit handing fish out.
-RH
I said there was a CORRELATION. It is not necessarily equal. But I'll be damned if I run into a poor person nowadays not willing to share their story of how they messed up and got to the point they are. It is more than usually being lazy about work. Often, it is due bad decisions that revolve around relationships, alcohol, and job markets. Many times it is just an inability to understand the system, or just the complete inability to recognize that there IS a system. Rarely is it "just because". The few who do use the "just because" line of reasoning simply don't have a cohesive world view.
Which more or less invalidates your argument. Lucky or not, Television is a luxury. God never created TV on the 8th day, and I did just fine without one for many years.
You don't seem to realize that the government should not be in the buisness of MAINTAIN A STANDARD OF LIVING. When they do, TV's and sofas become entitlements. People will use the government as a frikkin suckle, and learn how NOT to live and survive on their own. One day, if this government shall fall or be unable to support any more handout, we will have a bunch of people that natural selection didn't beat the firts time around starving in the streets, having forgotten the fine arts of begging and working. Charity can identify the cases worth saving. These are characterzied by the grateful and those who want to work.
Poverty will never go away. Poverty is a RELATIVE state. If you really think you were poor, then think god you are AMERICAN. Palestinian toddler would call you a frikkin wuss.
I don't believe that being poor means being lazy, but I believe here in America that there is one HELL of a correlation. If what you said was relevant, then we would see people who want to make a living wage and support their family would join the military. Yeah right. Too many hippies are out there that believe in being poor, excuse me, "immaterial", that the government owes them a free lunch every day, and that happiness is derived from fighting capitalism and pissing on the steps of wal mart. And my taxes foot their bills.
Oh, and why is the cost of higher education so high? Imagine if you had a buisness in a sector where you never had to worry about competition for tution costs, because most of your money came from the rich of the government-funded clients. Scholarships have taken a back seat to government funding and grants. Middle class people who pay their own way are also a dying breed. Without the government, there would be a decent chance that getting education at our PUBLICLY FUNDED UNIVERSITIES would actually be an affordable investment, and ridiculous ammounts of money wouldn't be wasted on multi-million dollar football coaches, whose year salary could fund the education of hundreds of individual students.
My tax dollars pay for schools that I could hardly f*cking afford. I'm pissed.
NT :)
Interesting that you don't seem to be saying anything about voting fraud in specific, but rather the electoral system in general. I'm the last person to try to defend the archaic system we've got now, but just for the sake of argument: if you're living in Flordia (as the original poster in this thread does), with a twelve hundred vote difference between the two front-runners, it damn well would have mattered to someone. Just not who you might like.
I must assume you mean arson-related deaths. If a firman is killed in the line of duty, and the fire is arson related, the fireman died as a result of the deliberate actions of an individual. If the person is convicted of arson, they will also be responsible for the charge of wrongful death.
The legality has nothing to do with liking or disliking firemen
No, I mean literally killing a fireman in the line of duty -- shooting him while he's fighting a fire. Its a capital offense, with possible death penalty in many states. But if I get killed at work, you can't get the death penalty because it's just murder.
In other words, the penalty is greater depending on WHO you are killing -- the why doesn't even matter. So if hate crime legislation is just a step on the road to thought crime (because it matters WHO you kill, if they are black or gay, etc) then so is any other "special class" of crime.
So by your logic (that the hate crime laws are just a precursor to thought crime laws), we will eventually outlaw disliking firemen, because they, too, are a special, protected class of victim...
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
BTW, one prediction from the pundit class has already been proven false -- light turnout. When I voted this morning (five minutes after the polls opened) I had to stand in the longest line I've seen in the fourteen years I've lived in this precinct.
The closeness of this race may very well give us a good turnout -- it would be great. Show politicians that we DO care, it's just that generally the populace is apathetic if the winner is already ordained before they ever show up...
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Hate Crimes Legislation => Thought Crimes Legislation
Is that why we have stricter penalties for killing a fireman in the line of duty than a random guy on the street?
Because we want to make it illegal for people to dislike firemen?
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I voted Nader w/ Gore trading...just hoping that my Nader supporter in Minnesota will remember to cast that ballot for Gore!
--
Make mine methylphenidate.
Just a note or two about how it's done in Utah. They use public schools. Which makes sense. There's got to be some kind of correlation between population and number of public schools.
Here's why they don't use churches. As most of you know, the dominant religion in Utah is Mormon (LDS). Curiously enough, the LDS Church doesn't let anyone use their churches for voting. The official line, in fact, is that the buildings can't be used for any politcal purpose, period (they already get enough flak about controlling politics in the state, I figure, so they have to draw a line).
There are other churches in Utah, but the majority of church buildings are LDS owned, so ecclesiastical meeting houses are out.
So they use public schools.
Tweet, tweet.
I'm from Mississippi, and I filled out my absentee ballot in October. It went like this:
... Hi, I'd like to cast an absentee ballot.
me: Oops, I left my Voter Registration card and my Social Security Card at school. I hope a driver's license will do!
lady: Ok. What's your name.
me: my-name. What kind of ID do I need?
lady: none.
me: Not even a driver's license?!
lady: Nope.
me: In that case I'll take two.
Thankfully she didn't hear that last part. Voter fraud would be REALLY easy. As long as I gave her a registered voter's name, I could vote!
I don't understand why people feel it's their civic duty (and right) to vote but they don't feel the responsibility to be informed. I heard guys on the radio this morning urging everyone to go out and vote, but IMHO anyone who is undecided at this point has not been paying attention and should not be participating. It's important to vote, but only if you follow the issues. It makes me absolutely livid to realize that this election--with the future of the Supreme Court in the hands of whoever wins--may be decided by apathetic undecideds who don't have an opinion of the issues, lazy voters who don't care enough to read the newspapers, and airheads who'll vote for whoever has the best haircut and the funniest speechwriters.
I'm not trying to flame you here, just frustrated with the whole situation. Like I said, I give you credit for knowing you shouldn't just flip a coin.
Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who
I stopped by the local library this morning and there was absolutely no one there. however it was not the correct voting precinct. so off I drive to the fire hall across town...
I get within a quarter mile and there are cars everywhere. I park and walk a long distance to get there and when I get inside there are maybe 300+ people in line. mind you I also have to wait in a 50+ person line to register to vote, and then another huge line to actually vote? I don't have 3 hours to kill like that!
So I walked out. the old lady by the door said "you're not going to wait?" with an incredulous tone. I told her that I didn't have that kind of time to waste, since I work for a living.
I'd like to know why we can't work towards having digital/electonic voting. I personally feel that enough security measures could be taken to ensure the viability of this, and I personally can attest that it would make it so much easier to vote! I know there are so many arguments about this, about how it hurts the poor who don't have computer access etc. but tell me this- how many poor people who get paid hourly have the time to leave work and drive home just to wait 2 hours to vote? very few, I'll bet.
Whereas if they mailed out some kind of single-use key to all elible voters... you could use it either at a traditional voting booth, or use it via some kind of heavily encrypted/hardened site over the internet. I'm not sure how it would work but I know we'd see a MUCH larger percentage of 18-24 year olds vote! we're talking 80% non voters here, and falling into that age group I think I understand why they don't- it's just too much of a pain in the ass!
That's just my two cents- I'm going to try and go vote when I get off work, but since I'm putting in another 12 hour day today (like all of you other tech slave labourers out there) I don't know if it will happen.
Attempted Civic Responsibility = Pain in the butt, and a longer work day... bah!
EOM
I'll be voting Browne today, switching my vote from Nader. Browne is clearly with it, and has a good understanding of how this country should be run.
I only wish I had heard about him earlier and more, but I guess I can thank the media partially for that. I feel so strongly about his stands that I would have become an avid supporter/activist, but now it's too late.
BilldaCat
Bush is the rural man's hero. He doesn't talk down to people, he is respectful, religious, and sincere. Instead of endless proposals to appease every voting block, he wants to govern by principles.
Europe is one big city. Of course they're going to prefer the city-slicker. Recently I was reading magazine staff votes, i.e. which candidate different writers for the magazine would vote for. They were almost all Al Gore. Again, magazine writers are all highly educated city-slickers. But not everyone in America wants a brainiac for a president. In fact, the smart presidents have actually been the worse presidents (with some exceptions).
Don't forget:
Orwell wasn't wrong, we're jus a little behind schedule..
Lowmag.net
I can't really summon up any feeling this election. The only feeling I have right now is disgust at this whole entire process from the ground up and including every single person here.
Bleagh.
Sure I'll vote, but it's like balancing your checkbook during church - no sense of power where there should be. No issues have been brought up (by anyone except Nader) during the campaign that I honestly care about. Social Security? I'm 19 - that'll be long gone by the time I get there. Perscriptions for seniors? Fuck the old people! My county has a shortage of housing for ppl who make less than $30k a year, and 6 new retirement plazas are being built. School vouchers? It's not college they're talking about, that's for sure.
The only thing worse than listening to campaign rhetoric is listening to people with opinions put them forth (x is best, blah blah blah). Bleagh.
If only there was a reboot switch for America. Consider me marginalized.
-- I can't think of anything witty to put here. Sorry.
Elections were , once upon a time, a larger holiday then Christmas in America.
This was pre civil war.
1) Check out the math on Bush's tax cut. The newest newsweek has a good breakdown.
1) Make less then 25k year a year? Your takes go from ~2,500 to ~700. That's pretty damn good for a tax cut that is a "gift to the rich".
2) The top 10% in america pay 1/3 of the taxes. Their take of the cut is about 1/5. This is 1/3 of the surplus.
Please don't quote Rhetoric.
Yeah, but he left out the fact the Roman's used lead pipes for most of their water supplies, leading to generation upon generation of dumber and dumber Romans....
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
For weeks and weeks on /., all I've seen is endless waves of messages saying how great Nader was. At first I was for him as well, but after reading his platform and many other candidates I realized I really liked Browne or Bush a lot more (I already knew what a poor choice Gore was, even before he started running. Can you say "Clipper"?).
/. was a haven for libertarians, but hardly a peep about Browne has issued forth before now - was there a big Browne five month cruise that I missed or something?
I thought that
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Maybe Katz could start an article about other countries views of US politics - I'd like to put my 2 (brazilian) cents in...
Anyway, the media around here has a definite pro-Gore outlook on the american election while the government has an apparent pro-Bush outlook, I for one would like Nader, Bush is a dumbass and Gore is a dope, both of them will rape the internet in favor of corporations. Both of them will take away the little liberty that's left online for the americans which - like it or not - will touch the whole world, not just John and Jane Redneck.
