Is America in Trouble?

[Tinykong]

I will ask again, what evidence supports the country being red? Do you really think the inevitability of Obama winning, keeping you from voting is an unreasonable example of why the country is blue, due to elections? Because it seems like, at least for your state, your reason for not voting actually confirms what I am saying.

I never said the country was red, I said that using election results as a model for the views and opinions of the country as a whole is inaccurate. If we had 100% voter turn out, you could use it, but we have been hovering in the 50% range since the 1970's.

The electoral college is what prevented me from voting for President, because if my view is different than the majority in my state, my vote is irrelevant. It's been that way in the last 3 Presidential elections, I just vote on the local issues and leave the national general election stuff blank.

[Felya]

I never said the country was red, I said that using election results as a model for the views and opinions of the country as a whole is inaccurate. If we had 100% voter turn out, you could use it, but we have been hovering in the 50% range since the 1970's.

The electoral college is what prevented me from voting for President, because if my view is different than the majority in my state, my vote is irrelevant. It's been that way in the last 3 Presidential elections, I just vote on the local issues and leave the national general election stuff blank.

Than thank you very much for responding, because in context, most of the country voting for Obama, does mean they don't think his goal is ruin the country. That's what I am responding to........

[Tinykong]

What does that have to do with multitasking? You are not answering my questions and going of on tangents that have nothing to do with my post. Check on the amount of filibusters lead to requiring not just a majority, but a 60/40. What Obama had in his first two years, is by no means party control. I gave you examples of actual items that were blocked by the minority...

They had single party control of the Senate (59 votes plus Al Franken) and yet you refuse to call that single party control?

[Wildtree]

General elections are not indicative of what people want, it's indicative of what people who vote want.

2012 voter turn out is looking to be less than 2008 and 2004. I didn't vote for President, mostly because in my state it wouldn't matter (Obama was going to win Maryland by a huge margin, if I wasn't voting for him my time was wasted) and because there wasn't a candidate on the ballot that I felt had anything real to offer. That sentiment is shared by a lot of people I know (anecdotal, I know) who really just couldn't have given a shit less about the election, and just wanted the ads and campaigning to stop. The attitude of "we can't change it, so fuck it" is loud and growing. Most people have a hard enough time just making ends meet, spending time and energy on politics is not something they can or will do.

Now don't get me wrong here..
But you and the people with your mindset are the ones that are mainly at fault for whats going on in DC.

There are two parties at work, which keeping a deadlock on everything that's going on. As long as you people don't wake up and use your vote for a third party, to get them past the 5%, nothing will change. On that message you are correct.
But it is YOU who has the power to end it.
Imagine, if all those people who did not vote 2004/2008 would have gone with libertarians, or greens. are you aware what message that would have sent?
Fuck, one could have voted for Roseanne Barr. Just because.
At this point it's not about if the others are better, it's about getting a third power in congress for balance, to stop the other two from doing as they please.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 03:55 PM ----------

They had single party control of the Senate (59 votes plus Al Franken) and yet you refuse to call that single party control?

For simple majority yes.... But they simply changed the rule to a 2/3 majority, which was then not enough anymore..

[Tinykong]

Than thank you very much for responding, because in context, most of the country voting for Obama, does mean they don't think his goal is ruin the country. That's what I am responding to........

You mean: 3.072 million more voters (which is a mere 1.27% of the total voting population) voting for Obama proves absolutely nothing about the overall opinion of Americans, right?

[Felya]

They had single party control of the Senate (59 votes plus Al Franken) and yet you refuse to call that single party control?

Yes, because folks like Liberman only caucus with democrats, but endorsed McCain in 2008. They needed republicans like Snowe, to even get Obamacare passed.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 10:00 PM ----------

You mean: 3.072 million more voters (which is a mere 1.27% of the total voting population) voting for Obama proves absolutely nothing about the overall opinion of Americans, right?

Yes, and that is assuming you and every single person who voted against Obama, not just Romney, thinks Obama is set to ruin the country. Yet, I am assuming that every one that voted for Obama, does not think he wants to destroy the country. Now, which leap is farther? Do you think Obama wants to destroy the country?

[SirRobin]

While I do find attempts to demonize Obama to be pretty funny. I also think the "biopoly" in this country needs to go. It may have served a purpose at some point but in the last couple of administrations it appears to be doing more harm than good. Partisanship appears to be hijacking the political process and it needs to stop. Basically one of those, "if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem," sort of things.

[Tinykong]

Now don't get me wrong here..
But you and the people with your mindset are the ones that are mainly at fault for whats going on in DC.

There are two parties at work, which keeping a deadlock on everything that's going on. As long as you people don't wake up and use your vote for a third party, to get them past the 5%, nothing will change. On that message you are correct.
But it is YOU who has the power to end it.
Imagine, if all those people who did not vote 2004/2008 would have gone with libertarians, or greens. are you aware what message that would have sent?
Fuck, one could have voted for Roseanne Barr. Just because.
At this point it's not about if the others are better, it's about getting a third power in congress for balance, to stop the other two from doing as they please.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 03:55 PM ----------

For simple majority yes.... But they simply changed the rule to a 2/3 majority, which was then not enough anymore..

