Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[glynor]

For all you US denizens, I don't care who you are voting for... Just Go Out And Do It, Tomorrow.  For myself... I've already voted, but I'll be volunteering all day tomorrow.  What are you doing?

[gappie]

well, not a us citizen. but i hope you folks over there choose, and choose what your heart tells you.

now where on the internet do you people go to, to follow your elections. bought my self a bottle of orangejus  and i want to see something of it tomorrow night.

 
gab

[JimH]

Any good news site should work.  CNN, for example.

Watch what happens in Virginia.  The polls close at 7:00PM EST.  If Obama wins it by more than a couple per cent, it's probably all over.

Florida and Ohio will be close and should give another clue.

This site has an excellent summary, based on many polls:
http://electoral-vote.com/

[221bBS]

I'll be waking up around 5:30-6:00am  so I can vote before work... hopefully the line won't be long and I won't be to late

[JimH]

You're entitled to be late for work if you vote.

Here's another site with the projected count:
http://www.rove.com/election

Karl Rove was Bush's chief political advisor until he got in a little trouble.

[Matchbox]

For the first time in my adult life, I will NOT be voting.

It does matter who we vote for, and there is nobody worth voting for.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

[JimH]

Match,
Obama wasn't elected head of the Harvard Law Review by his peers for being a Marxist.  You can't get much more "establishment" than that.

Please...please... reconsider.

McCain is also a good person at heart, in my opinion.

Reach down and decide.

Jim

[Matt]

Obama wasn't elected head of the Harvard Law Review by his peers for being a Marxist.  You can't get much more "establishment" than that.

True.  That's not very mavericky.

[Matchbox]

Komrade Obama has promised to redistribute my income to others of his choosing.  Obama has called those that he wants to raise their taxes fund his welfare state socialism "selfish".

Closet-Liberal McCain has made similar promises.

Both will punish my success and reward those that will not support themselves with the result of my labor.

This election is ALL about income redistribution, from both candidates.

I've protected my assets as best I can and will retire early.  I'm not going to continue to work hard, only to have it taken from me at the point of an IRS gun to be given away as more and more welfare.

My not voting IS a carefully considered vote.

When "the common good" of a society is regarded as something
 apart from and superior to the individual good of its members,
 it means that the good of some men takes precedence
 over the good of others, with those others consigned to the
 status of sacrificial animals.

- Ayn Rand 1905-1982 -

[JimH]

Komrade Obama has promised to redistribute my income to others of his choosing. 

If you earn more than $250K a year, I think that's true.  And if you do, you should be glad to be so lucky.

[Matchbox]

I don't believe in luck.

[JimH]

I don't believe in luck.

I would take luck any day, but I also believe in hard work, and I believe that, if you make it, you owe a little extra to your fellow man.  I think that's what Obama meant.

[BullishDad]

Here's the site that I like to read.  I've noticed that it is used as a source for many other political sites.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

[rjm]

The income redistribution that either Obama or McCain would implement is mice nuts compared to the wealth destruction that both will continue by spending 33+% of GDP on the military and whatever is not left over on bank bailouts.

[phalanthus]

 
well said jim - if australians were voting it would be 90% obama- i hope all my american friends do the same !!

[Matt]

Both will punish my success and reward those that will not support themselves with the result of my labor.

I've heard this sentiment a lot, and it troubles me.  I feel fortunate to have the health, intelligence, and ambition to make a healthy income.  Shouldn't I feel a duty (or even privelege) to use some of it to help those who haven't been as fortunate?

[glynor]

If you need detailed polling analysis, the only site that matters:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Should be an interesting night tomorrow.

BTW, got our first results in... Dixville Notch, NH:

Obama: 15
McCain: 6

Consider, though, this is a town of 75 in rural New Hampshire.  Here are some older results:

In 2004:
Bush 19
Kerry 7

2000:
Bush 21
Gore 5

1996:
Dole 18
Clinton 8

1992:
Bush 15
Perot 8
Clinton 2

1988:
Bush 34
Dukakis 3

UPDATE:

Here's another site with the projected count:
http://www.rove.com/election

Karl Rove was Bush's chief political advisor until he got in a little trouble.