Frankly - despite cheering for Nader, Bush will win and I have a good reason: Will Farrel does a wicked drunk prez "Dublya" and Dana Carvey could always do a guest spot as "Dad".
--
--
All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
It really pisses me off to see yet another person spewing that same BS. You only have the right to complain if you vote? Is it some kind of magic process that gives you complaining rights??
What if you were shot and hospitalized on your way to vote and missed your chance? Would that mean that for the next 4 years you would not be allowed to complain about politics?
"Man this medical equipment is shoddy! The stupid government should sure put more money into..."
"I'm sorry Jim, but did you vote? No? Then SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!"
Or does this guy get a special "complaint dispensation" because he really meant to vote but couldn't?
Just because you vote doesn't mean that your vote makes a difference. Sometimes you can make a much bigger difference by refusing to vote. When people indignantly ask you "Why not?" you explain to them what you feel about the candidates, the issues, the governmental system, etc.
Let's make a slashdot-user-acceptable analogy. Which makes a bigger statement. A person who bitches about closed-source software and sends out newsletters using his Linux system, or someone who does the same but uses Microsoft Outlook, because with its wonderful automation features it's easy to send out the newsletter?
If you have huge misgivings about the way government works, the failings of democracy, etc. it is pretty hypocritical to go vote. But according to StormyMonday and so many others such a person must become a hypocrite to earn the right to complain. Riiiight.
Ya know what really annoyed me? I saw on CNN today that some places were using these fancy touch-screen voting machines, and the lady was really proud to say:
"And with this machine you can't spoil your ballot, it checks to make sure that the choices you've made are legitimate and only then does it accept your vote"
I say, vote, or don't vote. It doesn't make that much difference anyhow. What does make a difference is talking about why you did what you did. One single vote, even in a "swing state" really won't make a big difference, but one single voice can make all the difference.
That's just flawed reasoning. I'm sorry but I've seen this too many times not to say something. I know many people will disagree with me but that's just the way it is. Just please keep it civil.
Here are some of the flawed arguments I've heard on why you should vote:
People died so that you have the right to vote. People also died for the right to keep slaves. Religious fanatics die for their religion. Just because someone else believed strongly enough in something to die for it doesn't make them right.
Black people were intimidated, or otherwise blocked from voting. Just because someone blocks you from doing something doesn't make that thing important. If I block you from picking your nose in my restaurant, does your nose-picking somehow become important? No. The you were blocked from doing something may be important, but the act being blocked isn't necessarily important. In this case, the racists blocking the black people from voting might have been doing it just because they didn't want black people getting in the way. But if the racists did because they thought voting was important it doesn't necessarily make the racists right. Afterall, they are known to be way wrong on some of their beliefs anyhow.
If you don't vote you have no right to complain. Sorry, but voting doesn't magically give you the right to complain. If you pay taxes then you have the right to complain about how they're used, whether you're a US citizen who voted, a US citizen who didn't vote, or a landed immigrant who didn't (and couldn't) vote. Even if you don't pay taxes you have the right to complain. What about Mexicans? They have no vote, they don't pay taxes, but they're hugely affected by US policies. They have every right to complain.
Voting is the only way to make a difference. Voting rarely makes any difference. From a mathematical standpoint, the vote of one person, even a person in a swing state, will only make a difference if he/she is the deciding vote in the state. In some ways it matters whether a candidate got 51% or 99% of the vote in a state, but it doesn't affect the final outcome. There are a lot of other, more effective ways of making a difference. Get out and protest, tell people why none of the candidates is any good. Tell them why the government is flawed. Write a book. Make a movie. Throw a Boston Tea Party. These are ways of getting a point across and most make a bigger difference than a small checkmark in a tiny box.
Voting may be important, but these are not reasons why. I personally don't feel voting is important. I think complaining loudly is much more important. One single voice has changed history a lot more often than one single vote.
Did vote for one Libertarian, against Ted Kennedy. I'm just so tired of that whole dynasty.
For the local offices where I didn't know anybody, I tended to vote for the person from my town or neighborhood. If I'm in a suburb of Boston, will somebody who lives down on Cape Cod be very accessible?
The turnout was good, I got there at about 8:15 or so and there were about 15 people waiting to get a ballot, and then 30 or so waiting to get out of there. My local polling station is at the old folks' home down the street, so I'm pretty sure that most of the people working the paperwork and the machines voted for Roosevelt -- Teddy, that is. And everything was in serial, not parallel. So when the guy in front of me screwed up his registration (he last voted in Boston and never registered specifically in Quincy) everything ground to a halt, no one else could seem to help me around him.
One of the reasons that I not only voted but am telling people at work to vote is that a number of people on my team are not citizens, and therefore don't get to be involved. I therefore think that part of my responsibility is to demonstrate to them that there are people that take it seriously.
d
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
You make much of Bush's experience as governor of Texas. But being governer of Texas actually doesn't mean much- as a remnant of reconstruction-era politics, Texas has one of the constitutionally weakest gubernatorial offices in the country, with the governer wielding less real power than the lieutenant governor, attorney general, comptroller or land commissioner.
There were more than six presidential choices on my ballot this morning, and you mentioned one of them. Make up your mind, is there a choice or not? Well, you'll be able to vote soon and you'll have to make up your mind for a few seconds in the booth.
Actually, if you want to know how this population voted just go look at the Slashdot Poll.
I went, I voted for the best choice I felt could win for President, and who I wanted (mostly Libertarian with some Green Party) for everything else, but I noticed something interesting.
For a number of elections in my district (such as electing Judges, or in a few other cases I forget), i saw things like "Choose any two" and then the exact same two candidates are listed straight across the board (Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Family, etc). What sort of a choice is that !?!?
Why do they even bother to hold elections for these people when we don't have a choice? We vote for them or not but they are the only ones running. THAT is why people don't turn out for elections.
Show them how wrong they are and turn out for elections even if you believe your vote for President won't count. There are LOTS of other things being decided on the ballot (including referendums). Your vote most certainly WILL count on those!
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
I was fifteenth in line at my precinct this morning. I wanted to get there early so I could watch the returns tonight. It was remarkably painless. I was in and out in twenty minutes, which seems to be pretty good. The only peeve were the two people behind me who chattered on about all sorts of nothingness for twenty minutes.
Though often quoted, Bush is the twice elected governor of the second biggest state in the country
The texas Governor is the constitutionally weakest governor in the US. He has no executive powers, but can basically veto legislation, call out the national guard and appoint judges. He is approximately the fifth most powerful officer in the state. Some Texas governors have actually been absentees; GW is one of the more active Texas governors in history: he puts in about half a day of work every day.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
So did you at least get the number of the lady in front of you?
However, I can't help but feel that the most socially useful thing I did was buying a pastry from the Senior class bake sale on my way out.
My motto used to be two fold:
Don't blame me, I don't vote.
Why should I pick either of two evils?
Reading the book, Hitler's Pope:m The Secret History of Pius XII by John Cornwell completely changed my mind.
Cornwell's thesis is that Pacelli (who later became Pope Pius XII) negotiated a concordat with Hitler. The concordat basically stated that the Church would remove Catholics from all political life (including voting, demonstrating, etc.). In exchange the Church received the assurance that the Nazi regime would not persecute the Church.
The effect was that the Center Party, the single largest opposition group to the National Socialists, fell apart. The Center Party was almost exclusively Catholic. Once the Church forbid the party, it fell over and the Nazi's had very little other serious opposition.
The conclusion I drew from reading this book is that my voice does matter. If for no other reason than preventing another catastrophe like the holocaust, I will go to the polls and vote.
have a day,
-l
Normally, I'm the FIRST voter at my polling place. Today, I got up late, and went with my daughter to show her the voting.
Then I went to work - I work at one of the network "Decision Desks" - You know, they guys who project the winner?
It's going to be a LONG night - I don't get out till mid day tomorrow. Don't you love 24 hour work days?
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Because the world neither pays taxes, nor abides by our legislature.
I can't even believe anyone would legitimately argue that foreign bodies should have any say in our domestic government. Even taking into account the influence that the US has on the rest of the world, only a retarded gorilla would see the US as a nation whose elected officials have to answer to anyone *but* it's citizens.
Besides, are these other nations going to abide by our laws? Are they going to pay our taxes? Of course not. Which is precisely why they have no say in our elections.
I refuse to be a VA resident, so my domocile is still in Tennessee.
;) come on recording the vote seems just so much more satisfying than punching a card.
Anyway, at the risk of being redundant (have posted some of this before) I voted at an electronic machine in Tennessee on Saturday October 21st, 2000. I prefer the electronic voting machines over all othrs that I have used over the past 20 years.
However, I did have to wait in line for a while before voting. The machines were setup at a mall and the mood was quite relaxed.
I heard from people that voted a week later that they had no waiting.
Pressing the name and seeing the green LED (all parties, not just the Nader one
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Actually, having been a National Guardsman for over 12 years, Commissioned and Enlisted, I would have to see more evidence that he did anything improper.
He certainly seems to have had the blessing of his command, no action was brought against him at all (it would have been trivial to do then, still quite easy now). Also, I am not sure about all of the little rules of his time, but when I completed Army flight school, funded by TN, another Tennessee Guardsman that was there with me got a job in Florida and was no longer obligated to complete service in TN. If he had just failed to show up he would have had some sort of disciplinary action.
Whatever the situation was with Bush, it sure does not look like he was doing anything out of the ordinary then, at least by the scant records available.
Also note, driving a fighter ANYPLACE is more hazerdous than smoking dope with your secret service gaurds in a secure compound in Vietnam.
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
(Informing and venting at the same time, please read gently)
/. was interested in early voting they would have posted one of the stories I submitted about early voting (not complaining, just stating). Hell, for all I know this will be the least read comment on this topic. However, people in the DC/NoVA area, where I work, seem to be fascinated with this "advanced technology" and that it is somehow "not right".
Folks, those of us that vote in Tennessee (and KY, OH, TX, perhaps others?) have been able to vote for a couple of weeks now. I voted on 21 October 2000 and still had to wait in a couple of lines even that early. Relatives that voted a week later (still back in October), had no waiting. I first voted this way 4 years ago and would never trade the convenience and SANITY of this method.
BTW, I am not speaking of mail-in voting, we setup electronic machines in easy to get to places, I voted in a mall on a Saturday.
If the "mainstream press" were really interested if that boy from Washington, DC (Al Gore) is winning the State of TN then they should have been doing exit polling for a couple of weeks, not waiting until the last 150 people finally get to the voting places on the last day.
