Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I really feel election day should be moved to a Saturday, so there's no issues with people having to take time off work (well, less issues, maybe).

Yep, that'll work well. And turnout drops in every major college football town in the country.

But I think the most annoying problem of all is that it's effectively a 2-year campaign.

Unrelated but related anecdote from small town politics I heard about today. Candidate borrowed $40k to use for her campaign ... for a magistrate judge's job in a county of 10k that pays about $20k per year. She lost by a margin of over 3-1, 3000+ to 1000+ votes.

[Daimyo]

Early voting seemed like a huge success this year and was well consumed in every state that offered it. Lets pick the state that has the best setup and make that federal law.

[Buccaneer]

Lets pick the state that has the best setup and make that federal law.

Cool. A "one-size-fits-all" solution. If it was a "huge success" at the various states level, then leave it alone. Why the fuck should it be turned over and mandated by Washington DC?

[Flasch186]

The fact that the McCain camp was SOOOOOOOOOOO unhappy with her, and her qualifications to be VP and add to the ticket....

while at the same time lying through their teeth to the American Public is amazing. Not shocking since it's what was suspected when they talked about it but nonetheless shocking in it's reveal.

[Buccaneer]

Flasch, it's ok, you can turn it off now. Really.

[Flasch186]

my wife agrees w/ u bucc.

[st.cronin]

I think a week is excessive, but a 24 hour voting "day" ought to be doable. Open the polls at 4pm California time on Monday, close at 7pm New York time on Tuesday.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I think a week is excessive, but a 24 hour voting "day" ought to be doable. Open the polls at 4pm California time on Monday, close at 7pm New York time on Tuesday.

Do you literally mean 24 hours non-stop in each location? The reason I ask is because I'm wondering where you draw the line?

Presidential years only? All elections? All elections with a Federal office involved (i.e. every two years)? Some other criteria?

And the reason I ask that is because over the past decade or so there's already been problems in many areas with finding an adequate number of qualified (and willing) poll workers for the 12 hour cycle we have. I can only imagine trying to double that number. And even moreso trying to double that number for some elections where the turnout is in single digits due to overwhelming lack of interest far more than any sort of ease of voting issue.

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Cool. A "one-size-fits-all" solution. If it was a "huge success" at the various states level, then leave it alone. Why the fuck should it be turned over and mandated by Washington DC?

Because it is a good thing and something like 20 states haven't done it yet on their own.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

If it was a "huge success" at the various states level, then leave it alone.

And there i think is a flaw of libertarianism. slavery was huge success. socially i think the federal government is best because it can avoid a small minority group (or interest group as hamilton referred to them) with lots of power.

more than the federal government, small/local governments think they know how "their" people should live their lives. (didn't your city change the delay of green traffic lights because they claimed to know what their drivers were thinking going through yellows?) more than the federal government, the few in power in local governments can tell people how to live according to their beliefs. (in fresno it is against the law the annoy a lizard in a park) there is certainly more separation between church and state on the federal level than on a lot of local levels. (wasn't it a small new england government that burned women for being witches?)

i think the federal government has become evil because it tries to intrude like local governments do. i believe in the concept of our federal system, because more than the other system it has the potential to LEAVE ME ALONE. an impossibility with local gov's.

economically it's a different story. they both take too much of my money to do stupid things, and not enough to do great things.

[Senator]

Originally Posted by Senator

College Playoffs - please make it happen Obama. You can do anything!!

I called it, bitches!



College football commander-in-chief?

Considering that this year Barack Obama defeated two of the great political brands in America – the Clintons and John McCain – won at least 349 electoral votes and, of course, shattered a racial barrier few thought possible, perhaps he doesn’t need any advice.

Still, Mr. President, why the heck didn’t you mention your support of a college football playoff sooner?

“I think it is about time that we had playoffs in college football,” Obama said Monday on ESPN. “I’m fed up with these computer rankings and this and that and the other. Get eight teams – the top eight teams right at the end. You got a playoff. Decide on a national champion.”

Now, you’re obviously a shrewd and intelligent politician. Not revealing this until the eve of the election was a huge oversight, though.

There are few topics in America that generate such widespread support as the abolishment of the BCS. Other than four conference commissioners, few favor the current foolishness over a playoff.

The anti-BCS people are passionate, too. They have detailed plans, websites and emotional anger due to past disasters. Go ask a Southern Cal fan about 2003. They’d march on Washington if they thought it would help.

There were millions of single-issue voters available on this. College football could’ve been a game changer in some of your tougher states.

Consider Alabama. Sen. McCain defeated you 61 percent to 39 percent.

All you had to do was get your name on the ballot with a couple of on-purpose typos. Forget “Obama.” Had you’d been listed as “Go Bama,” you’d have locked up 50 percent of the vote.

The other 50 would’ve been easy. Just hold a rally at Toomer’s Corner and, in your best Bill Clinton, emote about “feeling Auburn’s pain” in 2004 when the 13-0 Tigers got shut out of the title.

Mitt Romney won the Republican primary in Utah this year by the percentage score of 95-5. This could’ve made that look like a squeaker. We’re thinking Georgia Tech over Cumberland, 222-0.

This is a true my enemy’s enemy is my friend kind of issue, too. Talk about “a new spirit of patriotism.” Joe Paterno would as soon wear white sneakers and contact lenses as vote Democrat. Appeal to his hatred of the BCS though and who knows?

Sen. McCain has always been an intelligent, principled and fair-minded man, so it stands to reason he too is anti-BCS. It’s unlikely he would’ve ceded the issue to you.

However, an attack ad could’ve featured footage of him supervising the coin toss at the Florida-Ohio State BCS debacle from January 2007. Add some haunting music, superimpose grainy head shots of Tom Hansen and Jim Delany and have a skeptical voice wonder why he was “palling around with sporting terrorists.”

All is fair in politics (and killing this horrible system), right?

Despite missing this opportunity, you won big on Tuesday. Still, 56 million people voted for Sen. McCain. The need for some kind of olive branch is needed and nothing would do the trick like extending it repeatedly across the hide of those BCS suits.

In case you didn’t notice, a lot of those red states were in the SEC and Big 12. If you end this corrupt abomination, they’ll let you drive the Sooner Schooner or play fetch with UGa VII.

The BCS is a central bureaucracy created to douse competitiveness and line the pockets of the rich and connected while defrauding the consumer of what is advertised. How American.

Testimonials are available. Southern California’s Pete Carroll on the BCS: “I think it stinks.”

Florida’s Urban Meyer: “You’ve got to blow it up.”

We could go on, from coast to coast, border to border, all creeds and school colors.

This is a non-partisan column (I declined preliminary offers to interview both candidates during the campaign since this is a place to go to get away from the election.) Now that it’s over and we know how you feel though, we’re holding you to it.

I’ll even reach across the aisle and compromise on my support of a 16-team playoff to embrace your rudimentary eight-teamer.

Look, dealing with war and rebuilding the economy, those are difficult challenges. This is simple. It could be resolved in a week. And, since you’re a politician and always eyeing the next election, it’s worth noting that delivering a playoff would go a long way toward ensuring that second term you’ve already started talking about.

Who would vote against the man who freed us from the tyranny of the BCS?

Everyone says a playoff can’t be done, that the entrenched interests are too powerful. No one even fathomed executive influence though. If Kennedy could demand a man on the moon, this should be a snap.

A suggestion for the inaugural address: “Mr. Delany, tear down this wall!”

Yes We Can.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Senator

A suggestion for the inaugural address: “Mr. Delany, tear down this wall!”

Yes We Can.

You, my friend, are awesome.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Random election tidbit number 472,538 comes from today's Tom Taylor newsletter at radio-info.com

“Barack Obama spent massive amounts of money on radio” – but not with Radio One.

Radio division chief Barry Mayo’s clearly disappointed – not in the outcome of Tuesday’s election, perhaps, but with the spending patterns of the Democratic presidential candidate’s campaign. They’d figured that Obama would be spending more heavily with African-American stations. That money comes in through the “national” faucet, and it’s one reason national was down over 17% for Radio One in the third quarter. What's the rest of the story at Radio One, then?

I'm not actually sure what's more surprising here: that more money didn't go down that avenue or that a radio executive would be having problems figuring out that more wasn't spent with them because more wasn't needed.

Wait, the political aspect is more interesting, a clueless radio exec is increasingly par for the course.

[Flasch186]

Ill ask again.

anybody have any thoughts about the housing boom in the suburbs and the idea that many people whom in the past couldnt afford homes now could, spread the votes out in a way never seen before and thus leading to a shift in voting patterns helping change the outcome in this election as opposed to the patterns set in the past?

[chesapeake]

Sure. More diverse suburban communities played a part. But my sense is that the suburban vote was more affected by the fact that the economy, not foreign policy, was the driver of the electorate in this cycle.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Ill ask again.

anybody have any thoughts about the housing boom in the suburbs and the idea that many people whom in the past couldnt afford homes now could, spread the votes out in a way never seen before and thus leading to a shift in voting patterns helping change the outcome in this election as opposed to the patterns set in the past?

Heck, I didn't even see you ask the first time

I can see where that would affect the Congressional races but it shouldn't really have impacted the Presidential race any, the votes are the votes in that instance.

I don't perceive any particular advantage with regards to turnout in the primary metro suburbs (indeed, might even be more difficult depending upon the average commute time & such) so that's probably out of the mix. It might have affected the effectiveness of advertising slightly but since the majority of voters had made up their minds about the time candidates were selected that wouldn't seem likely to have shifted things.

Maybe the headache I'm fighting this morning is fuzzing my brain a little but I'm really not seeing how that would have played much of a role in the Presidential race (which is what I'm thinking you were mostly asking about).

[Flasch186]

Im not arguing either side but it dawned on me after thinking about the diversity in the neighborhoods we're selling in and a wonder if that was a new pattern that truly got into full effect during the housing boom. I'll agree that it most certainly did and will effect local elections HOWEVER it's a graduated scale downwards as unless you have a firebrand type running (McKinney / Brown) Im not sure that anyone pays more attention than the average when going down ballot to the point where you shrug and say, "never heard of 'em."

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Heck, I didn't even see you ask the first time

Maybe the headache I'm fighting this morning is fuzzing my brain a little but I'm really not seeing how that would have played much of a role in the Presidential race (which is what I'm thinking you were mostly asking about).

I think the population movement from places like California and the East coast to the Midwest and desert Southwest states could have an effect down the road. Those regions are having population increases as jobs dry up on the coasts, property values decline, and cost of living increases.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Ill ask again.

anybody have any thoughts about the housing boom in the suburbs and the idea that many people whom in the past couldnt afford homes now could, spread the votes out in a way never seen before and thus leading to a shift in voting patterns helping change the outcome in this election as opposed to the patterns set in the past?

That may have played a role in isolated areas, but Obama simply did better than past candidates(or McCain did worse if you like). Looking through the exit polls shows that Obama outperformed in almost any category. The NYTimes map of which counties Obama or McCain outperformed in is almost all blue.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I'll agree that it most certainly did and will effect local elections HOWEVER it's a graduated scale downwards as unless you have a firebrand type running (McKinney / Brown) Im not sure that anyone pays more attention than the average when going down ballot to the point where you shrug and say, "never heard of 'em."

I'd argue the opposite (if I'm interpreting what you mean correctly), that the impact is heaviest at the lowest level & decreases as you move up the office chain.

GrantDawg's observation earlier about Newton County, GA for example. Not so much it, but neighboring Rockdale County was a GOP stronghold for more than a decade (closer to two decades IIRC) but as the white middle/upper middle class has moved further out the demographics have shifted & at this point it's a mixed area politically. Even the staunchest GOP strongholds in Georgia like Cobb & Gwinnett are becoming more diverse, as those more of the core GOP voters move further away from Atlanta & in turn create extremely safe voting blocks in multiple smaller counties (look at the counties surrounding Athens/Clarke County to see what I'm talking about).

It's really just a math thing when you boil it down. The smaller the political unit, the fewer relocations it takes to have an impact, so the changes are both more noticeable & have more impact at the local/county/district level than at the state or regional level.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Palin will be doing her first post-election interview with Greta Van Sustern (sp?). It'll be interesting to watch her demeanor now that the pressure is off.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Palin will be doing her first post-election interview with Greta Van Sustern (sp?). It'll be interesting to watch her demeanor now that the pressure is off.

Maybe Greta will ask her to name 3 nations in Africa. It isn't hard to name at least 3 of them.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Maybe Greta will ask her to name 3 nations in Africa. It isn't hard to name at least 3 of them.

Unless you're under the impression it's all one country

*rimshot*

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Maybe Greta will ask her to name 3 nations in Africa. It isn't hard to name at least 3 of them.

Go ahead...and don't forget to include the name of the leader in each.

[Neon_Chaos]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Go ahead...and don't forget to include the name of the leader in each.

It would be very useful if he was running for VP.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Go ahead...and don't forget to include the name of the leader in each.

I could cheat and look them up, but I will get right to the point and say that I only know the leader of one right now - al-Gaddafi in Libya. Counting Libya as a nation, let's go to Egypt and South Africa. That meets the minimum of my requirement. Given that she, reportedly, thinks Africa is one singular nation, I've bested her without even trying to get into naming the leaders. By the way, it is not a contest between her and I. It is about how much someone trying to be VP of this nation should know before they are chosen for the job.

[DaddyTorgo]

Why stop with Egypt + South Africa? What about Niger, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, Algeria, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Namibia, Mozambique, Central African Republic..

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Why stop with Egypt + South Africa? What about Niger, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, Algeria, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Namibia, Mozambique, Central African Republic..

Because the challenge was to name 3. Not as many as you can.

[SFL Cat]

Honestly, based on the knowledge of friends of my HS senior daughter, it wouldn't surprise me if three out of four 18-year old high schoolers today probably think Africa is a country as well...and I'm sure most of them voted for Obama....

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Honestly, based on friends of my HS senior daughter, it wouldn't surprise me if three our of four 18-year old high schoolers today probably think Africa is a country as well...and I'm sure most of them voted for Obama....

But...does Biden think Africa is a country? That would be the relevant question. Saying Palin knows as much about the world as the average high school student means we dodged a bullet earlier this week.

[lordscarlet]

Has she never played Risk? That's where all of my geography knowledge comes from. There are, what, 7 countries in Africa?

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Honestly, based on the knowledge of friends of my HS senior daughter, it wouldn't surprise me if three out of four 18-year old high schoolers today probably think Africa is a country as well...and I'm sure most of them voted for Obama....

When they are on the presidential ticket for a major political party, get back to us.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Honestly, based on the knowledge of friends of my HS senior daughter, it wouldn't surprise me if three out of four 18-year old high schoolers today probably think Africa is a country as well...and I'm sure most of them voted for Obama....

So if part of the electorate is stupid then it doesn't matter if the candidate is?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Why stop with Egypt + South Africa? What about Niger, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, Algeria, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Namibia, Mozambique, Central African Republic..

The biggest problem I have with naming African countries is when I start naming off countires that no longer exist there or changed names or whatever... What do you mean Zaire isn't a country there??? Way too many games with old maps of countries that get me confused!

To be honest though, I can absolutely tell you that I am far less able to name leaders of African countries than probably any other continent on the map..

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

So if part of the electorate is stupid then it doesn't matter if the candidate is?

Reminds me of the movie "Idiocracy" (which is a horrible movie that I don't recommend anyone watch.)

[timmynausea]

I don't see why we should stop at high school. I know plenty of pre-schoolers that can't tell Africa and South America apart. And you know those little guys are all liberals.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

So if part of the electorate is stupid then it doesn't matter if the candidate is?

Yes. People want to believe that they could run for these high offices too, so voting for someone who doesn't seem to know more than them helps them feel better about their own prospects for the job.

It is just a theory and I'm not entirely serious about it, but there could be something to it.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Alan T

The biggest problem I have with naming African countries is when I start naming off countires that no longer exist there or changed names or whatever... What do you mean Zaire isn't a country there??? Way too many games with old maps of countries that get me confused!

To be honest though, I can absolutely tell you that I am far less able to name leaders of African countries than probably any other continent on the map..

+1 on the countries

+2 on the leaders - it's why i didn't even try - too many coups and revolts and etc. still far too unstable

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Why stop with Egypt + South Africa? What about Niger, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, Algeria, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Namibia, Mozambique, Central African Republic..

YouTube - Animaniacs - Nations Of The World

[path12]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Reminds me of the movie "Idiocracy" (which is a horrible movie that I don't recommend anyone watch.)

Now them's fightin' words....loved that movie.

OW, My Balls!

[path12]

Originally Posted by Alan T

The biggest problem I have with naming African countries is when I start naming off countires that no longer exist there or changed names or whatever... What do you mean Zaire isn't a country there??? Way too many games with old maps of countries that get me confused!

I mainly knew most African nations by their name in Balance of Power. Yes, I'm stuck in 1987.

[Autumn]

Hah Balance of Power. That was a sweet game. Maybe I've got those floppies around here still ...

[Fidatelo]

I think I'd have said Congo/Zaire, South Africa, and Madagascar, which I believe are all from Risk.

Of course, I'm not trying to be a world leader... asking me to name countries is like asking Palin to name programming languages: not very relevant.

[Neon_Chaos]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

It's like I don't even know who you are anymore.

President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho FTW.

I want to ride on the Time Masheen too.

[Autumn]

It's amazing to me that people don't demand more of their presidential candidates in this regard. It's all fine and good to say you don't have to know all the countries in Africa to be a great person or even a smart person. But shouldn't there be some prep required out of people running for the position? Even a basic resume? I'm not just talking about Palin. Bush is another easy target, but there's plenty more. just because someone decides to run for the office shouldn't mean they're qualified for arguably the most powerful position in the world.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Autumn

It's amazing to me that people don't demand more of their presidential candidates in this regard. It's all fine and good to say you don't have to know all the countries in Africa to be a great person or even a smart person. But shouldn't there be some prep required out of people running for the position? Even a basic resume? I'm not just talking about Palin. Bush is another easy target, but there's plenty more. just because someone decides to run for the office shouldn't mean they're qualified for arguably the most powerful position in the world.

This gets me thinking, or wondering... I can think quickly of three Republican politicians who were national candidates the past several years that just came across as very "unintelligent" and had very laughable quotes in Bush, Palin and Quayle.

I try to think of equal failures on the Democrat side and have a tougher time with names. You have some definite Democrat whack-jobs like Jesse Jackson, but I never really viewed him as lacking in intelligence, just being completely insane. Most of the Democrat failures of the recent past seem to have been actually intellectuals that got way over their heads in some aspect such as Jimmy Carter or some of the late-80s Democrats.

I am sure that I just am not thinking of people.. have there been a Democrat equivalent to Bush/Quayle/Palin in the recent past that come across as just mind numbing? This actually has me curious, so please don't bombard me with the normal Democrat or Republican partisan comments, I am sure both sides have had their equal share of very bright and very ignorant individuals

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Alan T

This gets me thinking, or wondering... I can think quickly of three Republican politicians who were national candidates the past several years that just came across as very "unintelligent" and had very laughable quotes in Bush, Palin and Quayle.

I try to think of equal failures on the Democrat side and have a tougher time with names. You have some definite Democrat whack-jobs like Jesse Jackson, but I never really viewed him as lacking in intelligence, just being completely insane. Most of the Democrat failures of the recent past seem to have been actually intellectuals that got way over their heads in some aspect such as Jimmy Carter or some of the late-80s Democrats.

I am sure that I just am not thinking of people.. have there been a Democrat equivalent to Bush/Quayle/Palin in the recent past that come across as just mind numbing? This actually has me curious, so please don't bombard me with the normal Democrat or Republican partisan comments, I am sure both sides have had their equal share of very bright and very ignorant individuals

That's because Democrats are elitist intellectuals.

Oh, right, you said not to say that.

I think 3 candidates in the past 30 years is not the worst thing in the world, and two were VP. It seems to me that Republicans believe more in a system than a particular candidate. They want a likable person that has a good team. Democrats want a strong individual that they feel can solve all of their problems on their own.

I am far from a political expert, though.

[lungs]

Zimbabwe - Robert Mugabe (although there is conflict) but probably lost election to Tshvingari (not sure how to spell it)
Egypt - Mubarak
Congo - Kabila (laurent's son, think his name is joseph??)
Libya - Qaddafi
South Africa - Mbeki

For fuck's sake, I can name five countries and their leaders off hand and I'm just a dumb farmer.

[lungs]

dola

oops, guess Mbeki is no longer president... as in a few months ago.

[DaddyTorgo]

hey, ya still got 4 lungs!