I live in Maryland, look at these historical voting results: (
Listed as Democrat/Republican)



2012: 61/36 2008: 62/37 2004: 56/43 2000: 57/40 1996: 54/38

See where this is going? Unless you're voting Democrat in this state, your vote is wasted by the electoral college. Same with lots of other states. Democrat voting in Texas? Wasted. Republican in NY/CA? Wasted. An independant isn't going to win in a general election without MASSIVE, and I mean massive support from 60-70 million voters. It just simply won't happen.

[Felya]

For simple majority yes.... But they simply changed the rule to a 2/3 majority, which was then not enough anymore..

Also must ignore that they needed a republican like Snowe to pass Obamacare and a conservative to side with liberals to make it constitucional in supreme court. This is the clear party line path Obama's main policy receved.

[TheOne]

That is a persistent myth. I mean seriously, you've so far laid down what, $4 trillion on Iraq and Afghanistan? And you've grossed what exactly in revenue to exceed that cost? I think this sounds like the worst business proposition in history.

War doesn't make money unless you sack the country you're invading and bring back spoils. Even then it depends what the war cost you to wage...

I have been trying to tell people this for years. They are still too idiot to understand it. Silly humans just like to fight like the children do. "MY DICK/RELIGION/COUNTRY/MOMMY IS BETTER THAN YOURS LET'S FIGHT ABOUT IT!!!11!!one1!"

Idiots.

[Felya]

I live in Maryland, look at these historical voting results: (
Listed as Democrat/Republican)



2012: 61/36 2008: 62/37 2004: 56/43 2000: 57/40 1996: 54/38

See where this is going? Unless you're voting Democrat in this state, your vote is wasted by the electoral college. Same with lots of other states. Democrat voting in Texas? Wasted. Republican in NY/CA? Wasted. An independant isn't going to win in a general election without MASSIVE, and I mean massive support from 60-70 million voters. It just simply won't happen.

Maybe the popular vote would have been closer or heck, maybe Romney would have won the popular vote and sent a message? Maybe a third party would have represented a higher percentage? All it means is that you are unable to even vote...

Everyone should vote, your logic of not voting for inevitable is just laziness.

[Tinykong]

Yes, because folks like Liberman only caucus with democrats, but endorsed McCain in 2008. They needed republicans like Snowe, to even get Obamacare passed.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 10:00 PM ----------



Yes, and that is assuming you and every single person who voted against Obama, not just Romney, thinks Obama is set to ruin the country. Yet, I am assuming that every one that voted for Obama, does not think he wants to destroy the country. Now, which leap is farther? Do you think Obama wants to destroy the country?

You can’t draw any of those conclusions based on how people voted or who won an election. A vote for Obama doesn’t mean you inherently approve of his policies, it could very well mean you think he’s the more attractive pile of crap. The same can be said for Romney, it’s not hard to believe people voted for him simply because he “wasn’t Obama.” Hell, I’m sure some people voted for him because he’s not black, as ignorant as that is.

[Felya]

I have been trying to tell people this for years. They are still too idiot to understand it. Silly humans just like to fight like the children do. "MY DICK/RELIGION/COUNTRY/MOMMY IS BETTER THAN YOURS LET'S FIGHT ABOUT IT!!!11!!one1!"

Idiots.

Oil companies moved back into Iraq shortly after Bushes 'mission accomplished'. Companies that were banned prior to our invasion. Spoiled are being had, just not by us.

[expectwar]

You will never see the national debt at $0.00 so I say run it up!

[Tinykong]

Maybe the popular vote would have been closer or heck, maybe Romney would have won the popular vote and sent a message? Maybe a third party would have represented a higher percentage? All it means is that you are unable to even vote...

Everyone should vote, your logic of not voting for inevitable is just laziness.

Sent what message, that the electoral college is broken and outdated? It's been done before, 2000 says hello. Look at what we've done to reform it...zip.



I voted, just only in the elections where my vote counted. Why do you think candidates only campaign in certain states? Per the electoral college, some states simply don't matter. Unless a couple hundred thousand people suddenly woke up on Tuesday and said "Hmm, I'm voting for someone other than Obama," he was going to win this state.

Edit: It really is a nice, patriotic idea of every American doing their civic duty and casting their ballot for the candidate of their choice, but you're being naive if you believe that your vote counts. Unless you live in a battle ground state, or vote with the majority in your state, your vote simply doesn't matter.

[SirRobin]

When only about half the eligible voters care enough to vote? That's a real sign that that country is in trouble and its been in trouble for a long time.

[Felya]

You can’t draw any of those conclusions based on how people voted or who won an election. A vote for Obama doesn’t mean you inherently approve of his policies, it could very well mean you think he’s the more attractive pile of crap. The same can be said for Romney, it’s not hard to believe people voted for him simply because he “wasn’t Obama.” Hell, I’m sure some people voted for him because he’s not black, as ignorant as that is.