Actually, if
If the States out on the west coast would adopt a system like TN, KY, OH, TX then they could stop whining about the election being "over" before they voted. Well, probably would not stop the whining, but they would have had an opportunity to vote their choice long before Dixville Notch, N.H. counts its votes early "election day" morning.
If other States would adopt proportional voting like Maine and Nebraska, then folks can stop whining about the electoral college too. Check Electoral College Homepage for real info on how it works, instead of listening to reporters and victims of public education that post here. The EC is NOT "winner take all" by any means.
Please check the http://www.2600.com for their polling results, then look at the current cover. I love the mag as well as the bias, that I do not always share, especially in this case.
Anyway, I voted last month and if Albert Gore Jr. wins the State of TN, it certainly will not be my fault. I want to see his face as he is counting the votes in January (if this sounds like a clueless statement, please check that EC link and refresh your knowledge of how this process works).
Hell, you would probably want to see mine if I am completely wrong about the outcome of this election, LOL!
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Yep, I believe that I have seen your info before and never doubted that Gore edged over Bush in a standardized admissions test. How did Gore do on the GMAT? Probably did not take it. What about the GRE? What about the ASVAB?
At least Bush was able to complete flight school. The Army version was no picnic for me, doubt that the Airforce one is any cake walk either.
If Gore was not out getting "baked" (smoking pot) at the Bayou in his true home of Washington, DC, while he was SUPPOSED to be attending Georgetown law school, he might have finished that.
If he had been attending Vanderbilt's Divinity school instead of doing the same in Nashville, he might have finished that too.
Well, he didn't. There have been no shortage of his contemporaries talking about him smoking dope all the time, people he worked with, people I know in the DC area that worked at "The Bayou" nightclub back then, his own admission that he did it in Vietnam (he left out the part about being heavily protected while there) and on and on. However, it would be fine by me if it was not affecting his performance. It certainly appears that it was affecting his performance.
Oh yea, I wish people would stop saying that he is from TN. He is from DC, period.
Maybe Bush was drinking a lot back then and never denied it, but at least he was able to finish an MBA from a REAL MBA program. And I have not been reading about any "witnesses" to this cocaine fiction that was spread about Bush. If it were true I would expect a similar turnout of snorting buddies for Bush as there are smoking buddies for Gore.
YES, I am pissed that I did not get free smokes in TN like the homeless got in Michigan when they went to vote in the Gore vans!
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
But Bush obviously did show up to fly the plane, in flight school and for several years after.
He then became employed out of State and his commander let him stay in the unit without attending, happens frequently now, obviously was not unheard of then.
Be that as it may, he was flying missions with his unit for some time, much more often than Al Gore "taking the point", another Gore fiction that he himself lied about.
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
This was the first election I have ever voted in - my only regret was that I didn't go and vote in earlier elections (I have been eligible for a while).
After it was all over (and I had a few problems in my case, having moved and needing to vote in a different precinct, but not having an up-to-date ID card, re-registration, etc), I thought to myself "That wasn't so bad - why don't more people do it?".
Indeed. I had always thought it was going to be a chore, but the hardest part was driving and getting a parking place - after that, it was an easy process. The only thing that I can think of stopping others from voting is not being able to get time off. However, IIRC (and please correct me if I am wrong), an employer cannot legally prevent an employee from voting (ie, by termination of employment for missing work for voting) - similar to jury duty. Isn't this correct, or am I wrong?
Anyhow, after it was all over, and I got my sticker (BTW, the ballots were of the "mark-the-arrow" type), I went back to work. And who did I cast my vote for, president-wise?
Nader.
I don't consider my vote wasted...
I support the EFF - do you?
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Not only did I have to go to a church to vote (a technicality I was willing to ignore), they had the ten commandments hanging above the voting booths. (It was just a laminated bulletin-board type thing. The room might have been a church classroom.) But it really annoyed me. I'm thinking of writing a letter to the secretary of state expressing my concern, and maybe the church where the poll was. I don't plan on making a big case about it. I'm sure it was not intended to influence voters, but I did not think it was appropriate. I think it is more a matter of the state not paying attention to these things than it is the church's.
Ugh! Where are you? Here in Massachusetts, registering to vote is trivial. You can do it by mail, or walk into any town office and fill out what amounts to a 3x5 card with your name and address -- and if you're homeless or otherwise don't have a street address, there's a place on the card to draw a map of where you usually can be found. No kidding (was when I registered ~6 years ago). And you don't need to produce any ID or proof of residence in many towns/cities (e.g. Boston, Arlington, Cambridge.)
Maybe that explains why MA politics are so socialist -- we actually get out the vote....?
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Hate Crimes Legislation => Thought Crimes Legislation
Don't forget that there are plenty of other laws that base the punishment (or lack thereof) based on what you were thinking at the time. If you kill someone because you THOUGHT your life was in danger, it's called self-defense. If you have a mental defect, you can plead not guilty due to it. I've not seen many people throwing fits about those...
---
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
Amen. If you support Bush or Gore, this is a close race, and your candidate needs your support. If you support Nader, he's within epsilon of his 5%, and he needs your support. If you support Browne, hey, you know why you're voting.
The bottom line - whatever your political affiliation - get out there and support your candidate.
And I don't just mean for President. There are a lot of other close races, and control of the Senate and House is probably up for grabs today too.
Given that the margin of victory is likely to be so slim, your vote has more influence today than at any time in the past 40 years.
If you haven't voted yet, and are eligible to vote, stop reading about voting and do it.
With all its faults, the best cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy.
(No partisan wisecracks - this isn't a day for me to tell you who I want to run the country - this is the day you tell me who you want to run the country.)
Sorry, i don't understand how this is open to fraud. Every elegible person gets one card/code/slip. If they chose to use it themselves, or give/sell it to Adam for his use, that's hardly fraud. ... Or is this exactly what you are talking about.
In which case I am perfectly happy with that sort of fraud. I wouldn't sell my vote, but I don't see why I should stop you doing so. I mean, people spend lots of money trying to indirectly influence me, why not make it concrete?
Doesn't matter. No third party will win; even a coalition of all the third parties likely wouldn't gain double digits. The whole point is to signal your dissatisfaction with "da system".
mind you, I'd like to vote, but I have taxation without representation. Does anybody know if there is a way I can get my social security withholdings back when I leave the country?
I was thinking about this. What is needed is a secure yet anonymous system that guarantees that everyone eligible can vote at most once.
I was thinking that perhaps you let the DMV (they have provisions for dealing with heavy loads of people throughout the year) let people register several weeks/months in advance; they verify your eligiblity and print you out a secret (== long, perhaps on a smartcard) code that you can use over any phone to vote.
The main stubling block is anonymity vs losability. You know some people will lose the card, so the system has to know your number in order to revoke the old one when printing you out a new card. So you either get losability, but this necessitates you lose anonymity. I guess most people would prefer anonymity -- even I could hold onto a smart card for a few days, I think.
Massachusetts is not a battleground state. The electoral votes are pretty much guaranteed to go to Gore. And while I may not know enough about Nader to feel good about voting for him, I do know that he has no chance of winning the election this time around, so it doesn't really bother me. And I would like to see a third party get some funding next time around.
So, at the last minute, I voted for Nader.
--
--
"I personal[ly] think Unix is "superior" because on LSD it tastes like Blue." -- jbarnett
It wasn't the 10 commandments but a bunch of hand-written things that God does and doesn't "like." I'm not going to protest or anything, but I did find it a bit freaky. Living in a huge Republican State (We have Pat Robertson, w00t!) I imagine it comforted more voters than not...
;-)
/."
But by whoever's God, I voted for Nader!
"I'm not a bitch, I just play one on
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
It's possibly your software. Some versions of ghostscript have an error that will mangle PDF. Ghostscript 6.0 doesn't have these problems, so the solution is to upgrade.
That really doesn't strike me as a substantive reason to vote for someone. A more relevant tech issue would be that Gore continually supported (unconstitutional) restrictions on private use of encryption, while Bush opposed them.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
... is that 50% that thinks 30 minutes every 4 years is going to change anything.
Bitchslapped? Give Rob a bitchslap from bitchslapped.com.
>the other nations of the world had their chance to become the economic and political leader in world affairs, and didn't get the job done (yet, at least).
Been there, done that, lost it again..
//rdj, the flying dutchman
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Should've voted Nader.
Wah!
Monica Moorehead? I saw this on the ballet
today and thought I was going to die laughing.
AdFuel
The world does not end there.
Not yet it hasn't, but we've been lucky...
"I will gladly pay you today, sir, and eat up
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
I used to be a Democrat. My own party did:
1. DMCA
2. WTO (I live in Seattle)
Bye, Al.
I'm voting for Nader because he managed to get 5 minutes air time to explain why the WTO protests are about constitutional sovereignty and not free trade.
The Dems need to understand that if they don't shape up, their own constituency is going to feed them to the dogs.
I don't care if the other party is worse and is going to win because I'm voting my conscience.
Geeks will not vote the way you want them to.
Geeks won't vote the way all those other constituencies do and stay in line for you!
Listen to the Geeks, Dammit!
=googol=
If you want to see all the returns, you have to watch Fox or the Fox News Network. All the other "major" networks will be ignoring everybody except Bush and Gore - even Nader will be ignored with the exception of those few states where he will have enough support to affect the outcome.
I voted for Browne. Voting your conscious is never a wasted vote.
To most of us (us = young, educated middle-class) the whole idea of voting is a complete joke. [early disclaimer: I disagree] Most only see it as a choice between whatever figurehead the donkeys or elephants can drudge up and read the speeches they write (some of which can't even do that without fumbling so I hear). The figureheads, once appointed, will then disregard the general public and focus on people that pay thier campain ads on TV. This was my political view before I had somewhat of an epiphany earlier this year.
...). If you give your vote to Browne, Nader, or any other 3rd party, you're making a clear statement - and this statement will carry A LOT more weight than not voting at all!
/. - GO VOTE! And if you dont like Gore or Bush, THERE *ARE* ALTERNATIVES! Browne, Nader, and the reform party would all love to have yours - as each vote for them means 10x as much.
Not voting is an *unacceptable* protest. Instead of it showing that you believe the voting system is flawed due to lack of choice, you actually show that you don't care enought to spend 10 minutes out of a four year period to check some boxes. And more over, there ARE other choices out there. For instance the Libertarian party (http://www.lp.org) is the largest 3rd party out there, and have radically different ideas than Gore, Bush, or any of the others. And if socialism is more to your liking you have Nader.