Karl Rove is a... Well, I won't say in nice company what he is.  But either way, that electoral college map is playing it safe.  That's probably a fairly conservative estimate, though possibly also fairly likely.  If there's a wave (and there might be one), I think you'll see North Carolina and Missouri flip from his map.  Maybe Indiana and Georgia too.  Arizona might even be embarrassingly close (forcing it to go to the 200,000 uncounted absentee ballots which will take another 2 days or so).

Keep in mind... None of the polls really know what the turnout will look like.  If it generally matches proportionally by demographic the 2004 electorate makeup, then Rove's map will be right (and FL, VA, OH, and CO will likely all be very close).  I don't think the demographic is going to match up though.

We will see.  Should be an interesting night.

[edladner]

IMHO if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain either.  There is no excuse for not voting.  It's not just the direction of the country at stake, it also a multitude of local canidates and issues that need deciding. I can barely walk and certainly can't stand in a line.  My wife drove our van to the library and they came out to me so I could vote.

[Mr ChriZ]

well said jim - if australians were voting it would be 90% obama- i hope all my american friends do the same !!

Same here in the UK.  For the first time in a long while we see someone in the US worth voting for.  Not sure I can say the same over here at the moment!

[KingSparta]

I was listening to the extended news yesterday, and they remarked bushes popularity is at like 20% it is a 80+ year low.

I really think we need to overhaul our current government and how we grind our pork.

I saw a show about bridges and 20,000 of them are in rip critical state. I Do Think We Should Have Some Sort Of Health Care System. Some Of Our Roads Are In Poor Shape And Our Tax Per Gallon In NC Is One Of The Highest.

They Take Money Out Of Medicare, And Put In A IOU, With No Intentions Of Repayment.

Out Of The Two Obama Sounds Like A Better Choice, The Republicans Sure Have Screwed Up Things In The Past 8 Years.

[twobadfish]

I was the first in line for my district!!!!! 

[JONCAT]

fivethirtyeight has had my attention for weeks.....I can't wait to see how his analysis plays out.

I waited 25 minutes to vote, and my wife is out getting people to the polls for the Obama campaign in Florida as she did last week. I'm at week staring at work, being "productive".

the excitement is palpable in the air here today...

DC

[Matchbox]

I've heard this sentiment a lot, and it troubles me.  I feel fortunate to have the health, intelligence, and ambition to make a healthy income.  Shouldn't I feel a duty (or even privelege) to use some of it to help those who haven't been as fortunate?

If you have that "duty", it's self imposed and up to you, it's not up to Komrade Obama to spread YOUR wealth around.

If you choose to spread you wealth around, it is your choice and no one will stop you..

Komrade Obama has gone well beyond the idea of welfare, he outright talks of spreading the wealth around, total income redistribution to those of HIS choosing, not YOUR choosing.

In a court of law, a judge must recuse themselves if they have a finanacial interest in the outcome.

I believe that if one is not a *TRUE* taxpayer (one who does not collect more in $$$ and services from the govt than they pay in), then they need to recuse themselves and not vote.

Why should someone who does not contribute get a vote on how the money from those that do pay taxes gets spent?  That method is doomed to fail, and sadly, even Karl Marx saw the flaw in our system.

Democracy is a form of government that cannot long survive,
 for as soon as the people learn that they have a voice in the
 fiscal policies of the government, they will move to vote for
 themselves all the money in the treasury and bankrupt the nation.

- Karl Marx / 'Father of Communism' -
 

[JimH]

Komrade Obama

Calling Barack Obama Komrade isn't necessary.  People with different views can still be respectful when expressing them.

[JONCAT]

Marxie seems to be talking about the convergence of democracy & capitalism.

I assume your pointing the finger at the milleu of people on welfare, when in fact Marx's comments are cogent with regard to the corporate wealth and its machinations (i.e. lobbyists & corporate interest groups).

You have it backwards, the people directly dependent on government, in poverty (who WORK for a living, yes a majority of the nation's poor work and still fall under the poverty line), should have direct input into the process of how that government is run. Maybe there should be some restructuring but it's a red herring to imply that underachievers depending on government handouts, who choose not to work, are undermining our entire economy (leave that to the GOP for the last 8 years).

