USA Presidential Election 2012

[ling]

Okay, here is something I don't get: why would you vote for Obama when you actually sympathise with another party more? I mean, apparently everyone thinks like that and then it's only about Obama and Romney while actually people like other parties more, isn't that wrong or at least very strange...?

Because of the way the electoral system is set up. Each state has a number of electors, and the winner of that state gets all of them. Whichever candidate gets more than 270 electoral votes wins. Also, there are no runoff elections for president.

I share more in common with Jill Stein, but her chances of winning are exactly zero. I'm voting for Obama because the prospect of a Romney presidency is too nightmarish to even contemplate.

I still remember how Bush won Florida (and thus the US) in 2000 by a margin of around 700 votes. Some 30,000 Floridians had voted for Ralph Nader. If they have voted for Gore, Gore would have been president. That's the danger of voting for people with zero chance of winning: you can aid in giving the worst candidate the keys to government.

Don't you think this system should be changed to give other parties more chances?

Yes indeed. The electoral system needs to be reformed, and the possibility of instant runoffs should be implemented. But that would require a constitutional amendment, and that won't happen as long as conservatives dominate.

[JackFrost]

Who exactly decides this then? Why do all the other States chose to don't do this?

The state legislatures and governors together have a say in this. And I don't know why the other states aren't following that model. It didn't take long for the system to become "winner takes all" when it was set up at the end of the 18th century.

Yes indeed. The electoral system needs to be reformed, and the possibility of instant runoffs should be implemented. But that would require a constitutional amendment, and that won't happen as long as conservatives dominate.

I doubt the liberals are too interested reforming the system as well or maybe I haven't heard a lot of vocal ones.

But the idea of using instant runoffs may not require a constitutional amendment since the constitution only says how many congress seats a state can have, who can be president and congressmen, and how a president is elected by the electoral college.

[linguoboy]

I doubt the liberals are too interested reforming the system as well or maybe I haven't heard a lot of vocal ones.

I don't get the feeling that most liberals are interested in electoral reform per se--it's too wonkish and confusing for most people. They only get engaged if they can see a clear advantage for the people they like.

For instance, look at all the outrage over voter disenfranchisement this year. Republicans have figured out that greater turnout disproportionately benefits the Democrats, so they initiated measures to reduce it (under the cover of fighting "voter fraud"). Democrats sought to have many of these blocked in the courts on the basis that they mostly impacted lower-income and minority voters--who happen to be among those most likely to vote Democratic.

But if, say, those being kept away from the polls were mostly Republicans, would the Good Liberals be making much noise? They seem quite fine with the fact that in, some states, convicted felons are disenfrachised for life, regardless of how long it's been since they've served their time, and that most states restrict their voting rights in one way or another.

The real problem is that what's best for the electorate (i.e. more choice, more turnover) is worst for the incumbents--regardless of party affiliation--and it's the politicians in power who would have to approve the changes. I really don't see a way forward without a massive shift in political consciousness among hoi polloi.

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

This (satirical) article shows the difference between voting in the Netherlands and the USA fairly well:

http://www.speld.nl/2012/11/05/helft-am ... rategisch/

[Tenebrarum]

Best of luck, America! I'm here praying the hardest that Rmoney will not win.

[Kenny]

All I'm hoping for is that at least 51% of those who have gone or will go to the polls today in the states of Ohio, Florida and Iowa be (and haven't voted and don't intend to vote for a third-party candidate) are reasonable enough to vote for Obama. We'll see. Keeping my fingers crossed, as useless and idiotic as that may seem (my only other superstition is knocking on wood which is equally moronic but what can I do now, it's a very old habit I can't extirpate).

[md0]

It's fun to watch the US election coverage on European channels
They don't try to be impartial.

[Kenny]

http://www.politico.com/2012-election/m ... nt/2012/FL

I think Obama will win Florida. He has a slight lead and the Miami area hasn't even hit 40% processing yet and those folks are supposed to be pretty deep blue.

[Dormouse559]

8 pm - polls close in California, Washington State, and Hawaii
8:01 pm - Obama wins California, Washington State, and Hawaii

Oh, Electoral College, you're so silly!