Voting outside of the 2 major parties is a clear protest to the current bi-party system (I say bi-party because the press only focses on these to mainly, and not to mention the debates
As for my own personal experience today, I have to say this is the first time in my life I felt actually *proud* to be American. Casting my vote across the Libertarian party line knowing there's a candidate for prez, senate, and house was a great feeling. I went to vote at 2pm CST, and was slightly surprised to see that I was the only one under 60 there! I know most people were still working [I took a half day off], but wow.
So if you havn't voted yet and you're just sitting on your duff reading
I actually voted last week. I don't understand why anyone would wait to election day. It was SO easy. I did it at my grocery store. I didn't even know I could do it until I got there. All I had to show was my drivers licence (you have to have already registered to vote).
I voted for Browne. Here in Texas the LP was on a LOT of local races - way more than any other 3rd party. I voted LP in every race I could, except for one where I personally know (and like) the candidate.
I urge Slashdot readers not to vote for either Gore or Bush. If you do this you are supporting the corrupt system. You are absolutely kidding yourself if you think either of these folks give a DAMN about you. (That is unless you've given several thousand dollars).
You may not realize that if 3rd parties get 5%, they qualify for federal funding in the next election. When they get 1%, the "media" will track them. Voting for a 3rd party is extremely valuable because these are thresholds that lead to greater credibility and greater opportunity to launch a viable candidate later.
Moreover when the election winner gets less than 50% of the popular vote, they do not have a mandate to do anything, which means they are less able to implement the corrupt objectives of their big bucks contributors. The lower the better.
calvoter.org
They do a great nonpartisan analysis of every ballot initiative. More importantly, they show you who the top 10 contributors for and against each initiative were.
So, for instance, in case you were shocked to find out that VC-guru Tim Draper had given $30MM to fight for school vouchers (prop 38), you can then find out the much-less-publicized-fact that the teachers unions are richer than he is, and have spent even more money to defeat it!
Can your IM do this?
It's so easy to register to vote. And I've had to regegister 3 times in the past few years.
It's simple. I go to the DMV to get my change of address card and 2 weeks later they send me my new Voting location. The first time took a whole 5 minutes, because I had to decide to be Independant or Republican.
Also, I can't see anyone calling voting difficult. I got up 10 minutes early and stopped on my way to work to vote for Bush (It's probably get me moderated down here, but Gore's just way to Socialist).
There's no excuse not to vote unless your ignorant of US politics. If you are then I urge you not to vote, but if you have any idea of the current state of the world and the US then get your lazy rear out of bed 10 minutes early and VOTE!
hmmmm...what? Oh, I left this stupid
This question seems to be a litmus test for political leanings. A whole lot of people didn't care that Hillary Clinton, who was not on the ballot, was being given a huge amount of power to determine the course of 1/7 of the nation's economy (the late and un-lamented HillaryCare). In effect, the people who voted for WJC in 1992 were voting for the head of a committee as well. To turn around and condemn GWB for taking the same role is, well, a little hypocritical.
--
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
It was a felony conviction (aggragvated assault,) that was sorta drug realted. I was an addict and I commited a crime, did my time and have been clean since then. I had just turned 18 was really just a dumb kid.
Had I registered before I got in trouble I'd still be able to vote...but I have to wait 7 years...sucks.
"Most of my heros won't appear on no stamps..." Chuck D from Fight the Power
Actually, I've been cranking up "The Democratic Circus" from their Naked album a lot lately. It helps to keep things in perspective...
Found out this morning, there's a circus coming to town....
They drive in Cadillacs using... walkie-talkies and the... secret service...
Their big top imitation of life
And all the flags and microphones
We have to cover our eyes
I thought of that later (that it was against rules to discuss politics inside). I don't think the election officials were viligant enough to catch it (the little old ladies were swamped).
On the way out the exit poller from the Oklahoman (proudly named "The worst newspaper in America!" by the Columbia Journalism Review -- kinda like having the academy decide a movie was so bad they should give it a special oscar!) was five feet from the door. A college jschool kid probably. I told her that she was supposed to be 150 feet from the door (trying to do her a favor before they came out and scholded here). She haughtily informed me she was with the PRESS. So was I for five years, lady. Geez, here I've gotten off on another rant again. My sense of civic duty is at an all time low....
---
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
Geez. I know confronting this guy with facts is useless. I mean, by this time he had started up with the black helicopters, the Trilateral Commission and Masons. All three code words that set off my "one-world conspiracy militia wacko alarm" -- who are usually pretty reluctant to come out publicly where I live since we have this nice memorial with 169 empty chairs in it. Tends to keep 'em a little quiet.
But I really wanted to ask him, "do you really believe that 75 percent of the people work for the government? How many people do you know? How many work for the government? Do the math!!!!!"
I bit my tounge, the guys has his rights, blah, blah, blah. I'm middle of the road/bearing left socially. I don't get all that fired up about politics any more. But I do research the state questions to figure out what they actually mean. This sounds elitist as hell, but I'm glad a lot of people don't vote. If they'd rather sit home and watch Survivor and Jerry Springer, more power to 'em. Maybe they can have militia man over for taco dip and some Bud Light.
-- END RANT---
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
[Article from KKK allegedly endorsing Bush snipped]
Endorsements aren't commutative.
Bush hasn't been proven (or disproven) to be racist, strictly from the evidence of a racist's endorsement of Bush.
Put on your critical thinking caps, people.
[
the woman at the table helpfully explained write-in votes, and that writing in a vote for anyone but President is a waste because it won't be counted...
it is clearly against the law to campaign at a polling place. This is clearly a violation of the law...
From that report, the precinct lady didn't tell the voter which of the available official non-presidential candidates to choose. She just explained the counting process, with the conclusion that write-ins are not tallied by default.
If the official candidates were getting low numbers, then the state would go back and see why. If the reason was an obviously recurring write-in, then of course, the write-in would get tallied, as it might be the winner.
Since there are Federal matching campaign funds at stake for candidates who get over X% of the vote, even a zero electoral vote presidential candidate wants to know what their numbers were.
No other office has that provision that is significant for the losers of their races, so there's no NEED to tally write-ins unless it becomes obvious that a write-in has a snowball's chance of WINNING.
Stop with the knee-jerk rage, and put on your critical thinking caps.
[
perhaps you [...] let people register several weeks/months in advance; they verify your eligiblity and print you out a secret code that you can use over any phone to vote
The coupon scheme that you propose does not validate the identity of the person making the vote. It just validates the identity of the person picking up the coupon. This is just as bad as existing absentee ballot fraud.
The precincts (should) verify your identity and registration, and give you a ballot slip. When you've made your selection, the ballot slip is registered to block any second attempt.
There will always be ways to manipulate this system, but it's the best we've got so far.
[
"No person shall be eleected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President should be elected to the office of the President more than once...."
George Herbert Walker Bush is still eligible for one more elected term. (However, I wouldn't vote for him. "It wouldn't be prudent at this juncture.")
GHWB was Vice President for eight years, then President for one elected term. That means he's got another elected term available. If Ronnie had died in office and GHWB served more than two years to complete that term, then he'd be ineligible.
The Amendment was passed during FDR's fourth term, not because FDR was unpopular (obviously not), but because people were feeling it was going against the founding fathers' intentions: they made four-year terms because they recognized the need for new blood in the highest offices of government.
Wipe off that smugness. It looks kinda like egg.
[
Gripe about USA being self centered and then offer up a European-only view? How about Central and South America? Or the Middle East? Or the Pacific Rim? Or China or Africa? You should definitely start to look out of your (European) borders. The world does not end there.
I don't think the USA has a monopoly on self-centerism. Maybe a dominant market share, but not a monopoly :-)
Anyway, getting back to the topic, it does not appear that the election's effect on foreign relations is uppermost in the average American voter's mind. The main issues seem to be more internal fiscal and social problems than anything else. In a different time (e.g. the Cold War), other more external issues might be more relevant. But not now.
In my more cynical moments I tend to look at the current state of politics in America as close to the end of the cycle- namely the fall. Read your history, boys and girls, particularly the the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire. Read the following and see if *you* can draw some interesting parallels. (the following taken from this site.
The British historian, Gibbons, identified the primary reasons for the collapse in his "Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire".
IV. Social Causes.
V. Economic Causes.
VI. Political Causes.
Oh well. Everything ends sometime.
You are Americans, well, I don't disagree with you. None the less if you won't care about the rest of world, your diplomatic relations will cool down. You will have harder time to deal with other countries. You will have hard time to keep peace in middle east so these sources of oil you are so much dependent on would not stop to flow. You will have much harder time in export and import of other goods, you should better check labels on items around you. Many of them are made in China (mostly) or other foreign countries. You are Americans, you might not care for the rest of world, but like it or not, you are too far from being independent on it.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
Here, the county held absentee voting at the mall, among other places. Apparently it's very popular. You can't really make the excuse that it was out of your way, since you were already at the mall buying the latest consumer goods that the nice corporations marketed to you.
It also has the side effect of keeping political signs out of the mall...
---
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
Why didn't George Bush Sr. run for president? He was easy to figure out. You just read his lips, and whatever they say, he's going to do the opposite.
---
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
"... you've got no right to complain about the Gov't for the next four years. So get your sorry arse to the polls or SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!"
Alrighty...
Disagree with Microsoft's business practices? Fine. Wait, do you have voting stock in the company? You don't? Well SHUT THE FUCK UP THEN! If you don't have voting stock in Microsoft, you have no right to complain about their business practices! At least that's how it is under your train of thought.
But hold on a sec. Do you own some Microsoft software? Hey, bitch on then! You're giving Microsoft your money for a product / service, and if they don't deliver, let em have it!
Me? I don't vote. But I'll still bitch and complain as loud as I want, and you can't stop me. Why is that? I'm an American taxpayer. I "pay" the government for products (e.g. new roads) and services (e.g. federal programs), and if they don't deliver, I'll let them have it. After all, it is my money they're using.
Just because I don't vote doesn't mean I can't complain. But if you think otherwise, then I hope I won't see you crying about Microsoft in Slashdot's next Microsoft-oriented story. By your train of thought...you don't have voting stock, you have no right to complain.
Nuff said.
--
--
The real Raunchola isn't cool enough to have any imposters
I know you were being funny, but a lot of people say they don't vote as a form of protest.
Unfortunately, a protesting non-vote is completely indistinguishable from an apathetic non-vote. If you really want to protest, vote, but use the write-in space. Unfortunately, Mr. (or Ms.) NoneOfTheAbove will probably just get counted as a mismarked or invalid ballot, and still not give the message you really wish.
