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.
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
Warning: I'm by no means an expert on election law, which varies from state to state. However, I'm pretty sure that some of the "crimes" you're citing aren't actually illegal at all. For example, voting absentee while away at college is not only not illegal, but it was actually encouraged while I was in school. It merely depends on in which state/district you've declared residency.
Second, you have to remember that Florida has a really ugly history of absentee ballot fraud. A lot of the signs that you're seeing now are a reflection of the legislature and judiciary's efforts to combat this.
And finally: in instances where voting fraud is systematic and intentional, I absolutely believe that severe punishment is in order, comparable with that for battery of a police officer. Voting is serious business, and deliberately rigging an election is a crime in the same vein (although not as severe) as treason, in my view.
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.