[Tenebrarum]

OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON OBAMA WON !!!!!



Great job America!! You have self-respect after all!!

[ling]

I'm ecstatic, overjoyed, and relieved. Obama re-elected! Woohoo!!

Those awful people like Rush Limbaugh, John Sununu, Sheldon Adelson and Karl Rove must be popping blood vessels! We see that Donald Trump already lost it!

GOOD!

[linguoboy]

Those awful people like Rush Limbaugh, John Sununu, Sheldon Adelson and Karl Rove must be popping blood vessels! We see that Donald Trump already lost it!

You can find some schadenfreuderrific footage from Fox News' broadcast last night of Rove having a meltdown on air. I'm sure there are many more lulzworthy recriminations to come.

[Michael]

Man, what a rite of passage 06 Nov 2012 has been for me, being a first-time voter and all, and for our nation as well. Barack Obama defeated Mittens. (Have never been happier in my life - should have seen me scream of happiness last night!) Gay marriage has been legalized in 3 more states, while marijuana has been legalized in 2 more states. The nation's first openly lesbian senator has been elected to Congress. Yesterday just couldn't have gotten any better for us liberals! Everybody back in Italy of course is absolutely ecstatic. My Italian brethren are happy for us!

Those awful people like Rush Limbaugh, John Sununu, Sheldon Adelson and Karl Rove must be popping blood vessels! We see that Donald Trump already lost it!

Moreover, not only did Senator McCaskill defeat Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin in Missouri, but Tammy Duckworth defeated Joe Walsh, another Tea Party nutjob, here in Illinois. Looks like God isn't too pleased with His OP! Down with extreme right-wing conservatism!

[md0]

I am glad the anti-intellectualism of the Republican Party lost.
I do hope Obama's re-election will force GOP to shift closer to the political centre again, because it it shifts further right after this, the Democrats will have to shift in the same direction too :/

[Kenny]

They'll have to shift their view on gay marriage to some extent at least unless they want to give up on certain demographics for good. (Along with a number of other issues.) And they need a likeable candidate which Romney was anything but. I mean even GW's goofy face and Southern word-inventing parade was more deserving of sympathy than Mittens.

[linguoboy]

I am glad the anti-intellectualism of the Republican Party lost.
I do hope Obama's re-election will force GOP to shift closer to the political centre again, because it it shifts further right after this, the Democrats will have to shift in the same direction too :/

How do you figure? Its seems pretty clear that it was the GOP's reactionary stance that doomed it this cycle (viz. crushing defeats for Tea Partiers Akin and Mourdock and a very narrow victory for Bachmann), so if the Republicans decide to double down and tack further to the right, why wouldn't the Dems smile and see them off?

[md0]

To fill the empty spot in the political spectrum and appeal first to moderate Republicans and then to non-completely douchebag Republicans who will both feel not represented by a more extreme-right GOP. This always happens here after elections, and I don't think how a country with an even narrower political space will be different.

[linguoboy]

To fill the empty spot in the political spectrum and appeal first to moderate Republicans and then to non-completely douchebag Republicans who will both feel not represented by a more extreme-right GOP. This always happens here after elections, and I don't think how a country with an even narrower political space will be different.

But what could they reasonably pivot on in order to pick up moderate Republicans?

[TeneReef]

Destroyed by Total Capitalism
America Has Already Lost Tuesday's Election

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 65437.html

The United States Army is developing a weapon that can reach -- and destroy -- any location on Earth within an hour. At the same time, power lines held up by wooden poles dangle over the streets of Brooklyn, Queens and New Jersey. Hurricane Sandy ripped them apart there and in communities across the East Coast last week, and many places remain without electricity. That's America, where high-tech options are available only to the elite, and the rest live under conditions comparable to a those of a developing nation. No country has produced more Nobel Prize winners, yet in New York City hospitals had to be evacuated during the storm because their emergency generators didn't work properly.

[Tenebrarum]

But what could they reasonably pivot on in order to pick up moderate Republicans?

Endorse Sarah Palin. Shower her with more money to get her to switch allegiance. Because soccer moms.