So I wish to nominate Jon Katz as the Protest Candidate of all Slashdotters. On the next election, or if you want to protest today, write in Jon Katz.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
You've got an official voting station in your shower? I want one there... ;)
I have fantasies about major media news sources acknowledging that there are reasons why people have political beliefs not endorsed by the two parties. I have fantasies in which the two parties have to defend their stances on certain issues, even if the other party agrees with them. I have fantasies about non-moderates being able to participate in the political process, without being told "you have to vote for one of these two people you disagree with, or you might as well just stay home."
Just like everything else in life, you have to be strong to survive. Simpering in the corner and moaning about how big companies are hurting you is weak and feeble behavior. If you had any real conviction, you'd quit voting for losers and start influencing the hearts and minds of those with a legitimate chance to win.
Thank you Ms. Rand. I guess if you can only conceive of two possible positions on any given issue, than two parties is enough for you.
Is it too much to hope for that I've been trolled?
--
share and enjoy
"What third party?... always seeem to hear about the !%@^ reform party though." BRIAN: Are you the Judean People's Front? REG: F*** off. BRIAN: What? REG: Judean People's Front. We're the People's Front of Judea. Judean People's front, caw. FRANCIS: Wankers. BRIAN: Can I join your group? REG: No. Piss off.
Your comments are very well taken. I'll also throw out some completely domestic reasons to vote. I'll point out that within living memory--40 or so years--a lot of people in this country couldn't vote. And, they couldn't vote for the color of their skin. That's what a large part of civil rights movement was about. People weren't prohibited from voting by law of course, but by intimidation--and a whole lot of blatantly illegal local ordinances. If you don't think voting is important, then why were volunteers for voter registration drives in the South attacked, and one occasion murdered? Think about that. It was not so very long ago. For many--if not most of us--this era was something our parents can remember even if we cannot. If you think voting is not important, then why in parts of the Southwest have hispanic voters been subjected to harrassment in recent elections? Specifically, I'm refering to an NPR story which reported that election officals required extra identification for hispanic voters in the areas last election. I'm told this year the democratic party is stationing lawyers in these problem areas to look out for abuse. (Now if anyone has more specific details on this report, I'd like to hear 'em because it just caught the story ony my way out the other day.) Now, my question is if voting doesn't matter, then why to this day do bigots try to block minorities from voting--let me be blunt, why do bigots try to prevent people of a different color from voting. Simple, they fear a change in power. When this kind of stuff went on, and is still going on, in this country, how can you not vote? Its obvious that at least some people think the vote is important enough to block other froms using it.
The reason outsiders are concerned about this US election is that the US exerts such a strong influence on the rest of the world. Politically, economically, militarily and even academically. For better or for worse, the US is one of the only nations that can broker deals between other nations, our economy does drive much of the world's economy, and the US is the only nation that effectively project military power these days. On the academic front, many of the world's leading scientific institutions are based in the US. If I lived in another nation, you bet I'd bet I'd be interested in the US elections. I'd be glued to the coverage if I lived in country with US peace keepers stationed. And, I'd keep a keen eye on immigration issues if I was a student looking to go to grad school. Look around, there's a lot of foreign grad students in US universities. The reason for that is simple, some of the best places to study a particular field are in the US. Even though most Americans don't care about the rest of hte world, their governments influence dominates it. Darned right outsiders should be concerned. What they can do about it is not much. You are right, the elections are for Americans, and Americans only. I would suggest that other nations pick up some of the slack in leadership, both for their own, and our own good.
We certainly are. But what's even more amusing:
All these other contries (Within a page of you, I see comments about Germany and Brazil) are talking about the US election. It's important to them. However, pick anyone in the US, even the well-educated, and ask them who the presidential candidates (or their counterparts) in another country are. Very few people will know.
Now, how about those people in Germany? Do they know about the government of Brazil? Betcha they don't. So why do we have this view that the world revolves around the US? Let me give you a hint -- we're not the only ones who seem to think so.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
You know what I find to be the proof that slashdot is going down the toilet? Instead of actually wanting to debate, you just want to have the moderators do the dirty work for you, because he holds opposing views to yours. (Yes, one of his facts is wrong, but the post is well-reasoned and worth reading. I cannot say the same for a post that says that 'Gore scored 1355, Bush scored 1206, anyway, Bush is dumber.' By that logic, I'm more deserving than either of being president.)
Moderation, though often used badly, should never be used to hide an unpopular view. Slashdot is a discussion (and usually argument) forum. Either debunk his post with your own wit, or you'll have to let it stand.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
>Because, let's face it, the US of A really needs
>to start being responsible for what it's doing
>to the environment.
>The country that gave us SUV's...
And where did Land Rovers come from?
Wish I had the points to mod this up. I feel exactly the same way.
>Still, property rights are the most fundemental human rights, after all.
I'd have to give the right to self-defense the vote there. And I'm not talking about guns. Fists, sticks, whatever. If someone tries to hurt you, you should have the right to stop him.
In DE, I hear that if someone invades your home and threatens you, you MUST RETREAT. If you have any possible way to exit the situation, you must try, and you cannot employ force in your defence. Even in CA there are circumstances where you can defend yourself in this situation.
That's the kind of madness I want to stop.
(If I have mischaracterized the sitation in DE, someone please reply.)
Try post WWI Germany for a fine example of how idiotic multi-party systems can become. There is value in the two party system, whether you like it or not. The truth is that you have defined yourself outside the mainstream (which is entirely within your rights.) But don't expect to be empowered in a system that rewards those who can amass the greater quantity of individual votes. I suspect that all those who complain about the two party system are actually closet demogogues who have Machiavellian fantasies of getting things done the RIGHT way --- their way. You think Ralph Nader has his head on straight? Guess again.
When they start digging Nader's skeletons out of the closet, you'll see how creepy he really is.
Just like everything else in life, you have to be strong to survive. Simpering in the corner and moaning about how big companies are hurting you is weak and feeble behavior. If you had any real conviction, you'd quit voting for losers and start influencing the hearts and minds of those with a legitimate chance to win.
my way to work. Proudly cast a vote for Browne in the most republican state in the country. I just *really* hope that Bush does not win. That would be bad but then again Gore would not be much better. Oh well hopefully we can have another 4 years or gridlock while the rest of us live our lives and hope for some real choice next time. Starting today my motto is "Go Jesse" thanks all.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
It isn't that clear cut.
Do you think you should be able to vote at 15? How about 12? I worked at 16, but it was a part time job, didn't care much about politics,and a vote from me would definatly have reflected my parents views and not my own.
US politics sicken everyone.
Speak for yourself.
Why do I keep typing pythong?
I really wanted to buypass the Talking Heads today and go vote. But that guy is so funny in that big suit waving his arms all over singing "And She Was" and all those other big hits. What as today, now?
Thomas,
A few points..
Peace or War in the Mideast (or anywhere else) -
Those who live there will make war on their own with or without the US as they have for thousands of years. For so long, Americans have been told to stop trying to run the world. If anyone wants to fight in the Mideast, they will, whether or not the US does anything. That also applies to most of the rest of the world that has continually told the US to butt out of their affairs. I think it is high time we did.
Separate European military force outside of NATO -
Your country, France, already answered that question in 1966 when you withdrew from NATO. There already is a strong political and economic union in place in Europe, why shouldn't you have a unified military force separate from the US if you want to?
George W Bush is not GWB,Jr. His father's name is George H.W. Bush. Albert Gore IS, however, Albert Gore Jr; he has the same as his father, the late Senator. Both are men of means - GWB has had explicit direction from his father on making large sums of money, Gore inherited money and property from his father upon his death. Both men have major flaws which question their ability to lead.
However, I voted. I voted not because of who is running, but because the person elected will be spending my tax dollars, for better or worse. Second, I voted because there was more than a President running, there were Senators, Congressional candidates, local judges, etc. Finally I voted because I can't stand people who spew slogans and defeatist euphanisms but they do not vote. Voting gives my complaints substance.
By the way, you have a very beautiful country. I have visited it several times and think the people are quite friendly.
Apparently, I am an horrible nerd, and I ought to be put to death. I have gone against my generation and my passion and *gasp* voted for some names that had a picture of a elephant and/or a donkey next to it. I should clean out my desk right now, I have no right being a young and hip computer professional.
Well, at least thats the attitude here. What we have here is a gaggle of young americans voting in their first or second election that seem to believe that they have solved all the problems with democracy. Hell, how many of you were even alive the last time Ralph Nader did something? Raise your hands if you have ever even seen a Corvair.
Being a typical greedy human being, I have feelings for all the birds and bees and spotted owls in the world, but the person I am really worried about is me, and my family and close friends come in a close second. Idealism is nice, but I would rather take care of myself. Thats why I am still buying CDs and DVDs at at great rate. I know that the MPAA and RIAA is evil, but fuck em, I want to get the unrated version of American Pie, you know what I'm talkin' about?
So, yeah, it would be nice to vote against campaign contributions, and PACs and all the bullshit, but on the other hand, I want results. I want the people I want on the supreme court, I want the right tax cuts (or raises, I don't mind paying taxes, we are still one of the least taxed nations on earth), and I want bills going through that support me. These are things that a third party cannot deliver for me. For now...
So you like the Green Party? Jesse Ventura give you the thrills? Start small. Jump on out there and make sure that your third party of choice has filled the ballot. Have em running for city council and the school board. Then move on to your utility posts, your treasurers and auditors. Next, you can pull off a attorney general and maybe even a governor or two. And so on.
Third parties won't be an infuence until they have equal face time on the ballot with the Reps and Demos. Then you will start to see some action. Eight years ago, the reform party got 19%, not just because of Ross Perot, but also because they had cannidates on thousands of important and not so important ballots all over the country. Thats what gets results. Maybe people will take ol' Ralph more seriously if he had two or three senators behind him.
I am not anti third-party, but I am a realist. Until somebody tries to challege the mainstream parties on every level, there will be no parity, and all of the young, hip and smart people will continue to bitch. Get out there, get your boys on the ballot and vote, dammit.
Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
To me, there's no real difference between Bush and Gore anyway, so why bother?
That is just sheer idiocy. Only through total ignorance can someone believe that.
When Dubya wins, and if the republicans hold the house and senate, I guarantee we will see some changes. Mostly good, some bad, but change we will see.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
After reading about votescam from yesterday's /., I carefully recorded what sort of machine is used as the ballot box here in Raleigh NC.
Down here, we use a paper ballot in conjunction with a black felt tip marker to cast our votes. The ballot is then fed into a sheet fed scanner called an Optech III-P scanner made by a company called Eagle.
Printed at the bottom of each ballot is the signature of Constance Mitchell, of the Board of Elections.