Do you think more people voted against or for Obama via things like looks? Because if you assume an equal amount found unjustified reasons to vote for Obama and Romney, the popular vote still means Obama had more justified reasoning people voting for him. What is your reasoning for believing that over 3 million voted for Obama based on unjustifiable features over Romney?

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 10:20 PM ----------

Sent what message, that the electoral college is broken and outdated? It's been done before, 2000 says hello. Look at what we've done to reform it...zip.

How do you know it would be zip when Trump vegan bitching about it when Romney was leading? Fox news had countless electoral vote exports talking about nothing because the assumed popular vote never came. It would ave been a huge deal, based on the reaction it got without even happening. Care to trout that it's only 3 million? How little would you be able to say that 3 million would be if you voted? You tossed the 3 million as if it's so tiny, yet do not see the impact if it didn't exist? Can't have it both ways....

I voted, just only in the elections where my vote counted. Why do you think candidates only campaign in certain states? Per the electoral college, some states simply don't matter. Unless a couple hundred thousand people suddenly woke up on Tuesday and said "Hmm, I'm voting for someone other than Obama," he was going to win this state.

Unless any of those votes you took, resulted in 1 vote win, you are being a hypocrite.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 10:24 PM ----------

It really is a nice, patriotic idea of every American doing their civic duty and casting their ballot for the candidate of their choice, but you're being naive if you believe that your vote counts. Unless you live in a battle ground state, or vote with the majority in your state, your vote simply doesn't matter.

Bull crap. If every person who thought this way voted, it would mean real difference. The reason why nothing changes, is cease there are too many people like you that have been disenfranchised.

[Tinykong]

Do you think more people voted against or for Obama via things like looks? Because if you assume an equal amount found unjustified reasons to vote for Obama and Romney, the popular vote still means Obama had more justified reasoning people voting for him. What is your reasoning for believing that over 3 million voted for Obama based on unjustifiable features over Romney?

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 10:20 PM ----------



How do you know it would be zip when Trump vegan bitching about it when Romney was leading? Fox news had countless electoral vote exports talking about nothing because the assumed popular vote never came. It would ave been a huge deal, based on the reaction it got without even happening. Care to trout that it's only 3 million? How little would you be able to say that 3 million would be if you voted? You tossed the 3 million as if it's so tiny, yet do not see the impact if it didn't exist? Can't have it both ways....





Unless any of those votes you took, resulted in 1 vote win, you are being a hypocrite.

I'm not the one making the claims about what a vote means, you are. I'm pointing out (as I have said several times) that you cannot use the results of a general election as a simile for what the overall opinion of the country is. I merely offered some possible reasons why a person might vote one way or another. I think it's more plausible that people vote for the reasons I listed (as well as for the reasons you did) than simply based on the idea that each person is making an informed, intelligent choice.

It actually happened in 2000, and 12 years later we've done nothing about it. Proves my point. You can keep preaching the romanticized idea about each vote being important, but obviously you don't understand how the electoral college works, and why it's flawed.

The stuff I voted on was all (in my opinion anyway) non-partisan ballot measures and referendums. They could have gone either way, I was actually surprised some of them passed.

[Wildtree]

I live in Maryland, look at these historical voting results: (
Listed as Democrat/Republican)



2012: 61/36 2008: 62/37 2004: 56/43 2000: 57/40 1996: 54/38

See where this is going? Unless you're voting Democrat in this state, your vote is wasted by the electoral college. Same with lots of other states. Democrat voting in Texas? Wasted. Republican in NY/CA? Wasted. An independant isn't going to win in a general election without MASSIVE, and I mean massive support from 60-70 million voters. It just simply won't happen.

I know exactly what you mean. Next city to me is Omaha, Nebraska. Nebraska is about as red as it possibly gets. If you favor anyone else, you are basically screwed.
Yet still..... Get out and vote for the others, no matter what.

What you show is but another example as to why the electoral college has to go.
Democracy means that everyone who can vote should vote, and that their vote means as much as the other guys vote. No matter what state one comes from.
Now with absolute neutral eyes, I can see that the Republicans will fight to their last breath, to keep the electoral college in place.
it is their one and only chance to stay in power. Take it away and they may end up falling even behind another party like Libertarians or Greens.
It's about 80% of the nation who lives along the coasts. Most of those states currently in Dems control. They also do fairly good in the larger cities inside the country.
I strongly believe that it is mainly because of those states are going through a lot more multicultural life. Tourists, legal immigrants, halftime residents, they arrive mainly at the coasts. So the coastal Americans are more open minded, more internationally oriented, if you wanna call it that.
International goes along with more left leaning.
I hope you understand what I mean now.
There is just a huge difference between a New Yorker and a crop farmer from Nebraska who never seen a lot more than his cornfields and a few trips to Omaha, or Lincoln.

And for third power.... Are you aware that an independent snatched a Senate seat from a Republican?
So yes, it is possible to make a change. It's not easy, and may take some time, but it is possible.

[Tinykong]

I think this was linked on MMO champion before, but it's worth reposting for better exposure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k