I can't believe what a big deal has been made of Obama's tax plan. He's restructured the tax bracket so that the majority of Americans will pay less taxes...how that has been equivocated into more taxes or "spreading the wealth" seems a stretch at best. Different administration, different tax plan...big deal. When you pay less taxes next year (assuming your in the middle class) , be sure to complain in a new thread here ; )

dc

[Matchbox]

I can't believe what a big deal has been made of Obama's tax plan. He's restructured the tax bracket so that the majority of Americans will pay less taxes...how that has been equivocated into more taxes or "spreading the wealth" seems a stretch at best. Different administration, different tax plan...big deal. When you pay less taxes next year (assuming your in the middle class) , be sure to complain in a new thread here ; )

dc

Barack Obama and the Plumber

 "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"
 the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed
 "more and more for fulfilling the American dream."

 "It's not that I want to punish your success.
 I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you,
 that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded.

 "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up,
 it's gonna be good for everybody ...
 I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

- Presidental Candidate Barack Obama - 10/2008 -

"spread the wealth around" are code words for forcible income redistribution to those of *HIS* choosing, not *YOUR* choosing.

Obama then goes on to say... he doesn't mind if people get rich.

Obama is a bright flaming socialist.  We're doomed.

Like Warren Zevon, I'm gonna go live alone in the desert....

America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices
for 'the common good', but by the productive genius of free men ...

- Ayn Rand 1905-1982 -

[JONCAT]

Most of the "free men" I know, sit in big chairs playing World of Warcraft all day.

DC

[Matchbox]

Calling Barack Obama Komrade isn't necessary.  People with different views can still be respectful when expressing them.

Jim,

When people go into the voting booth today to "express their opinion", those voting for Obama, the majority of them, are voting to be recipients of the income redistribution Obama promises.

Taking from some by force to redistribute to others is an act of violence.  The street mugger is more honest than these voters, at least the street thug knows he's a thief.  The voter, having had all self-respect breed out of them over the decades since FDR, thinks they are being noble, but they're just joining a mob to to their looting, nothing noble about that.

[JONCAT]

I assume Matchbox is a Libertarian as government is "socialist" by nature.

DC

[JONCAT]

And, how is a companies restructuring of executive pay any different from government re-assessing the tax code.

How do we address inflation and dropping wages? You're not being realistic Matchbox. This country is disintegrating before our very eyes, people can't afford anything.

Groceries, drugs and some necessities are rarely taxed for moral reasons because of a compounding problem found with the truly poor that has to do with disposable income. That is, a family that earns less than say, $25,000 has almost none.   They may be forced to spend say, 25% of their income on groceries, no choice. A family earning $100K hardly feels the grocery bill in comparison.

This is because even a family that earns say $50,000 has potentially $25,000 disposable if they chose to live as cheaply as the $25k family. This could be funnelled into tax shelters. And Rich Boy often chooses to spend most of his money in ways that avoid sales taxes, such on his gardener, nanny, pool cleaner, chauffeur, accountant, lawyer, and other labor-based services, as well a his European vacation and any investments. Poor Boy has no such choice, his income must go to taxable consumer goods.   These complications amplify the "pure" qualities of regressive taxation theory.

Libertarians often argue: TAX IS THEFT!
It's human nature to overestimate one's own powers and to undervalue the help we have received.   The toys. Perhaps taxes are like any other transaction.   A bundled transaction. When you buy a set of tires or a meal at a restaurant, you are paying for employee theft, drunk employees, security, air conditioning, accountants, and stupid business moves, etc. that you may disapprove of, bundled into the cost of doing business and it's not on your invoice.   Bottom line: nobody is forcing you to buy the tires or the meal. 

Your choice.   You can live like a hermit in a shack, eating roots.   If you do not consume the toys, likely you will be poor and owe no taxes.   But once you have eaten and grown fat you are now in debt.   There is no free lunch. 

Some say that the American meal is the best meal in the world.   If you have eaten of it, pay your debts, and don't try and sneak out the back door.   

http://www.psnw.com/~bashford/taxation.html

dc

[Matchbox]

And, how is a companies restructuring of executive pay any different from government re-assessing the tax code.

I don't understand the question.  The tax code is a govt function, while executive pay is private business.  Apples and oranges.

How do we address inflation and dropping wages? You're not being realistic Matchbox. This country is disintegrating before our very eyes, people can't afford anything.

Inflation is CAUSED by govt deficit spending.  It's a sneaky way of raising taxes, without an actual vote.

Wages are not dropping for those willing to work.  My wages have risen every year of my life.