To cast the ballot, the paper ballot is fed into the Optech III-P and a LED readout counts how many ballots have been cast. It also has a cash register printer incorporated into it, so that it may print out when the vote began being counted, and when it reaches so many votes. The printout paper was remarkably blank.
I intend to find out as much as I can about this ballot box scanner, and if I can, to contact Ms. Mitchell and ask her how the vote is tabulated fairly and securely, so that we have the result at the end of the night. I want to see where the possibilities for votescam lie.
I cast my vote for Harry Browne, and where possible, all other Liberatarians. In the cases of district judges, I had no choice but the two parties, or abstention, so I salt-and-peppered my vote between the two parties for those elections.
I hope other people noted how their vote was recorded and are as concerned as I am that it is all too easy for the election to be determined by something other than our votes.
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
I am 19 years old, and I live in the Chicago suburbs. This is my first time voting.
I registered a few months ago at the library, which was a rather easy experience. I've filled out more information to register for some web sites. The only thing special you really need when registering is your social security number. The rest was just basic name/address stuff. I got my voting card in the mail about 2 months later, which was cool. Now I could say I was a "card carrying voter", whatever that means.
The next thing that I did was figure out where my polling place was, which was pretty easy too. I went to my county's homepage and followed a few links to a site that had a list of all the polling places in the area. I found out what ditrict I was in and I picked the closest place to me to go to. The reason you have to go to certain place, is that every registered voter has a piece of paper representing them. They ask your name when you vote and they flip through looking for your piece of paper. You can see that there is no way for them to have the whole state's or country's voters on file. The whole point of voting districts is that they are close to your house and usually you only have to drive a few blocks to get there. Overall the polling place was as easy to get to as the local 7-11. One more note about polling places: if you just can't figure out where to vote, you can always call your county (number in the phone book) and tell them you would like to find out where your polling place is. They will transfer you to the correct extension. Now that I knew my polling place I would have to wait till election day.
Zoom ahead to today. I drove over to the polling place, went in and walked over to the area where the voting was going on. It's not hard to spot, just look for elderly people sitting at tables. Once there, there was a table for my last name group (N thru Z). I went up to the guy there and told him my last name. He flipped through the papers and found my sheet. He asked for my liscence (not my voters card, wierd huh?) and after he verified who I was, he gave me my sheet of paper and my liscence back and told me to go to the next table. I gave my little sheet (which I had to sign) to this woman, and she gave me the ballot and a "ballot secrecy folder". Once I had that I was free to walk up to one of those little privacy booth things and get to business. The ballot was basically a scantron test. I filled in little circles with a felt-tip pen (not a number 2 pencil!) that was in the booth when I got there.
A few things about the actual ballot. First I was glad to see four different third-party candidates already listed on the ballot. There was of course a write in spot also. Also, there are some offices where there are two candidates to be voted in, so make sure you pick two people for those offices. There were also some where there was only one person running, so there was just one circle for the candidate and one circle for a write-in. I just filled in the circle for the guy running. Lastly there were some referendums (called propositions in some places I think). These are like laws (sorta) that you vote on. There were about five on my ballot. They are things like: would you be in support of building a new school if it raises taxes my X amount and stuff. I voted yes for everything except one referendum for something that was to be built partially on a nature preserve. After I finished filling everything in I put my ballot into the folder and walked back to the table with the woman who gave me the ballot. She told me to go to this other woman standing by what looked like an EKG machine from a hospital. Once by the machine, the woman told me to put my ballot into this slot on the top. I slid my ballot out and stuck it into the machine, which proceeded to suck the ballot in quickly. I was glad, I was worried it would spit my ballot out like a dirty dollar bill in a vending machine.
That's it, I voted! The lady handed me a sticker that said "I voted" with a little flag on it. *cue national anthem*
--SoLo
John Susek
I didn't vote because I'm not 18 yet. If I could have voted, I would have voted for Nader. My experiences with the elections and our system of government have been very sickening though, throughout this whole election. Seems to me every years voters have fewer reasons to turn out, because the republicrats are so sickeningly the same.
--
1) it's insanely difficult to vote in this country
I agree. I recently moved to Georgia. I went to get my driver's license (a process that took *5 HOURS OF STANDING IN LINE! and 5 minutes of work on their part*) and they asked me if I would like to register to vote. I said yes, and she said that was all I had to do to register. I thought that it was cool, and after nearly two months I got my actual license in the mail. So, I figured I was registered to vote, I asked a neighbor where to go to vote, and I went about my merry way. So, to make a long story short, when I went to vote, I was turned away, and the person that was trying to help me was unable to get through to the number she had and informed me that there were a lot of people that were unable to vote due to the state of Georgia screwing it up. The end result is that I hate the system even more, it's not a conspiracy, but beaurocracy and stupidity. We already know that the method of the electoral college is screwed up, but this adds just another reason why the system in the U.S. is not all it's cracked up to be. I wanted to vote, but was denied. To the state of Georgia, I give a hearty, "FUCK YOU!"
Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
your official voting station doesn't have a shower? what happens when you go into the stall and pull that lever (the temptrol) and the shower curtain closes?
Some of us who support alternative candidates think that the US government should look less outside our borders... we act like the world's babysitters, having troups in other countries, starting wars with nations that don't "play nice", and giving aid to foreign countries, as long as they agree to the "bed times" we set for them.
The US government should look only inside its own borders. How other nations run thier governments and such is thier own damn business.
"Evil beware: I'm armed to the teeth and packing a hampster!"
Lex orandi, lex credendi.
I wake up. I look at the clock. I decide I really do feel like crap and I'll stay in bed a while [the luxury of a college student]. I watch CNN [why? too lazy to change channel] babble on about the election. I see that turnout is already appearing to be fairly high.
I finally get my lazy ass up. I rummage around for my voter registration card. I can't find it. GAH!
I pick up the phone and call the City Clerk. Phone's off the hook. GAH!
I drive around my neighborhood, looking for my voting precinct. I pass it unknowingly--no big sign.
I grab something to eat and drive over to school to drop off in my office over at SGA. I am ribbed for not having voted yet [it's around 11:00 a.m.]. I smile, nod, and say, "I'm trying to figure out where the hell I vote." Our secretary, who lives close to me, tells me where she voted.
I travel to said place. I wait in line. I step up to the clerk. Guess what--wrong place! I walk over to another poll worker; she can't get through to the clerk's office, either. She tells me she thinks it's one of three churches--all on the same road, of course.
I climb back in my truck and drive back down my road. I pass churches slowly. I got honked at and given the fingers by drivers. I smile and nod and wave. I finally see the church--and it's one I'd passed.
I pull in, wait in another line, cast my ballot, look confusedly at the various amendments on Alabama's constitution, vote some yes and some no to piss off the people who look at these things--egads, Alabama needs a constitutional convention!--and cast my vote for W. He's the best of my choices, but I wish I had other choices.
I walk up to the ballot counter. My ballot won't read. Undaunted, I recheck my ballot and re-enter it. Finally, it goes in. I was #864 at that precinct today. I'm amazed--that was around 11:30, before the Huntsville lunch rush will hit.
I drive back to campus. I come back to my office. I ask people if they're going to vote. One says voting is stupid. I nearly unload all of my frustration on him.
Well, I've voted. I have a right to bitch now. Even if Gore wins, I have that right--because I'll go get a new "Don't blame me, I voted for Bush" sticker to slap on my truck.
What the hell, no one elected in US election years ending in zeroes ever holds office for long, save for Ron Reagan.
--
-- Geof F. Morris
I've seen several comments here about people going into the booth and voting for unopposed candidates that they know nothing about, or that they might even disagree with. That's just plain silly.
If there's an office that's running unopposed and you don't like that candidate, or they're from a party you don't like, then don't vote for them! If 10,000 people in your town go and vote, but only 6,000 vote for that unopposed candidate, then the 4,000 that intentionally left that space blank sends a message loud and clear.
Same for national offices. Don't like any of the presidential candidates? The way you express that is to go into the voting booth and don't check any of those boxes. Your vote will be registered, and when the totals are made, you'll be counted as someone who voted, but didn't like any of the choices. That sends the message louder than not voting at all. By not voting, you say "I don't care." By doing this you say "I care, and I don't like any of you bums."
It's crazy to hear people say "I held my nose and voted for so-and-so." Ugh. There are other ways to show your displeasure than by picking from the lesser of evils.
-S
(who drew the line between the dots next to Browne/Olivier, voted libertarian when possible, didn't vote for offices running un-opposed by candidates I didn't like, voted for tax-cut plans, and voted to keep extremist animal-rights groups who use deceptive and misleading advertising away from non-cruel forms of animal entertainment)
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
So in short, to all editors, "First p0st!"ers, L337 trolls, and karma whores, if you are a U.S. citizen and have registered to vote, step away from your computer/workstation/server terminal, and head to the voting booth.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
I got the email too, but it was the other way around, requesting that Greens and Democrats vote today and for Republicans to vote tomorrow.
I've begun happily informing people that I hope Bush does win because of my 3rd party vote. Maybe if things get bad enough quick enough there will be a real impetus for change in our system.
:)
I'll probably be flamed for saying this, but I voted for Nader and personally, I hope that Bush does get elected because of that. I feel disillusioned by the current Democratic Party, what happened to the "Leftists"?
I agree wholeheartedly that if Bush gets elected, maybe some true Democrats will re-emerge when they see how bad things have gotten, but then again, that's just my "bleeding-heart" opinion
What caused you to lose your right to vote if I may ask? Just curious....
this was the first time my jurisdiction made use of electronic voting booths and frankly it bothered me. right before i went into my booth there was a guy behind the machines tinkering with them and i had to wait for him to get done before i could go in. i pushed a bunch of buttons and cute little lights lit up the candidates i choose. then i pushed "cast vote" and therew as a beep and that was it. what is to insure that my votes don't conveniently dissappear if i have failed to vote for an "acceptable" candidate? as i was leaving the guy who had been tinkering said to the old lady that helps you sign the book when you come in "yup, everything is working fine." he's not allowed to know who i voted for while i was voting. how can he insure that the votes i cast were landing in the right spot electonically? maybe a lot of non-tech literate people have unquestioning faith in technology but i'm not sure that anyone who truelly understands what was going on with the voting equipment was within a 20 mile radius of the voting station i visited today.
anarcho sufi urban taoist university and potluck carwash
There are not Socialists in this country. Deal with it. The only reason Europe's economy didn't go to hell a couple of years ago, is because the US economy held. We are not Europe. American government was designed from the get-go to be as hands off as possible. Socialism and American doctrine rarely work.
