Author Topic: All the way with BO (Read 33319 times)

litifeta · « **on:** November 05, 2008, 00:14 »

Looks like Obama slammed the MAC.

Pixart · « **Reply #1 on:** November 05, 2008, 10:43 »

Thank you Americans! Let's get the world back on it's axis!

lisafx · « **Reply #2 on:** November 05, 2008, 12:26 »

Quote from: Pixart on November 05, 2008, 10:43

Thank you Americans! Let's get the world back on it's axis!

You're welcome!

I got a sunburn standing in line for 2.5 hours on Saturday to vote in Florida but it was totally worth it.

Kngkyle · « **Reply #3 on:** November 05, 2008, 13:29 »

Happy to see my state turn blue.

(Florida)

sharply_done · « **Reply #4 on:** November 05, 2008, 13:43 »

The thing that gets me is that although Obama easily won, the popular vote was still quite close (53% to 46%). Almost half the population didn't want Obama, and would have been happier maintaining a more conservative viewpoint. I really hope he can unite the country, and that America can recapture the admiration of the world.

madelaide · « **Reply #5 on:** November 05, 2008, 17:22 »

I was just reading CNN.com and was positively impressed with Bush's speech. Ok, he probably did not write the speech himself, still these are beautiful words, especially considering they are from opposite parties:

Quote

Speaking from the White House, Bush said the people had chosen a president "whose journey represents a triumph of the American story."

He said: "It will be a stirring sight to watch President Obama, his wife, Michelle and their beautiful girls step through the doors of the White House.

"I know millions of Americans will be overcome with pride at this inspiring moment that so many have waited for for so long."

Martin Luther King must be smiling somewhere.

Regards,
Adelaide

litifeta · « **Reply #6 on:** November 05, 2008, 19:19 »

For the life of me I cannot understand how the US Election system works. I was reading on wikipedia about the electoral colleges etc. it is all strange to me.

melastmohican · « **Reply #7 on:** November 05, 2008, 19:26 »

Me too, I wonder why this system is so complicated if they can just use popular vote system?

It also must very frustrating for people from one party who live in "opposite party state" (like republicans in California). Does not matter what they do votes always go to one party :-)

Kngkyle · « **Reply #8 on:** November 05, 2008, 19:59 »

Quote from: melastmohican on November 05, 2008, 19:26

Me too, I wonder why this system is so complicated if they can just use popular vote system?

It also must very frustrating for people from one party who live in "opposite party state" (like republicans in California). Does not matter what they do votes always go to one party :-)

One reason we don't use popular vote is because then the candidates would only campaign in highly populated areas and pay little attention to the rest of the country. The electoral college also makes it more interesting. Campaigns have to strategically plan how they can get the 270 electoral votes needed to win.

I suppose if it ain't broke don't fix it.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 05, 2008, 20:18 »

Quote from: melastmohican on November 05, 2008, 19:26

Me too, I wonder why this system is so complicated if they can just use popular vote system?

It also must very frustrating for people from one party who live in "opposite party state" (like republicans in California). Does not matter what they do votes always go to one party :-)

I live in an "opposite party red state" and yet I see great value in the electoral college system over the popular vote. For one, it does a better job of sticking with one of our founding principals, protecting the minority from the majority. If we move to a popular vote then the issues of people in the midwest wouldn't be heard. For instance, even though I think ethanol subsidies are a bad idea they wouldn't exist if Iowa wasn't as important as it is in the primary season. And without Iowa we wouldn't be having a conversation about Obama being president because he would not have become the nominee. The other reason I think that the electoral college system is better than a popular vote as that it is much harder to rig an election in with the electoral college system, whereas it would be relatively easy to rig an election if we had a popular vote system.

madelaide · « **Reply #10 on:** November 05, 2008, 20:21 »

Quote from: yingyang0 on November 05, 2008, 20:18

The other reason I think that the electoral college system is better than a popular vote as that it is much harder to rig an election in with the electoral college system, whereas it would be relatively easy to rig an election if we had a popular vote system.

Why?

Regards,
Adelaide

PS: I agree with you about some issues regarding minorities when it comes to legislation, but specifically in a presidential election I think direct vote is more correct.

litifeta · « **Reply #11 on:** November 05, 2008, 21:55 »

So how does a person become a member or elector of the college. How does that work.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #12 on:** November 05, 2008, 23:13 »

Quote from: madelaide on November 05, 2008, 20:21

Quote from: yingyang0 on November 05, 2008, 20:18
The other reason I think that the electoral college system is better than a popular vote as that it is much harder to rig an election in with the electoral college system, whereas it would be relatively easy to rig an election if we had a popular vote system.
Why?