It is not the function of the government to take care of people cradle to grave.  Individuals may *choose* to contribute to others, but no on has the right to put a gun to my head to exhort ever increasing portions of my *EARNED* income to be redistributed to the gun holder and those of his choosing.

An honest man knows it's dishonest to consume more than he produces.

Inflation is not caused by the actions of private citizens, but by the government, by an artificial expansion of the
 money supply required to support deficit spending.

No private embezzlers or bank robbers in history have ever plundered people's savings on a scale comparable to the plunder perpetrated by the fiscal policies of statist governments.

- Ayn Rand, "Who Will Protect Us From Our Protectors"? May 1952 -

[eba]

I'm not voting, being in the UK and all, but wherever the elections are, I do tend to get annoyed with people telling me that I should vote.

Personally, I know absolutely sod all about politics, and would prefer to leave it to the people that know what they are voting for.

if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain either.

Something I've heard so many times, and in my view makes absolutely no sense.  If they are doing a bad job, then they should be doing it better, and I have something to complain about, whether I voted for them or someone else or not at all.  If I wanted to complain that the other bloke should have got in, then the sentence makes sense, but if I actually thought that then I would have voted in the first place.

If, on September 10th, the world had been sucked into a black hole, we would have had a right to complain (admittedly very little means to do it).  Did we vote on whether that experiment was to take place?  And yet this is something that could potentially affect all of us!  No, because very few of us know a lot about quantum physics.  To have an international vote on it would therefore have been very silly.  Yet with politics, everyone is encouraged to vote regardless because they have a right and are told they shouldn't waste it, and so on, and you get a lot of people voting because 'Well he seems like a good chap doesn't he?'.

We also have a right not to vote, and I think that if we recognise that our opinion is not based on substantial evidence, that right is best taken.

Oh, and when I say I know nothing about politics, I mean this: a few weeks ago, someone asked me whether I wanted Obama or McCain to win, and at that point I didn't even know who McCain was.  Last year, I was randomly browsing stuff on Wikipedia, and suddenly saw "Tony Blair, former Prime Minister".  That was well over a month after he'd stepped down, and I hadn't even realised up till that point.  My entire knowledge of Republicans versus Democrats comes from reading '100 years of Solitude' a few months ago.
You really think I should be helping to decide who runs a country?  Personally, I think I'd probly be in a better position deciding whether potentially world destroying experiments are carried out.

Ok, perhaps I could go learn about it, but it's clearly a very complex subject, and personally I wouldn't want to come to an opinion on it unless I really knew all the facts, and had looked at things from every angle.  There are a lot of people about who have very strong opinions on things, but actually know very little, and they will blindly argue without ever considering the opposing opinion.  Maybe people should have to pass a test to get a license to vote?

Ok, by all means correct me here, I am open minded and realise that a lot of what I've just said probly makes no sense, but in that case my point is probly made by that fact better than I actually made it myself:)


"Frankly, I’m suspicious of anyone who has a strong opinion on a complicated issue."
Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog

[DarkPenguin]

When people go into the voting booth today to "express their opinion", those voting for Obama, the majority of them, are voting to be recipients of the income redistribution Obama promises.

Really?  The majority of them?

[Matchbox]

Really?  The majority of them?

I cannot speak for any individual.  There are other reasons to vote either way, the abortion issue is one hot issue for some.

But *I* do believe that most Obama voters are voting to get more loot for themselves and their friends/family.

Those people may have to look way down deep inside themselves to see their true motives, but I do believe the majority wants more unearned stuff from the government, and want it without *THEIR* taxes going up to fund it.

Also, most people have no clue about economics, and therefore fall prey to all the lies and promises from both sides.

Liberals hold us individually responsible for nothing but collectively responsible for everything.

Think about Obama's aunt we recently heard about.  She was ordered out of the country years ago, she remained here illegally, living in public housing (at taxpayer expense), and even donated to Obama's campaign.  She can't afford her own housing, but has money to donate to a political campaign (also illegal, foreigners are not allowed to donate to campaigns), which promises to redistribute more money her way?

He has no time or money to take care of *HIS* family, but he has plenty of time to plan to exhort ever increasing portions of my income to redistribute to people like his aunt.

No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation,
an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man.
There can be no such thing as "the right to enslave."

- Ayn Rand 1905-1982 -

The libs have been telling people for decades their "poor" economic situation is not their fault.  They turned collecting welfare from being shameful into an "entitlement".

I believe we have turned the corner to our own destruction decades ago.  It started in the late 1800's with the anti-trust laws. 

Then the govt really got involved in the economy and caused the Depression of the 30's.  They blamed capitalism instead of their own inept handling of the economy and demanded more power, and got it.  The current Chairman of the Federal Reserve has ADMITTED that the Fed caused the Great Depression of the 30's.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59405

FDR put us on the road to socialism and LBJ just about finished us off with his "War on Poverty".

The current housing mess was also caused by the government thinking they could wish away reality.  And what happens?  They blame capitalism and demand more and more power to control us.

Government is a necessary evil, but the smaller the better.

Those who would sacrifice essential liberty
 in order to obtain a little temporary safety,
 deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin -

John McCain is no better, it really doesn't matter who "wins" we all lose.

All great countries fall, we had a good run here in the USA.  The die is cast, our collapse is coming.  I plan on being out of the way when it does.

[KingSparta]

One of the things that I don't get is Obama And McCain Are Paying Millions In Advertising I Think Obama Raised $640,000,000 Or So Million.

Is It For The Pay Check, The Influence, Or Something Else.

[phalanthus]

 
WELL DONE AMERICA
a poll in australia - - fascinating
A nation decides 
Who would you vote to be President of the United States?
 
Barack Obama - 94% 

John McCain - 6% 


Total Votes: 9946
 

[hit_ny]

One of the things that I don't get is Obama And McCain Are Paying Millions In Advertising I Think Obama Raised $640,000,000 Or So Million.

Is It For The Pay Check, The Influence, Or Something Else.

I've wondered about that myself as well, that high figue for Mr.O must have corporate donors as well.

Maybe they don't see him as that much of a threat to their bottomline than perceived.

[glynor]

FWIW...

All tax policies are redistribution of wealth.  That's just how it is.  You think a 15% Capital Gains tax rate isn't redistribution of wealth??  Corporate loopholes that aren't available to average taxpayers aren't distributing wealth towards the corporations (and their leadership) and away from the middle/lower classes?  A lot of the people on the "other side" of the issue argue a lot about wage income tax policy as though that is all that matters.  That's all fine and good, but wages aren't where rich people get their money.  The top 1% earners of the country make the vast majority of their money from Capital Gains, not from wages.  That's what all those stock options are all about, after all!

The current tax structure has my father, who makes approximately $250,000 more than I do per year, paying less than I do in taxes.  And I'm not talking about percentage.  He actually pays less than I do in raw dollars, because most of his income is from capital gains and most of my income is from wages.  Much of the part of his income that does come from wages can be written off through write-offs that are unavailable (or of limited benefit due to scale) for me.  And so, I am left shouldering a larger portion of the burden of the corporate wellfare system myself, in percentage, purchasing power, and in raw dollars.  You think that isn't wealth redistribution?

Its a joke.  We've been distributing wealth towards Wall Street (via unsustainable and, officially, temporary Capital Gains tax cuts) and towards Corporate America (with unfunded corporate subsidies) for the full 7 years since 9/11.  This system was built upon a ideology that preached that the only thing that mattered were corporate earnings and the capital markets, at the expense of everyone else.  Obviously, this pure ideology failed.  Now, the idea that the other side presents is that the only other option available is socialism.  This is absurd on it's face considering the $1T in corporate giveaways that they've just obtained from us at gunpoint.  Nationalizing the banks and investment houses is okay but putting the capital gains tax rates back to what they were before the "temporary" reductions is socialism?  Don't make me laugh.  It is a false dichotomy.  The choices aren't "bow and sacrifice everything to our corporate and Wall Street overlords" on one hand and "power to the working class, wellfare-state, Marxist nationalization of everything" on the other.

Isn't the real answer, and that proposed by Obama, somewhere in between?  Obviously the American people have given their answer, tonight.  And so the pendulum swings back.  Hopefully it won't swing too far left, but it certainly has been right-tilted for long enough.

[KingSparta]

WELL DONE AMERICA
a poll in australia - - fascinating
A nation decides 
Who would you vote to be President of the United States?
 
Barack Obama - 94% 
John McCain - 6% 
Total Votes: 9946

I Don't think that makes it Official.