Pre-comment - I DO NOT meet most definitions of socialist or communist, please no flames....
I had the pleasure of listening to Jon Katz personally explain to me why American's don't vote - he ignored me when I tried to present the real alternatives.
The textbook reasons why Americans don't vote are
1) it's insanely difficult to vote in this country (relatively speaking) 2) we don't have a socialist party.
1) Election day is not a holiday here - I had to get up early to vote for not-Bush(I wanted to vote Nader or Browne, but neither one has a shot in hell) before I went to school, after which I had to go to work (where I get to read slashdot until some idiot reformats their floppy). If I hated Bush less, I would have slept in.
Also, you have to engage in complicated segregation-era registration procedures here - my friend lives in a state where filing a tax return is easier than voting. (I will leave it to others to figure out why). Europeans dispensed with this mumbo-jumbo decades ago and had the government register voters.
2)Working class people in America believe, correctly, that the two major parties cater to the interests of the middle class and big corporations. Bush wants to give an across-the-board tax cut (gift to the rich) and Gore wants to give targeted tax cuts (gift to the middle class). Poor = shafted. They don't vote, because frankly, both parties will probably screw them. In Europe, these people vote because the left-wing parties really do represent their interests. Actually, they vote like crazy.
So, there are a great many "socialists" in America, it's just that they don't have anybody to vote for.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Where in that statement can you find anything that even remotely suggests that choosing a church/synagogue/mosque/temple violates a law?
Will you be contaminated? Do you have such a weak sense of self and are so unsure of your own thoughts that asking you to enter a place of worship somehow compels you to adopt the tenets of the religion that established the structure? I suppose if you had to vote in a daycare facility you'd find it necessary to run out and procreate immediately.
What is the point? Well, few of us have not benefitted or somehow perpetuated the system and 'the way it is.' As such, I still believe that the United States is founded on the idea of a Government "Of and for the People." Change is still very possible from the bottom up and the minute we exchange the collective power we have is the minute we will be exploited. Gore, Bush, Nader, whatever, vote for who represents your idea of America and participate as a citizen. Anyone who sits on the sidelines, who could have prevented it, deserves what's coming. Similarly, those that vote also deserve what's coming, but also steered the path in some small way.
If we give up on our system, many of the fantastic visions presented in SF and Cyberpunk lit are likely to come to fruition. I don't want to live in the United States of (Sony, Ford, Phillip Morris, Microsoft, Etc. Etc.).... do you?
J
shock the monkey
This morning, my wife and I went to the local fire department in a nearby very small and very Republican town to vote. We both voted for Nader and hardly felt like Bush supporters as our state (Indiana) is a Bush state, so in this case if you dislike Bush and Gore, not voting for a 3rd party candidate you prefer truly feels like wasting your vote.
Anyhow, in the instructions on casting a write-in vote, it tells you to ask for a pen, but both my wife and I started wondering if this kind of violates the concept of the ballot being 'secret'.
I grabbed a pen as I went in, and the woman at the table helpfully explained write-in votes, and that writing in a vote for anyone but President is a waste because it won't be counted, so that was very nice, but it still kind of bugged me that they didn't just have a pen in the booth so it wouldn't have to be a big production.
Well, there are bigger things to worry about, sure, but to those of you doing a write-in, just remember to bring your own pen!
I just finished voting. Out of the fifty-seventy or so people waiting in line, the only two people under 30 were me and this other girl.
I hear all of this talk about how the young are disallusioned with the voting system and that is the reason why they don't vote. My question is how can they reason that apathy is a solution. Your votes do count for all of the state and local people/issues. And while I know that my vote will have no impact on who becomes president (primarily due to that parliment of whores known as the electoral college) at least I go and vote my conscience.
If you don't like how it works then get off your ass and go vote. The system we have may not be perfect, but it is the only system we have to inact change. So if think that ``it just doesn't matter,'' stop snivelling and do something about it because I can guarantee that nothing will change if your thumb is up your favorite orifice.
Either give it away or get top dollar, but never sell yourself cheap.
Lately I've come to really resent the incessant and usually biased polling that the newsmedia are forever trumpeting about. I propose the limitation of any and all public polling. If it were up to me, I would allow a few straw polls on designated dates within the long electoral season. Maybe one in March, one in July and then the real deal in November. Could this be accomplished by legislative action? Probably not. But a grass roots "just say $#^^-off! to Pollsters" might do the trick. Is there a downside to no polling? I can't think of one... But I can think of lots of reasons why they suck...
After a little agonizing and hard thinking I ended up making no other votes- such as voting for people who 'sounded like' they were on the same page as the Progressive candidates, or voting for Libertarians simply because I like encouraging slashdot libertarians to get out there and vote their butts off :)
I think this was right- when I got right down to it, I looked at the Vermont ballot and was psyched to see all the Libertarian candidates all over it. I was like 'alright! good going!'. Then, when I thought about it, I realised that I did indeed wish them well but that they were about as far from what I was voting _for_ as I could possibly imagine- and the only one I'd heard word one from was Browne. I had no way of knowing if any of them had common sense or if they were all rabid randite fundamentalists- so I simply refrained from voting against them by picking the Democrat or whatever- essentially I only made a vote where I'd done my homework and knew what I was voting for.
The libertarian thing amuses me- I was thinking about being charitable and give them votes solely because I thought they as a third party deserved a respectable showing, even though they can be starkly opposed to my interests. Instead, I went with my self interest, and voted only the candidates that shared my concerns, and did _not_ vote Libertarian. Does this attention to my own interests, moderate selfishness, and refusal to support a contrasting view on principle, then make me more Libertarian? O_O so if I'd voted Libertarian against my interests I'd be proving I'm not one, but by withholding my vote I illustrate a self-interest streak that is more Libertarian. And now my head hurts :)
Seriously, good going guys- _lots_ of Libertarians all over the VT ballot. Keep up looking after your interests and I'll keep looking after mine...
- The only contested elections on your ballot are for Pez/Veep, US Senator and county register of probate (what does the register of probate do, anyway?); US Representative, State Senator and Representative and the rest of the municipal and county offices are Democratic incumbents running unopposed.
- You wonder why someone's bothering to hold a sign for our US Representative (see above).
- The Libertarian candidate for US Senator is doing a lot better than the Republican candidate. Of course, they're both tilting at a giant windmill named Edward M. Kennedy, who didn't even bother to campaign this year.
- The guy holding a sign for Nader (who turned out to be a friend of mine from college; hi Jamie!) says to a passerby "Vote for Nader; Gore's going to win Massachusetts anyway!"
Intellect: Ok, I admit. Bush is no great intellectual. However, there really is no reason to believe that Gore is any more qualified or intelligent than Bush. For what it's worth, Bush scored higher on his SATs. Likewise, Bush had a higher GPA at College (with the exception for Gore's senior year thesis). What's more, though it's not something to brag about, we can be quite sure that Gore was trying quite a lot harder...for fewer results. Other people assert that Bush got Cs in school. Well I've got news for you, Cs was very much the average back in that day (unlike today). If you're going to try to assert that academics are tremendously important, acknowledge the fact that Bush was about average at one of the highest ranked schools in the country. Bush also graduated from Yale and got his Masters at Harvard; Gore, on the other hand, dropped out of both divinity school and law school.
Experience: Though often quoted, Bush is the twice elected governor of the second biggest state in the country. That is an executive position and far more analogus to the responsibilities of the President than any of Gore's offices. Furthermore, if you hold that being governor of Texas is not qualification for the presidency than nor was Clinton and his governorship of Arkansas.
It is apparent to me that the only reason Gore is promoted as having any more stature than Bush is because: a) The press, being mostly liberal, is inclined to bash him as much as possible b) Gore has wankish mastery for quoting stats (this impresses many people, though god knows why) while Bush does not c) Bush has made a few _verbal_ slipups (but so did his father) that has made him look like he doesn't understand. d) Bush came from a wealthy background (though Gore wasn't much worse off) and he didn't achieve enough with his advantages for some people's mind (God forbid anyone not know what they want to do with themselves at the age of 10 on) e) Bush's Texan tendencies to avoid big words and the air of intellectuality
In other words, I think Bush is actually smarter than Gore. I find it really hard to believe that anyone that watched the debates was impressed by Gore's performance _any_ measure. Gore's use of long sentences and "big" words is not a demonstration of intelligence; if anything, it's a demonstration of poor communication skills. Bush may have lacked style and a certain polish in his speech, but he communicated his (somewhat hard to stomach) ideas across relatively well. [Part of Bush's problem is that much of the reasoning behind his policy doesn't take well to soundbites.] Most importantly, I think Bush has a pretty decent grasp on the issues and the ability to persuade people. People made similar accusations of Reagan, yet he had an undeniable ability to persuade Congress and the Press. I think Bush is quite similar to Reagan in that regard. Gore, on the other hand, would get eaten alive by both Congress and the Press if he were to be elected. Then, of course, there are the issues....
To make a long story short, a significant number of intelligent, educated, and politically knowledgable people are voting for Bush. I count myself amongst those numbers, thank you. Good bye
I don't vote. It only encourages them.
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
These threads are severally begining to annoy me. NPR this morning had a german commentator ranting about how the "world" should vote for the US president. He argued that Europeans "care more" and are more cluefull. This is arrogant at best, eliteist at worst.
The President is ours. We are Americans, and the president is the symbolic American who makes sure that Congress does not over-reach. He is not a Prime Minister, something Europeans don't seem to grasp.
The President is not European, or Chinese, or Japanese, but American. We choose the president to govern us.
There are not Socialists in this country. Deal with it. The only reason Europe's economy didn't go to hell a couple of years ago, is because the US economy held. We are not Europe. American government was designed from the get-go to be as hands off as possible. Socialism and American doctrine rarely work.
By your logic (europe is socialist so Gore should be elected) we might as well elect Buchannen. After all, he will deal with the dictators in China/Iraq/Iran/etc better.
We are American's. Deal with it. Our political system is not yours, our views may not be yours. If we wanted to be European, thoose of us with European ancesstry would not have left.
Absolutely true.
You want to know why the candidates keep courting the 'old' vote? Because they vote. Wether its because they see it as important, they want to fit in and have something to talk about, or because they don't really have anything else to do with their time, the elderly as a demographic group have a large voter turnout. You want the candidates to start careing about issues that might affect you? Great... go to the polls and vote... and drag all your friends and all their friends. If suddenly the 25 and under demographic was going to the polls in record numbers, then the candidates would be trying to sway your vote, and that means issues that effect you.
(Just out of the 25 and under category myself)
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Also, you might try toning the language down a bit, especially if you are so challanged ad you demonstrate.
The quote: by size, maybe. but hell, by that logic, Tony Knowles, governor of Alaska, is even more qualified for the job. demonstrates that this person believes Texas is the second largest State by size only. In reality it is the second largest State by both size and population.
The poster also states that the GOvernor of Alaska is more qualified, without regard to the fact that Alaska is one of the least populated States in the nation.
Now, please, pay more attention before you go calling names that would, in your case, best be shouted while standing in front of a mirror.
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
I have received dozens of calls with recorded messages, calls from pollsters, calls that failed to connect a person to me to pitch a candidate. I think it is high time to declare these to be a capital offense. While I am opposed to the death penalty and barbaric punishments for lesser offenses, I think an exception can be made for political telemarketting. This, at least, is worthy of public stonings.
dsplat, who is glad he doesn't live in a "battleground" state.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
How does the time of day you vote affect the election. Say I have access to a large block of PARTY_X voters on the east coast. If I get them to vote en masse when the polling places open then early polls will show PARTY_X's candidate out in front.
The question is: Will this affect people who havn't voted yet? I would guess it would discourage people from voting against CANDIDATE_X, people who supported him (or were undecided) would run out to back a winner, and people who opposed him would be less likely to vote since they were already losing.
If I could find 30 libertarians and know where cnn was taking exit polls, bringing those libertarians to that voting place could drastically skew that poll.... Thus providing a net political benefit
In all seriousness, no matter who you support, just get out and vote. The fact that CNN is predicting that less than 50% of the eligible voters will get out and cast a ballot is pretty sad.
I wonder why I have read nothing in the papers about Larry Flynt's allegation that, during the 70s, George W Bush (who takes a 'pro-life' stance to abortion) arranged for his girlfriend to have an abortion. Is there some sort of news blackout in the US? I'm curious to know if a man was a drunk and cocaine addict, got a 15-year-old girlfriend pregnant when he was a 24-year-old adult, forced her to have an abortion, and refused to tell the truth about any of this... would that person be a good choice for President of the United States? Would that person be someone we might expect to bring honour and dignity to the office? Only curious...
Sources:
http://www.examiner.com/001030/10 30s orensen.html
http://www. kgoam81 0.com/viewentry.asp?ID=73474&PT=programsummaries
If I'm not informed, I don't vote.
Hear, hear. Now, get informed!
Someone suggested that you should visit the Dems and Reps for their shining wisdom on the issues. That's one solution, but it's like asking a salesperson if the product will cure all ills: they'll say pretty much anything to get your vote. Also, forget the titles of the initiatives: "Defense of Marriage Act" was also known by names like the "Defense of Homophobia Act." They'll pick whatever catchphrase will troll your emotions (and thus your vote).
Rather, get some less biased literature. Every place I've lived, I've been able to find a pamphlet by the National League of Women Voters, or some other non-partisan organization, that lists the Pros and Cons for every ballot initiative, right next to each other.
I agree, don't vote on what you're not informed about. However, I'd take it a step further and vote NO CHANGE on initiatives or propositions that you don't understand, even after reading them. Propositions are written by special-interests, not by legislators who even pretend to have the general public's welfare at heart. If you can't understand the proposed law, it doesn't deserve passage.
[
For the love of god, his quotes aren't even factual! Gore had HIGHER sat scores (1355 total for Gore, 1206 for Bush)... just see http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.htm l.... additionally gradewise, Gore's lowest was a (singular) D in Natural Science, and highest were A's/A+'s in English/French. Bushes lows were 70 and 71 (out of 100) in sociology and economics (more important to presidency then natural science), and his highest was a "pass" in history/japanese....
Anyway, Bush is dumber, but that doesn't necessarily matter. What matters is Bush will make a very conservative supreme court that will be very unfriendly to the net and such (DMCA, etc., also Roe Vs. Wade, Euthanasia....)..... neither are nice guys, and while Gore is smart and Bush is dumb, so what? We've had dumb presidents in the past and will have them again in the future.
That and Bush has the popular vote. Gore's only hope is getting Florida. Note that two good things would happen if Gore wins the election. 1) We wouldn't have Bush. 2) The Republican party would try to attack the electoral college, possibly dismantle it, due to the fact that Bush would have lost the electoral college yet won the popular vote. And regardless of who does it, at least the electoral college will be dismantled.
Please moderators moderate this guys post down. His facts are wrong wrong wrong. The fact he has a "5 informative" score is truly scary to me. /. is slipping...
... you've got no right to complain about the Gov't for the next four years. So get your sorry arse to the polls or SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!
If you think that you can't make a difference, then get involved in local politics. Trying to get your second cousin elected County Recorder of Deeds will teach you more about politics than you will ever get from TV. Maybe in two years, the Libertarians or the Greens or whoever can put up some candidates for Congress, where they can make a real difference, instead of just gasbags who want to make speeches that nobody listens to. I'm not holding my breath.
BTW, one prediction from the pundit class has already been proven false -- light turnout. When I voted this morning (five minutes after the polls opened) I had to stand in the longest line I've seen in the fourteen years I've lived in this precinct.
--
Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
I waited in line for half an hour to get my ballot. In front of me was an elderly lady, quite excited that she had to wait in line (to her, it meant that more people were getting out to vote; I didn't have the heart to tell her that it meant that more people had moved out to what was formerly the "outskirts"). Behind me were two mothers, talking about school, life, the special mock voting activities each parent's school was having for their students.
The voting went pretty smoothly. I voted for Prez/Veep, Senator, and US Rep, then proceeded to randomly fill in the bubbles for the rest of the candidates, sometimes chuckling to myself about what would happen if everyone voted like me. Then I stopped chuckling because I realized everyone really was voting like me.
On the way out, I picked up my 'I VOTED' sticker, proudly displaying the American flag. I'll probably use it to pick up chicks.
Election day's still an event, that's to be sure, but it definitely doesn't mean as much to someone of my age as to those of the generation or two ahead of me who fought for things like freedom and democracy. I hear people talk about how sick and tired they are of politics and how they don't have any choices. Think of what this country would be like if that were really true.
By the way, hot Slashdot females, I voted.
If there's supposed to be seperation of Church and State, why did I have to go to a local church to cast my vote this morning? :-)
Although I have followed all the campaign carefully all along and I have to say that I was really disappointed that NO ONE during the whole process asked a question: "How will other countries view US and how will change their dealing with US in case Bush (Gore) will get elected?"
This is an interesting point that you're right, most people didn't ever ask.
I spend a lot of time overseas and have to say that I haven't met a single person outside the USA who believes GW Bush is even remotely qualified to be president.
The world is basically laughing at us because it's so obvious to them that this guy is a lightweight, but hey in the USA I guess as long as your dad was cool you can still play with the big boys, even if you can't remember their names.
But the US has never put a big premium on experience, which is why I think we don't see it as such a big deal here. We like the idea of an "outsider" stepping in and cleaning up (y'know, because Bush has NO ties to politics-as-usual, other than all his money, friends, and his own father).
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
...and tired.
But not of politics (or Katz) -- I really am literally sick and tired (I think it's the flu). So I didn't go to work today, but I'm getting in the shower in a minute to go vote.
I'll be sure to update you guys when I get back in case Jon wants us to post about lunch or something...
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
During the conversation, I announced that I looked up our senators voting record, and quoted a few "interesting" votes... the partisan voter's response was "I know where they all stand." Sure -- if you know their party, then you know their opinions, right? How naive...how frustrating...
Although I have followed all the campaign carefully all along and I have to say that I was really disappointed that NO ONE during the whole process asked a question: "How will other countries view US and how will change their dealing with US in case Bush (Gore) will get elected?"
Oh, there's a very simple reason why no one asked that question. We don't care :)
---
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
How is it possible not to vote when you are among the (relatively) few people who can elect the most powerful leader in the world ?
I'm French, so of course I can't vote. I'm just watching as you Americans choose the man who will make peace or war in the Middle East, in Korea, in China, in the Balkans, and in several regions of Africa and Central Asia. The man who will negotiate all those issues with Vladimir Putin, Jiang Zemin et al. The man who will decide, incidentally, whether we Europeans can set up our own military force outside of NATO. Maybe you don't fully realize what "the President of the sole superpower" means, but believe me, we do.
The fact that millions among you (you = young, educated middle-class Americans) won't vote today - and that they're proud of it - upsets me.
Don't tell me that your vote wouldn't make a difference. At 50/50 every single vote counts, including yours. And you know that.
Don't tell us that the US election system is flawed. We know that already [?]. That's no excuse. Not voting will only make things worse.
Don't, please don't tell us that there's absolutely no difference between the two candidates. There is. You may not care much about the IQ or the qualification of your president, but we definitely do, for the very reasons I mentioned above.
Thinking that just because you didn't take ten minutes of your precious time to drop a paper in a little box, the next President of the United States will probably be George Bush jr instead of Al Gore, that drives me crazy. In any democracy, not voting is a Bad Thing, the expression of a "spoilt child" attitude. But in the US, the responsibility is even bigger, because the man you're electing will influence the lives of millions of people around the world, much more than yours. And those people cannot decide who that man will be. And you can. And you won't.
Thomas Miconi
Although I have followed all the campaign carefully all along and I have to say that I was really disappointed that NO ONE during the whole process asked a question: "How will other countries view US and how will change their dealing with US in case Bush (Gore) will get elected?" I think that US is one of the most self-centric countries in the world and you should definitely start to look out of your borders. The world does not end there.
I personally think that experience of other countries with former president George Bush were not really the best ones and that a lot of countries is concerned about electing his son who will be surely under huge impact of his father. Its even told much more out of US borders, that its George Bush senior running for yet another presidential term. I would definitely expect international relations to cool down somewhat in case he will get elected.
On the other hand most of Europe is now ruled by Social democrats, and in case Gore will get elected, US will experience continuation of very good political relations with Europe region.
Also consider that Gore is not babbling with idiotic smile frozen on his face. Try to imagine yourself in a skin of foreign president who would need to talk some serious business with Bush... I would comfort such person in advance.
I personally don't like social democrats in europe and democrats in US are the same sort, but I have to say that considering what are US republicans, then my choice would be clear.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
One thing that galls me when I talk to people about getting out and voting is when they say "I'm just one person. To me, there's no real difference between Bush and Gore anyway, so why bother?"
I'll tell you why: Because there is MORE on the ballot than just those two people. There are local referendums, laws and such to vote on, not to mention your state and congressional representatives, so you need to get out there and vote if for no other reason than to try and make your own state a better place to be.