Because in a straight popular vote a small group of people in a single state can rig the election, but with the electoral college system that single group in one state would only be able to influence the election if it was a close election like in 2000. Otherwise the conspiracy would have to include people in several states and the larger a conspiracy gets the less likely it is to succeed.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 05, 2008, 23:22 »

Quote from: litifeta on November 05, 2008, 21:55

So how does a person become a member or elector of the college. How does that work.

It varies from state to state. They're basically prominent members of the winner's party in each particular state and are normally picked at their parties state conventions and are awarded the position for party loyalty.

davey_rocket · « **Reply #14 on:** November 06, 2008, 02:38 »

We follow the electoral college because contrary to popular belief the United States is a republic not a democracy. The myriad differences are slight but important. A democracy implies rule by the majority, while this is possible in the US it requires a majority in the House, the senate and a like minded individual as the president to represent the majority, much as we now have following yesterdays election.

I believe that the founding fathers realized that a democratic, or majority rule, could potentially be detrimental by neglecting the will of the, in this case, shallowly under-represented minority and as a result put such fail safes in place. However certain situations in the past years have resulted in a public fervor that is represented as wildly one sided.

Regardless, I now live in a country that is 53% for the new president elect and 46% for the losing candidate, a statistically insignificant (p=.08) difference considering the population size and sampling methods. At what point will the tyranny of the majority neglect the concerns of the minority at which time the whole system will be turned on it's head once again.

Congratulations to those of you who don't live here and to those of you who celebrate the reportedly lopsided result of our current situation. While the excitement may be pungent, reality will soon set in: politicians are politicians, they are ambitious and charismatic when needed and crooked and selfish when left to their vices.

But hey, at least we have some change.

hali · « **Reply #15 on:** November 06, 2008, 07:57 »

as long as ob sends more money to education than bombers,
i think US will have change

but davey, you are right... no matter what they say at election campaigns,
once in, politicians are politicians. all becomes judas very quickly, or if they are faithful to the cause, they get assassinated like the true ones.
$:-\$

alpy7 · « **Reply #16 on:** November 06, 2008, 15:57 »

Quote from: litifeta on November 05, 2008, 19:19

For the life of me I cannot understand how the US Election system works. I was reading on wikipedia about the electoral colleges etc. it is all strange to me.

Think of it as 50 seperate elections. The electoral votes are based on the population od the state. Or by how many representatives and senators there are which is based on the population of the state. This is why one could lose the popular vote and still win the election.
As for voter fruad or rigging; it seems to be a part of every election. At least it is here in Wisconsin.
As for the winner Mr Obama; it doesn't appear his winning the election has helped the stock markets any. Change will not only be up to him, it will take cooperation from all of the polititions in Washington and at state levels.

madelaide · « **Reply #17 on:** November 06, 2008, 18:59 »

Quote from: yingyang0 on November 05, 2008, 23:22

Quote from: litifeta on November 05, 2008, 21:55
So how does a person become a member or elector of the college. How does that work.
It varies from state to state. They're basically prominent members of the winner's party in each particular state and are normally picked at their parties state conventions and are awarded the position for party loyalty.

So basically they get a free trip to D.C. to reproduce the result of their state of origin? Joking, but what is the practical side of these delegates?

I still think a president should be elected by direct vote. You have the Senate and the House to balance minority rights - which is actually more like a legislative than executive task.

Regards,
Adelaide

bittersweet · « **Reply #18 on:** November 06, 2008, 19:20 »

Quote from: alpy7 on November 06, 2008, 15:57

The electoral votes are based on the population od the state. Or by how many representatives and senators there are which is based on the population of the state. T

Actually only congressional seats are based on population, but every state only has two senate seats.

alpy7 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 06, 2008, 22:14 »

Quote from: whatalife on November 06, 2008, 19:20

Quote from: alpy7 on November 06, 2008, 15:57
The electoral votes are based on the population od the state. Or by how many representatives and senators there are which is based on the population of the state. T

Actually only congressional seats are based on population, but every state only has two senate seats.

yes

davey_rocket · « **Reply #20 on:** November 07, 2008, 02:44 »

Quote

I still think a president should be elected by direct vote.

One of my favorite Winston Churchill quotes...

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

CofkoCof · « **Reply #21 on:** November 07, 2008, 05:31 »

Quote from: davey_rocket on November 07, 2008, 02:44

Quote
I still think a president should be elected by direct vote.

One of my favorite Winston Churchill quotes...

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

Average voter voted Obama

madelaide · « **Reply #22 on:** November 07, 2008, 14:30 »

Quote from: davey_rocket on November 07, 2008, 02:44

One of my favorite Winston Churchill quotes...

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

It's an interesting reasoning indeed, and it implies that some people are enlightened enough to decide what is best for them and the rest, the rest being those stupid fellows to whom the right to vote was wrongly given. It's one step to dictatorship.

Regards,
Adelaide

RacePhoto · « **Reply #23 on:** November 09, 2008, 20:01 »

Quote from: davey_rocket on November 06, 2008, 02:38

politicians are politicians, they are ambitious and charismatic when needed and crooked and selfish when left to their vices.

But hey, at least we have some change.

I didn't support or vote for Obama, but I now support him 100% because he is the President. Probably goes back to being in the military, the chain of command and the commander in chief is at the top. Unlike some other people who spent the last eight years complaining and fault finding, including creating fraudulent accusations, I will support the new President because he earned the position and deserves that respect.

Your first truth is absolute. Politicians are what they are and will do anything to get elected and hold power. Then they seem to go off on their own path. It's not hard to figure out. Most of them at lawyers.

Change? Right! I used to have bills in my pocket, but after taxes, all I have left is change.

The electoral college protects the individual rights and prevents one large group from controlling the elections. It keeps the cities from dominating the rural areas. With only the popular vote, one large "club" would have all the power, just by numbers, instead of the consensus of the entire country determining who's at the head of the office.

Four Presidents have won the popular vote but lost the presidency.

Nixon won 520 to 17 and had over 60% of the popular vote. It's what they do in office that counts, not the road they took to get there. Here's hoping Barack Obama does well.

madelaide · « **Reply #24 on:** November 09, 2008, 21:11 »

I have a question. Why is someone who is half black and half white always referred as black? He is as close to Africans as he is to Europeans.

And it's not to say that "racist whites" say that. Even among the black community he is considered black. It's curious. I am 50% Italian, but I don't consider myself Italian nor anyone says I'm Italian.

Regards,
Adelaide

Pixart · « **Reply #25 on:** November 10, 2008, 00:13 »

If I remember, when he was on Oprah a few years ago and I had no idea who he was and she was telling him he should run for president some day he said he chose to be black. Something about coming from a mixed family and the angst of not knowing where you fit in, that it was a relief to finally just be black.

LOL, but with my memory these days that might have been Michael Jackson on deciding to be white, who knows.

litifeta · « **Reply #26 on:** November 10, 2008, 00:41 »

puzzles me too Madelaide.

Lots of mixed race people seem to align themselves with the color for some reason. I always get a giggle out of that when those same people complain about how the whites have done this or that. I think, hey, you're part white yourself ... lol.

bittersweet · « **Reply #27 on:** November 10, 2008, 08:09 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 09, 2008, 20:01

It keeps the cities from dominating the rural areas. With only the popular vote, one large "club" would have all the power, just by numbers, instead of the consensus of the entire country determining who's at the head of the office.

I have the misfortune of living in a state where one city represents my "voice" in the electoral college. This one voting district goes a certain party every time, and every single other district in the state votes the other way. The people who live in the city outnumber everyone else, so theirs is the only vote that counts.

madelaide · « **Reply #28 on:** November 10, 2008, 10:10 »

Quote from: Pixart on November 10, 2008, 00:13

he said he chose to be black.

I think most white-black mixed people (we have a name for them, mulatos) identify themselves more with blacks, maybe because of dominant facial features, like hair or nose. It's curious, nevertheless. I was told that mixed people in South Africa used to be discriminated by both sides during Apartheid.

Despite being called black, I think being a mixed-raced is even more appealing in a sense, as he is in fact the result of a non-racist relationship, what is very positive. It's not just about accepting the other race, but that mixing is natural.

Of course Michael Jackson is another story. He is not black, nor white, he has a race of his own.

Regards,
Adelaide

davey_rocket · « **Reply #29 on:** November 10, 2008, 19:24 »

Quote

I think most white-black mixed people (we have a name for them, mulatos) identify themselves more with blacks, maybe because of dominant facial features, like hair or nose. It's curious, nevertheless. I was told that mixed people in South Africa used to be discriminated by both sides during Apartheid.

It's true and still is, In much of Africa a lighter skin color leads to discrimination, especially in areas such as Somalia.

I believe that Obama has "chosen" to be black because in the current political atmosphere of the US being black is actually a leg-up. The papers tout that history has been made by electing our first black president, but what about Hilary Clinton as the first woman president. It caries along with it the challenges of fighting against racial oppression. By aligning himself with black America he is able to capitalize on the underlying guilt felt by whites for the atrocities of slavery ("white guilt"). I just have a hard time buying it.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: All the way with BO (Read 33319 times)

litifeta

Pixart

lisafx

Kngkyle

sharply_done

madelaide

litifeta

melastmohican

Kngkyle

yingyang0

madelaide

litifeta

yingyang0

yingyang0

davey_rocket

hali

alpy7

madelaide

bittersweet

alpy7

davey_rocket

CofkoCof

madelaide

RacePhoto

madelaide

Pixart

litifeta

bittersweet

madelaide

davey_rocket

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors