NationStates Jolt Archive

sorry, i spent too long paying hyper-attention to electoral politics this year to stop now. there are three senate races still up in the air; alaska, minnesota, and georgia. and we have some news:

a week on and the alaskans are finally getting around to counting some of their absentee and early ballots. and begich is now leading. more left to count, but things are looking much less solid for senator tubes.
http://www.elect.alaska.net/data/results.htm
Begich, Mark DEM 125019 47.24%
Stevens, Ted REP 125016 47.24%

so what is up with ballot counting here, eh? i mean, honestly come on, how hard is this shit?

also, how do you guys think these races will all turn out?

Could you pleas stop with the USian thing?

Could you pleas stop with the USian thing?

no. any thoughts on the senate races, or are you just here to hijack?

no. any thoughts on the senate races
Then no.

they are close, expect hand recounts.
also expect Absentee votes to affect the election.
most likely they all go republican. or a 2 to 1 split with the democrats.

no. any thoughts on the senate races, or are you just here to hijack?

Yeah sure but are you going to stop being rude?

I'm honestly surprised Tom Stevens is even still in the race what with the dirt that was dug up on him and all, let alone in a deadlocked tie for first. Is Alaska that conservative for real?

Since when has Alaska being apart of the United States of Mexico?

they are close, expect hand recounts.
also expect Absentee votes to affect the election.
most likely they all go republican. or a 2 to 1 split with the democrats.

Why wouldn't they have counted the absentee votes in the first place?

no. any thoughts on the senate races, or are you just here to hijack?

I will threadjack, though.

Why do you so aggressively insist on abusing an acronym so? You cannot turn an acronym into a adjective--it's not a proper speech.

The correct term to use is United States. It's not USian. Just like it's not PRCian, UKian, DRCian or DPRKian. US is not a word, it's an acronym, and you cannot turn it into a word.

Is Alaska that conservative for real?

It makes sense for a Republican to vote for him. He'll be removed from the Senate, there'll be a by-election, and some less scandal-ridden Republican candidate will win instead of a Democrat.

they are close, expect hand recounts.
also expect Absentee votes to affect the election.
most likely they all go republican. or a 2 to 1 split with the democrats.

the absentees are what are dragging bagich into the lead, and based on where the rest are from, they seem likely to be good news for him as well

Why wouldn't they have counted the absentee votes in the first place?

They typically don't count absentee or provisional ballots unless the election is too close to call without them.

the absentees are what are dragging bagich into the lead, and based on where the rest are from, they seem likely to be good news for him as well

we will see.. normally the later absentees are the military vote, and they tend to be 60/40 toward republicans. Though this election I am not certain.

I believe Georgia has to have a run-off because no one candidate has more than 50% of the popular vote. I'm not certain about that, but I believe Georgia is one of the states that requires a majority.

Couldn't you just have said "American"?

Why wouldn't they have counted the absentee votes in the first place?

i think their general excuse is that they are fucking alaska, bitch! if you'll remember, georgia didn't count all of its early votes for awhile either (now that i think of it, did anyone ever hear that they had actually finished?)

hence the other question in my OP - why the fuck are elections so hard for USians?

They typically don't count absentee or provisional ballots unless the election is too close to call without them.

That's totally unfair. The things you don't learn in government class huh? Your vote is supposed to count for something regardless of whether it changes the outcome or not. By not counting the vote you are basically denying the right of people to vote. Totally not on topic I know.

That's totally unfair. The things you don't learn in government class huh? Your vote is supposed to count for something regardless of whether it changes the outcome or not. By not counting the vote you are basically denying the right of people to vote. Totally not on topic I know.

Wouldn't they still count it for the end report even though they can announce the winner without the need for absentee ballots?

i think their general excuse is that they are fucking alaska, bitch! if you'll remember, georgia didn't count all of its early votes for awhile either (now that i think of it, did anyone ever hear that they had actually finished?)

hence the other question in my OP - why the fuck are elections so hard for USians?

Americans, Yankees, Colonists, Those Shitheads in the west, PLEASE. USian makes us sound even dumber since like was mentioned earlier you can't turn an acronym into a real word. We call people from the UK English, and they aren't the only people that speak english, by the logic people use to call us USians you should be picking on them too. Its aggravating to me and others because of the connotations of stupidity.

The reason elections are so hard for us is because we have so many laws surrounding them put there to simplify the process, unfortunately politicians ARE stupid so it just bogs things down.

Wouldn't they still count it for the end report even though they can announce the winner without the need for absentee ballots?

What if the absentee ballots some how manage to change the outcome?

i think their general excuse is that they are fucking alaska, bitch! if you'll remember, georgia didn't count all of its early votes for awhile either (now that i think of it, did anyone ever hear that they had actually finished?)

hence the other question in my OP - why the fuck are elections so hard for USians?

that doesn't even make sense, what leads you to believe that elections are hard for us? The fact that it takes time to count votes?

As for the other two races--Georgia is going to a runoff on December 2. I really hope Chambliss loses, but I think odds are in his favor.

Minnesota is still wrapped up in litigation. They keep finding more votes for Al Franken, which were lost because of "typos." At this rate, there's a good chance Franken will pull it off.

What if the absentee ballots some how manage to change the outcome?

well, if theres 1000 absentee ballots, and someone won the regular vote by 2000, then theres no need to count them to declare a winner. I guess they know how many absentee ballots there are before the election, sicne they send them out, no?

What if the absentee ballots some how manage to change the outcome?

If the election is close enough that absentee ballots could change the outcome, then they will count them before announcing the results. That's what is happening in Alaska right now. Usually it's not that close.

Why wouldn't they have counted the absentee votes in the first place?
They are not machine readable so it takes longer and they are still coming in by mail especially from soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What if the absentee ballots some how manage to change the outcome?

They always count them, don't worry. Just, in most cases, there is no hurry to count them since it's unlikely they'll change the election results.

In Alaska, in particular, they do not count ANY absentee votes until they have checked the complete roster of who voted absentee against the roster of those who voted on election day to make sure nobody votes twice. And they're not alone to open and count them out in the remote precincts: they all have to be brought to a central location (which requires lots of bush planes, making a bunch of stops). That's because Alaska has a colorful history of election fraud.

It surprises me that Sen. Stevens is allowed to be in the race, because usually convicted felons cannot vote, why should they be senators, especially if they are still waiting to serve their jail term. This proves how screwed up the American political system is. Btw, America does not have the problems that other countries have with their elections, namely rioting. That is because we tend to keep the nutjobs out of the system, however the result is that people are forced to pick between the lesser of two evils, thus making things take longer.

What if the absentee ballots some how manage to change the outcome?

Well then they wouldn't announce it if there was a chance that it could. If there is no possible chance say the winner has 90% of the vote and absentee ballots only make up 4% of total votes then while they would count them in the end they wouldn't need to count them to announce the winner.

*Watches this turn into a USian v. American debate*

no. any thoughts on the senate races, or are you just here to hijack?

Why can't you just say "yanks" or something?

It surprises me that Sen. Stevens is allowed to be in the race, because usually convicted felons cannot vote, why should they be senators, especially if they are still waiting to serve their jail term.

Actually, it was too late to remove Stevens' name from the ballot. The people who voted for Stevens probably understood that if he won, he would resign (or be kicked out) and there would be a special election.

When John Ashcroft (Bush's former attorney-general) ran for Congress, he was beaten by a dead guy. Same situation.

Since when has Alaska being apart of the United States of Mexico?

Lol, you fucking win, dude.

you can't turn an acronym into a real word

haha, sure

As a USian, I admit that we have a stupid system, and are cheap when it comes to improvements. part of it is companies that learned to milk all they could from something before selling the next upgrade. I bet that applies to the elections somehow as well.

Also - I love the word USian and salute your use of it, good sir. *tip of the hat*

Lol, you fucking win, dude.

Yeah I win :D

Serisouly I have never been called on that before on a thread. Quite proud.

Also - I love the word USian and salute your use of it, good sir. *tip of the hat*

As a US citizen (a.k.a. American), I feel compelled to register my hatred for this grotesque, useless, and irritating neologism.

that doesn't even make sense, what leads you to believe that elections are hard for us? The fact that it takes time to count votes?

the fact that alaska claimed last week that it had counted all of its precincts, despite having a third of the vote uncounted would seem to suggest something. likewise for georgia. also, the multi-hour lines to vote in the first place that are continuously seen every election (suspiciously, in black neighborhoods...). the huge variety of disenfranchisement schemes that go on routinely spring to mind, etc.

and yeah, its not like all of the votes are counted by one guy. this shit does not take more than an hour or two under any realistic system. and yet, without fail, we have votes being counted for the first time days or weeks later, if anyone can be arsed to actually do it - which is not itself guaranteed, for fuck's sake.

As a USian, I admit that we have a stupid system, and are cheap when it comes to improvements. part of it is companies that learned to milk all they could from something before selling the next upgrade. I bet that applies to the elections somehow as well.

Also - I love the word USian and salute your use of it, good sir. *tip of the hat*

part of the problem - as i have seen first hand - is that we leave old people in charge of polling places. the scantron reader was too much for them, though i was not allowed to help. scary.

Couldn't you just have said "American"?
No. Because then the other half of NS bitches about being too US-centric and all that rot.
Americans, Yankees, Colonists, Those Shitheads in the west, PLEASE. USian makes us sound even dumber since like was mentioned earlier you can't turn an acronym into a real word. We call people from the UK English, and they aren't the only people that speak english, by the logic people use to call us USians you should be picking on them too. Its aggravating to me and others because of the connotations of stupidity.

The reason elections are so hard for us is because we have so many laws surrounding them put there to simplify the process, unfortunately politicians ARE stupid so it just bogs things down.Calling someone from the UK "English" when they are actually Northern Irish or Scotish or Welsh could be bad.

Why can't you just say "yanks" or something?But most people in the US don't live in New England...

Maybe people should just get over the whole "what should we call people from that chunk of land between Canada and Mexico", since we had those discussions maybe a year or two ago and were told to stop hijacking every thread with it.

Or they can start their own thread on it. Rather than hijacking.




I don't see why voting is so...well...stupid. You generally need a photo ID to vote. So here we go...everyones photo ID will now carry their voter registration info. That card get swiped when you go to vote. You type your vote into an ATM-like machine. You get a paper printout to put in a nice little box for a paper trail. Thanks to the miracle of the internet, there is no reason you couldn't vote at any polling place and have the computer rapidly sort it. Drastically reduced need for absentee ballots, recounts, and the like...and rapid results.

The correct term to use is United States. It's not USian. Just like it's not PRCian, UKian, DRCian or DPRKian. US is not a word, it's an acronym, and you cannot turn it into a word.

And yet, you understand the meaning.

Much like the example of 'xmas'... I think you're fighting a losing battle.

the fact that alaska claimed last week that it had counted all of its precincts, despite having a third of the vote uncounted would seem to suggest something. likewise for georgia. also, the multi-hour lines to vote in the first place that are continuously seen every election (suspiciously, in black neighborhoods...). the huge variety of disenfranchisement schemes that go on routinely spring to mind, etc.

I having voted in both predominately white and black areas, I haven't noticed any difference in the amount of time it takes to vote, which was as long as it took for me to pick the ones I wanted as no one was in line. a source would be nice. And I don't know what disenfranchisement schemes you're talking about, I'm pretty sure that ended with MLK.

and yeah, its not like all of the votes are counted by one guy. this shit does not take more than an hour or two under any realistic system. and yet, without fail, we have votes being counted for the first time days or weeks later, if anyone can be arsed to actually do it - which is not itself guaranteed, for fuck's sake.

yup, but hopefully you don't let just one guy count the votes, but have people overseeing the process, as well as recounting to make sure he didn't make a mistake. Its not like its vital that people know the election results the day after. Its barely been a week, and you're acting as though its the most important thing to count them ASAP, instead of as accurately and efficiently as possible.

No. Because then the other half of NS bitches about being too US-centric and all that rot.
Calling someone from the UK "English" when they are actually Northern Irish or Scotish or Welsh could be bad.

Hence why we should call them British.

But most people in the US don't live in New England...

And that's why we call them Seppos.

As for the other two races--Georgia is going to a runoff on December 2. I really hope Chambliss loses, but I think odds are in his favor.

Minnesota is still wrapped up in litigation. They keep finding more votes for Al Franken, which were lost because of "typos." At this rate, there's a good chance Franken will pull it off.

I'm still hoping Franken is going to pull that one out of the bag. But - yeah, I think Georgia is a write-off.

...you can't turn an acronym into a real word...

Okay.

Think about it

I'm hoping for a filibuster-proof Democratic majority.

I'm still hoping Franken is going to pull that one out of the bag. But - yeah, I think Georgia is a write-off.

i don't know, in elections like this it's always gonna come down to turnout. obama seems to be throwing in for the runoff and the republicans are still busy crying. this may throw off things slightly.

Money'd be on Begich.

I'm hoping for a filibuster-proof Democratic majority.

it'll be effectively so anyways on lots of things. thee are a couple republicans left who can't really risk being tied too tightly to the party. i'm looking at you, collins and snowe

I'm hoping for a filibuster-proof Democratic majority.

It would be a mixed blessing.

The downside would be - for whatever reason they occur, problems will be thrown in the faces of the Democrats.

The upside would be - an end to the kind of tactics the GOP pulled in the run-up to the election - to whit: countering everything they can, and then blaming the Democrats for not getting anything done.


Just to maybe see some things get accomplished? I'd be for it.

Okay.

Think about it

ha!

i don't know, in elections like this it's always gonna come down to turnout. obama seems to be throwing in for the runoff and the republicans are still busy crying. this may throw off things slightly.

If only we weren't discussing Georgia. Georgian Republicans have made their protest... and taken a bit of a surprising slap in the face. I think they'll get a much higher turnout than they might, otherwise.

But, yeah - it's turnout. No real way of telling which way that's going to go.

And yet, you understand the meaning.

Much like the example of 'xmas'... I think you're fighting a losing battle.

We cannot stop you from using any given term, but that doesn't make it any less obscure or irritating.

List of adjectival and demonymic forms of place names (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_adjectival_forms_of_place_names)
United States American, U.S. Americans

The confusion over the alternate senses of the word American has resulted in several alternates being used or suggested, though these have now become largely obsolete or obscure. Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage says, "The list contains (in approximate historical order from 1789 to 1939) such terms as Columbian, Columbard, Fredonian, Frede, Unisian, United Statesian, Colonican, Appalacian, Usian, Washingtonian, Usonian, Uessian, U-S-ian, Uesican, United Stater."[10] Nevertheless, with the exception of "U.S." or "U.S. citizen", no alternative to "American" is common.

The term "American" is almost universally accepted internationally as referring to inhabitants of United States. In France, you don't typically refer to "un homme des États-Unis." You say "un américain." In Chinese you say "Mei3guo1ren1," (From mei [beautiful], which sounds similar to America, guo meaning country, and ren meaning person), in Japanese you say "amerika-jin." The Arabic word is amrika; I'm pretty sure that etazuni, from the French, is archaic.

Say American, or U.S.

Now let's stop arguing about this.

seriously, can you guys go whine about the word 'USian' elsewhere? i get it, it makes the baby jesus sad. too fucking bad, just deal.

We cannot stop you from using any given term, but that doesn't make it any less obscure or irritating.


Which I really really don't get.

The US isn't the only 'American' nation... right?

And, what's the problem with USian, given that? I don't mind when Americans call me a 'limey'. I don't mind when Aussies call me a 'pom'.

Why would I? What's the big deal?


The term "American" is almost universally accepted internationally as referring to inhabitants of United States.


An appeal to popularity seems a flawed way to measure 'right-ness'.

What about other 'Americans'? What do they think?


Say American, or U.S.


But, USian is so much quicker to type...


Now let's stop arguing about this.

Let's stop arguing about the issue that was off-topic when it was raised, anyway...?

Yeah sure but are you going to stop being rude?

I'm honestly surprised Tom Stevens is even still in the race what with the dirt that was dug up on him and all, let alone in a deadlocked tie for first. Is Alaska that conservative for real?

It's Ted Stevens, but hey. And yes. Alaska is that conservative. Think about it. Isolated, individualist, sparsely populated...everything you need to generate fierce loyalty in anyone you perceive as on your side. And if there's one perception ol' Ted nurtured in his years in office, that'd be it.

I will threadjack, though.

Why do you so aggressively insist on abusing an acronym so? You cannot turn an acronym into a adjective--it's not a proper speech.

The correct term to use is United States. It's not USian. Just like it's not PRCian, UKian, DRCian or DPRKian. US is not a word, it's an acronym, and you cannot turn it into a word.

Says who? Scuba? Snafu? Nimby? Yuppie? Sorry, but your irritation does not usage make. Language evolves, even against the petulant outrage of people without the ability to not take themselves so seriously.

Honestly, you would do your cause a much better service by ignoring it. Yelping about it draws more attention.

Okay.

Think about it

Exaaaaaactly.

I'm hoping for a filibuster-proof Democratic majority.

We don't really need it. All we need is a few moderate Republicans willing to cross over. And failing that, Reid just needs to grow a pair and force the Republicans to actually filibuster.

We cannot stop you from using any given term, but that doesn't make it any less obscure or irritating.

List of adjectival and demonymic forms of place names (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_adjectival_forms_of_place_names)



The term "American" is almost universally accepted internationally as referring to inhabitants of United States. In France, you don't typically refer to "un homme des États-Unis." You say "un américain." In Chinese you say "Mei3guo1ren1," (From mei , which sounds similar to America, guo meaning country, and ren meaning person), in Japanese you say "amerika-jin." The Arabic word is amrika; I'm pretty sure that etazuni, from the French, is archaic.

[B]Say American, or U.S.

Now let's stop arguing about this.

Tellya what. You accede to whatever linguistic demands I make when I see you type something that irritates me, and I'll be pleased to comply. You can't control someone's expression, no matter how much you might want to. Hell, I don't even use the neologism, but I have enough of a sense of proportion and perspective to not give a shit.

It surprises me that Sen. Stevens is allowed to be in the race, because usually convicted felons cannot vote, why should they be senators, especially if they are still waiting to serve their jail term. This proves how screwed up the American political system is. Btw, America does not have the problems that other countries have with their elections, namely rioting. That is because we tend to keep the nutjobs out of the system, however the result is that people are forced to pick between the lesser of two evils, thus making things take longer.

because he will be kicked out.
The Governor will appoint a temporary replacement and another election will be held as soon as possible. and this will give a different republican a chance to be senator.

because he will be kicked out.
The Governor will appoint a temporary replacement and another election will be held as soon as possible. and this will give a different republican a chance to be senator.

That means Palin gets to choose. Neat.

That means Palin gets to choose. Neat.

surprisingly the governors tend to pick based off the party of the person they were replacing. I guess they worry voters would get mad otherwise.

surprisingly the governors tend to pick based off the party of the person they were replacing. I guess they worry voters would get mad otherwise.

I think some states require it by law.

Which I really really don't get.

The US isn't the only 'American' nation... right?

And, what's the problem with USian, given that? I don't mind when Americans call me a 'limey'. I don't mind when Aussies call me a 'pom'.

Why would I? What's the big deal?

US, to begin with, is an acronym, not a word. It cannot, by any existing rule of English, be turned into an adjective at will. The only other word I can think of that even comes close is an import from German.

If you want to use a demonym, use Yank, if you must.



An appeal to popularity seems a flawed way to measure 'right-ness'.

When it comes to the English language, it isn't. English is determined by the popular usage at the time it is being spoken, not by an expert authority like the Académie française (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise).

What about other 'Americans'? What do they think?


It's a synecdoche, I can be exclusively an American, just as much as they can be an American.

Not only that, but this is English we're talking about, the language in which this is a grammatically correct sentence.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."

The demonym American can have more than one meaning.

US, to begin with, is an acronym, not a word. It cannot, by any existing rule of English, be turned into an adjective at will. The only other word I can think of that even comes close is an import from German.

If you want to use a demonym, use Yank, if you must.

No. How's that? Anything else you want to try and control about the way we type? I don't use the touch system, is that a problem?

What are these "rules" you keep yammering about? This is an online forum and as such is a veritable hotbed of abbreviation and unconventional usage. So long as everyone understands each other, why get upset about it? Text-speak irritates me, but when in Rome, I can't get pissed about it, can I?

When it comes to the English language, it isn't. English is determined by the popular usage at the time it is being spoken, not by an expert authority like the Académie française (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise).

Uh...doesn't this paragraph contradict itself? You're demanding proper usage from a language that has no central authority. Also, are you the arbiter for proper usage online? I think not, and neither is Webster, for sure. Solution? Let it go.

It's a synecdoche, I can be exclusively an American, just as much as they can be an American.

Not only that, but this is English we're talking about, the language in which this is a grammatically correct sentence.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."

The demonym American can have more than one meaning.

Neat! Irrelevant, but neat! Diagram that sucker -- I gotta see this!

In Alaska, in particular, they do not count ANY absentee votes until they have checked the complete roster of who voted absentee against the roster of those who voted on election day to make sure nobody votes twice. And they're not alone to open and count them out in the remote precincts: they all have to be brought to a central location (which requires lots of bush planes, making a bunch of stops). That's because Alaska has a colorful history of election fraud.

Nice rationalization, but that's not the real problem.

It's the mittens. It's hard to page through 40,000 paper ballots while wearing mittens.

Nice rationalization, but that's not the real problem.

It's the mittens. It's hard to page through 40,000 paper ballots while wearing mittens.

Plausibility, FTW.

because he will be kicked out.
The Governor will appoint a temporary replacement and another election will be held as soon as possible. and this will give a different republican a chance to be senator.

alaska got rid of governor appointments to vacant seats after the blatant nepotism that gave them their other senator a few years ago. seats remain vacant until the special election.

seriously, can you guys go whine about the word 'USian' elsewhere? i get it, it makes the baby jesus sad. too fucking bad, just deal.

I don't give a shit about baby Jesus. You could just as easily use a common word like "Yank" that has a long history of accepted usage. Instead you choose to use a term that you know people find offensive.

Yeah I win :D

Serisouly I have never been called on that before on a thread. Quite proud.

Why more haven't noticed, I'm not sure.

As a USian, I admit that we have a stupid system, and are cheap when it comes to improvements. part of it is companies that learned to milk all they could from something before selling the next upgrade. I bet that applies to the elections somehow as well.

Also - I love the word USian and salute your use of it, good sir. *tip of the hat*

I don't. It sounds stupid when said aloud. And when I read, I hear the words spoken inside my mind. That is why it is so irritating. It sounds so damn cumbersome.

Anyway, as for Ted Stevens, I hope he doesn't make it. And if he does, I hope the Senate expels him. I know that another Republican would just get in after him, but it would be so fucking rich to see him expelled.

Anyway, as for Ted Stevens, I hope he doesn't make it. And if he does, I hope the Senate expels him. I know that another Republican would just get in after him, but it would be so fucking rich to see him expelled.

if stevens wins it, i want him stripped of voting rights (he already is in alaska itself) and committee assignments, and referred to as "convicted felon stevens (r-ak)", but i want to keep him there. hang him out as a permanent badge of shame on republicans and alaskans.

He'll probably resign anyway.

In other news, I heard that Mark Foley is trying to clear the way for a reentry into public life. He said that many of the pages were almost eighteen anyway.

if stevens wins it, i want him stripped of voting rights (he already is in alaska itself) and committee assignments, and referred to as "convicted felon stevens (r-ak)", but i want to keep him there. hang him out as a permanent badge of shame on republicans and alaskans.

An interesting idea.

Perhaps you should write to the Democratic Party leadership, as it is a bit more subtle than outright expelling him.

And in the next election, they could just point out that the among the Republicans there is a convicted felon.

He'll probably resign anyway.

In other news, I heard that Mark Foley is trying to clear the way for a reentry into public life. He said that many of the pages were almost eighteen anyway.

Lololololol

In other news, I heard that Mark Foley is trying to clear the way for a reentry into public life. He said that many of the pages were almost eighteen anyway.

he is right - calling a love of hot boys in their late teens 'pedophilia' is fucking ridiculous. he is a predatory pederast , not a pedophile.

update:
Begich, Mark DEM 132196 47.41%
Stevens, Ted REP 131382 47.12%

bagich is 814 up now

slowest horse race ever

he is right - calling a love of hot boys in their late teens 'pedophilia' is fucking ridiculous. he is a predatory pederast , not a pedophile.

Oh yes, cause that's so much better.

if stevens wins it, i want him stripped of voting rights (he already is in alaska itself) and committee assignments, and referred to as "convicted felon stevens (r-ak)", but i want to keep him there. hang him out as a permanent badge of shame on republicans and alaskans.A scarlet P, as it were.


Neat! Irrelevant, but neat! Diagram that sucker -- I gotta see this!

I haven't done this in a while, but I think it would look like this
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
PN___ N_____ PN___ N______ V____ VT___ PN____ N
___NP_______ ____NP_______|.........|.......__NP:idobj
......|.............______RelClau_______ MV.............|
___________NP:Subj_____________....______VP:Pred_______

pn = proper noun
n = noun
v = verb
vt = transitive verb
np = noun phrase
vp = verb phrase
idobj = indirect object
relclau = relative clause
mv = main verb
Subj = subject
Pred = predicate
underscores show what goes with what above it, periods are just space holders.

Methinks something is amiss in the Minnesota senate race.

Coleman started out with a commanding lead of more than 400 votes over Franken. Not nearly enough to avoid a recount but still enough to probably win even in a recount. But the lead shrank as the days went by and more ballots for Franken were found. In one case an entire car trunk full of ballots almost exclusively for Franken turned up.

Ritchie, our Secretary of State is a DFLer and a strong supporter of Franken. He's also in charge of the recount and doesn't think it strange that the gap is closing after all the legal votes have been tallied. It wouldn't be difficult to rig it in the recount and I think that Ritchie might be tempted to turn a blind eye to this.

There were also accusations of voter coercion at the polls. Naturally both of the major sides are claiming it was the other and there is even supposedly a video of this. Seems that some Somali voters were told to vote for Al Franken or their vote for Barack Obama wouldn't count but there was also a Republican translator so who knows what the fuck is going on.

I know that Barkley and Aldrich never had a chance at winning but I wish that more people would have voted for them. For all the complaints about the 2-party system people sure do support it come election day.

I do not like where this has gone and I do not like where it is going.

Remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil and the only way you can truly waste your vote is to vote for someone you don't really support.

doesn't think it strange that the gap is closing after all the legal votes have been tallied.

it really isn't, given the way counting is done

Methinks something is amiss in the Minnesota senate race.

Coleman started out with a commanding lead of more than 400 votes over Franken. Not nearly enough to avoid a recount but still enough to probably win even in a recount. But the lead shrank as the days went by and more ballots for Franken were found. In one case an entire car trunk full of ballots almost exclusively for Franken turned up.

Ritchie, our Secretary of State is a DFLer and a strong supporter of Franken. He's also in charge of the recount and doesn't think it strange that the gap is closing after all the legal votes have been tallied. It wouldn't be difficult to rig it in the recount and I think that Ritchie might be tempted to turn a blind eye to this.

There were also accusations of voter coercion at the polls. Naturally both of the major sides are claiming it was the other and there is even supposedly a video of this. Seems that some Somali voters were told to vote for Al Franken or their vote for Barack Obama wouldn't count but there was also a Republican translator so who knows what the fuck is going on.

I know that Barkley and Aldrich never had a chance at winning but I wish that more people would have voted for them. For all the complaints about the 2-party system people sure do support it come election day.

I do not like where this has gone and I do not like where it is going.

Remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil and the only way you can truly waste your vote is to vote for someone you don't really support.


That's it. All elections are null and void. Lets do it again America.

it really isn't, given the way counting is done

Didn't Stalin say something like "He who votes decides nothing. He who counts the votes decides everything."?

Didn't Stalin say something like "He who votes decides nothing. He who counts the votes decides everything."?

yeah. but this isn't even vote rigging, just a fucking stupid broken process

This article explains why the recount is favoring Franken: (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=14205801)
Since 2000, seven out of seven peer-reviewed academic studies confirm that Democrats tend to make more mistakes than Republicans. The populations that are, in academic jargon, "vulnerable to error" are low-income, low-educated and minority, all of which disproportionately vote Democratic.

Press reports from Minnesota emphasize that there were 24,100 more votes for president than for senator in last week’s election, and note that these come from "Obama counties." Further analysis will likely show that most come from Democratic precincts. This is consistent with the fact that low-income and minority voters tend to live in the same areas.
Next, there is machine error -- the machine fails to read a clear mark. The dominant machine, ES&S Model 100, may be the most reliable optical scanner, but Ramsey County's director of elections claims it has an error rate of 0.2 percent. (St. Paul is in Ramsey County.) This can result from jamming, which more frequently occurs on heavily used machines in urban areas, so the hand count can be expected again to yield a disproportionate number of additional votes for Franken.

Nate Silver's analysis: (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/more-minnesota-madness.html)
The research I've come across suggests that about two-thirds of presidential undervotes are unintentional. So let's take two-thirds of that 10,086 vote total and assign them to the recount pile -- that equals 6,724 votes.
Bitwise notes, however, that Franken did in fact perform better -- really, quite a bit better -- in precincts with more undervotes. If undervotes follow the pattern of the recorded votes, then Franken would win 52.5% of recounted ballots (excluding any ballots cast for third parties). This is a significant finding, as these are the first numbers I have seen to break the undervote down to the precinct level.
I hesitate to say this, but I think the evidence points on balance toward Franken being a slight favorite to win the recount.

Methinks something is amiss in the Minnesota senate race.

Coleman started out with a commanding lead of more than 400 votes over Franken. Not nearly enough to avoid a recount but still enough to probably win even in a recount. But the lead shrank as the days went by and more ballots for Franken were found. In one case an entire car trunk full of ballots almost exclusively for Franken turned up.

Ritchie, our Secretary of State is a DFLer and a strong supporter of Franken. He's also in charge of the recount and doesn't think it strange that the gap is closing after all the legal votes have been tallied. It wouldn't be difficult to rig it in the recount and I think that Ritchie might be tempted to turn a blind eye to this.

There were also accusations of voter coercion at the polls. Naturally both of the major sides are claiming it was the other and there is even supposedly a video of this. Seems that some Somali voters were told to vote for Al Franken or their vote for Barack Obama wouldn't count but there was also a Republican translator so who knows what the fuck is going on.

I know that Barkley and Aldrich never had a chance at winning but I wish that more people would have voted for them. For all the complaints about the 2-party system people sure do support it come election day.

I do not like where this has gone and I do not like where it is going.

Remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil and the only way you can truly waste your vote is to vote for someone you don't really support.

If one politician is only 400 votes behind another - and you find a trunk full of votes for the other candidate, one of two things must be true:

1) Someone was trying to queer Franken's vote by hiding ballots ONLY with his name on, or

2) It's bullshit, because a 400 vote lead isn't turned into an 800 vote shortfall by a TRUNK full of votes.

If one politician is only 400 votes behind another - and you find a trunk full of votes for the other candidate, one of two things must be true:

1) Someone was trying to queer Franken's vote by hiding ballots ONLY with his name on, or

2) It's bullshit, because a 400 vote lead isn't turned into an 800 vote shortfall by a TRUNK full of votes.
You never hear of the tactic of stuffing ballot boxes?

Methinks something is amiss in the Minnesota senate race.

Coleman started out with a commanding lead of more than 400 votes over Franken. Not nearly enough to avoid a recount but still enough to probably win even in a recount. But the lead shrank as the days went by and more ballots for Franken were found.
400 votes out of 3 million is not a "commanding lead."

Shifting Total in Senate Race Not Unusual (http://www.keyc.com/node/13219)
The shifting vote total in the Senate race isn't that unusual...Coleman has seen his narrow lead over Franken whittled by more than half in the week since Election Day.Minnesota Public Radio analysis of elections over the last 10 years shows vote totals typically change about 15 hundred votes in statewide elections in the days after the polls close.The analysis also shows Democrats are usually the beneficiaries of post election error correcting.

You never hear of the tactic of stuffing ballot boxes?

Which would be relevant how?

Has there been an established discrepancy between the number of voters recorded, and the number of votes counted?

You never hear of the tactic of stuffing ballot boxes?

You're making a serious accusation without any evidence to back it up.

400 votes out of 3 million is not a "commanding lead."
That much was sarcasm and I thought it was obvious.

That much was sarcasm and I thought it was obvious.

It was hard to tell because the rest of your post suggested that the Minnesota Secretary of State is rigging the vote. Was that sarcasm, too?

It was hard to tell because the rest of your post suggested that the Minnesota Secretary of State is rigging the vote. Was that sarcasm, too?
I didn't say that Ritchie was rigging the vote but it is close enough right now for a ballot here and a ballot there to be worked in and change the results from a slim Coleman lead into a slim Franken lead. Ritchie does support Franken and I think he's more concerned with voter turnout and disenfranchisement than vote fraud. I'd trust someone like Joan Growe with this recount more than I would Ritchie.

I didn't say that Ritchie was rigging the vote but it is close enough right now for a ballot here and a ballot there to be worked in and change the results from a slim Coleman lead into a slim Franken lead. Ritchie does support Franken and I think he's more concerned with voter turnout and disenfranchisement than vote fraud. I'd trust someone like Joan Growe with this recount more than I would Ritchie.

Did you find evidence of mismatch vote numbers yet?

Because, absent that, your 'trust' of various people is interesting, but irrelevant.

Any irregularities will result in lawsuits by the respective sides.

I think he's more concerned with voter turnout and disenfranchisement than vote fraud

have you guys ever actually found any of this vote fraud?

Also - I love the word USian and salute your use of it, good sir.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Count me among those who find Free Ussrian's neologism supremely annoying.

I having voted in both predominately white and black areas, I haven't noticed any difference in the amount of time it takes to vote, which was as long as it took for me to pick the ones I wanted as no one was in line. a source would be nice. And I don't know what disenfranchisement schemes you're talking about, I'm pretty sure that ended with MLK.

umm, have you not been paying attention? the ridiculous lines became a top news story for like a week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/27508339#27508339

and the disenfranchisement ranges from attempts to raise the bar for eligibility, creating caging lists, illegal last minute purges of the voter rolls, and demographically targeted 'challenges' against voters. shit, the republican party in michigan was even attempting to use the current economic crisis to disenfranchise people who got foreclosed on.

Ussrian

USSRian seems like a good term too. USians always said 'russian', but that's clearly inaccurate. same with both 'soviets' and 'commies'. good thinking!

USSRian seems like a good term too.

Your taste and mine are rather different.

USSRian seems like a good term too. USians always said 'russian', but that's clearly inaccurate. same with both 'soviets' and 'commies'. good thinking!

If you are going to use that then u really have to say USSRians, which is really just saying "russian" which as you say clearly inaccurate. So perhaps you need to come up with something else.

If you are going to use that then u really have to say USSRians, which is really just saying "russian"

not if the people in question lived in the georgian or azerbiajan soviet socialist republics...

Couldn't you just have said "American"?

He could have but that wouldn't of pissed off every American reading it.

some details on the minnesota recount process:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/13/84113/162/386/646420

pretty much what you would expect, as long as you don't adopt the republican model from florida as a standard

Oh yes, cause that's so much better.It could be. He (Foley) doesn't seem to have been charged with anything, meaning that he probably didn't break any laws, or at least not statutory rape laws.

It could be. He (Foley) doesn't seem to have been charged with anything, meaning that he probably didn't break any laws, or at least not statutory rape laws.

yeah, his big problems are rampant hypocrisy and issues involving violation of trust and abuse of power-relations. the kids involved were 17-18ish.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Count me among those who find Free Ussrian's neologism supremely annoying.

I came up with the term on my own years ago, and then found out later that the term was invented in the late 1700's or some shit as the same debate over ambiguity in demonym choice was had.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I am so excited that the Dems might possibly have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate; only because I want to see what can be accomplished in a short time. I know that there is concern over them running roughshod over everyone and implementing far left policies but I don't see the Obama Administration doing that.

Come on Alaska and Minnesota!

I came up with the term on my own years ago, and then found out later that the term was invented in the late 1700's or some shit as the same debate over ambiguity in demonym choice was had.


I was just about to point out that the USian tag was hardly new. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I am so excited that the Dems might possibly have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate; only because I want to see what can be accomplished in a short time. I know that there is concern over them running roughshod over everyone and implementing far left policies but I don't see the Obama Administration doing that.

Come on Alaska and Minnesota!

I keep hearing the complaint that Democrats getting a filibusterproof majority would mean the institution of socialism across the board. I don't think that even a Democrat majority would vote for it, so I find it a bit of a hollow threat.

Shame really - the concept of everyone having healthcare, somewhere to lay their head, sufficient food and (ideally) a form of employment.... doesn't horrify me like I gather it is supposed to.

Methinks something is amiss in the Minnesota senate race.

Coleman started out with a commanding lead of more than 400 votes over Franken. Not nearly enough to avoid a recount but still enough to probably win even in a recount. But the lead shrank as the days went by and more ballots for Franken were found. In one case an entire car trunk full of ballots almost exclusively for Franken turned up.

Ritchie, our Secretary of State is a DFLer and a strong supporter of Franken. He's also in charge of the recount and doesn't think it strange that the gap is closing after all the legal votes have been tallied. It wouldn't be difficult to rig it in the recount and I think that Ritchie might be tempted to turn a blind eye to this.

There were also accusations of voter coercion at the polls. Naturally both of the major sides are claiming it was the other and there is even supposedly a video of this. Seems that some Somali voters were told to vote for Al Franken or their vote for Barack Obama wouldn't count but there was also a Republican translator so who knows what the fuck is going on.

I know that Barkley and Aldrich never had a chance at winning but I wish that more people would have voted for them. For all the complaints about the 2-party system people sure do support it come election day.

I do not like where this has gone and I do not like where it is going.

Remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil and the only way you can truly waste your vote is to vote for someone you don't really support.

What's odder, a car trunk full of votes for Franken turning up, or a car trunk full of votes for Franken? Hmm?

I was just about to point out that the USian tag was hardly new. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



I keep hearing the complaint that Democrats getting a filibusterproof majority would mean the institution of socialism across the board. I don't think that even a Democrat majority would vote for it, so I find it a bit of a hollow threat.

Shame really - the concept of everyone having healthcare, somewhere to lay their head, sufficient food and (ideally) a form of employment.... doesn't horrify me like I gather it is supposed to.


I know right?

I have a hard time envisioning the downfall of the United States at the hands of populist reforms and social justice.

What's odder, a car trunk full of votes for Franken turning up, or a car trunk full of votes for Franken? Hmm?
Neirther should have happened but they were accepted as legit almost immediately by Ritchie's office. No big invesitgation, no meticulous study.

In Minnesota it's easy to vote than register a boat as was pointed out in an editorial featured in the Pioneer Press. See, in Minnesota we don't just have same-day registration (something I support and used the first time I voted), we've also got something called vouching. Vouching allows an individual to register on Election Day by simply having someone from the precinct confirm his or her identity. To register a boat you need a photo ID and they'll tag your name to the boat registration number in a computer. The technology for real-time voter verification does exist but it isn't used. There is also a ballot that is pretty much impossible to screw up (in Minnesota voter intent is what counts even if a machine can't read it) and by having the touch-screen voting machines print off individual ballots the whole thing lack of a paper trail could be easily addressed. A lot could be done to make elections in Minnesota more secure without disenfranchising legit voters. A lot could be done but isn't.

I am so excited that the Dems might possibly have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate

luckily they don't really need to get all the way there - the few moderate/new england republicans left can't really politically afford to always toe the crazed obstructionist line of their party. not if they intend to still be senators in the future, at least.

In one case an entire car trunk full of ballots almost exclusively for Franken turned up.

source it

luckily they don't really need to get all the way there - the few moderate/new england republicans left can't really politically afford to always toe the crazed obstructionist line of their party. not if they intend to still be senators in the future, at least.

True, I completely overlooked cases such as that.

Neirther should have happened but they were accepted as legit almost immediately by Ritchie's office. No big invesitgation, no meticulous study.

In Minnesota it's easy to vote than register a boat as was pointed out in an editorial featured in the Pioneer Press. See, in Minnesota we don't just have same-day registration (something I support and used the first time I voted), we've also got something called vouching. Vouching allows an individual to register on Election Day by simply having someone from the precinct confirm his or her identity. To register a boat you need a photo ID and they'll tag your name to the boat registration number in a computer. The technology for real-time voter verification does exist but it isn't used. There is also a ballot that is pretty much impossible to screw up (in Minnesota voter intent is what counts even if a machine can't read it) and by having the touch-screen voting machines print off individual ballots the whole thing lack of a paper trail could be easily addressed. A lot could be done to make elections in Minnesota more secure without disenfranchising legit voters. A lot could be done but isn't.

You keep talking about the broken system. You say things that suggest these votes shouldn't have been accepted.

And yet you've still failed to show there's even a statistical margin of discrepancy between the votes cast, and their attribution (which rules out ballot-stuffing) or between potential voters and votes cast.

You seem to be invoking the SPECTRE of electoral fraud, with no evidence of any.

source it

"Trunkful" in this case meant 32 votes. It's from Hannity, of course.

HuffPo posted a transcript (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/13/minnesota-governor-tim-pa_n_143564.html) of Sean's conversation with MN Gov Tim Pawlenty. It's pretty non-damning.

True, I completely overlooked cases such as that.

yeah, its especially worrisome for them if you look at what has happened to their ranks over the past few cycles. a dying breed, being attacked both by their own party on the one hand and by their association with it on the other.

luckily they don't really need to get all the way there - the few moderate/new england republicans left can't really politically afford to always toe the crazed obstructionist line of their party. not if they intend to still be senators in the future, at least.

Indeed. I actually don't want them to get quite a filibuster-proof majority. Just close to it. So they still have to convince a couple Republicans to vote their way in the case of a filibuster.

He could have but that wouldn't of pissed off every American reading it.

Indeed, which is the whole point of the term.

Indeed, which is the whole point of the term.

no, that's a side benefit. the main reason to use it is that i like it and everyone appears to understand what it means with only a moments consideration after seeing for the first time.

Not at all. Well, maybe for some once they have found out that someone is irritated by it, but usually it is only in the minds of the detractors. I, personally, think it's less ambiguous than the term "American" plus I like how it sounds and as I said earlier, I like it because I came up with the term on my own.

Of course, if you insist on pretending that you can read the minds of others, what 6 digit number am I thinking of?

Now, even if it was meant to irritate, shouldn't those irritated grow a thicker skin and worry about something that actually matters?

Are you saying you have no pet peeves?

Are you saying you have no pet peeves?

How about ignoring everyone's pet peeves and let this topic get back on topic. We're done with the discussion of "USian" in this thread. Start another one if you want to pick it apart.

How about ignoring everyone's pet peeves and let this topic get back on topic. We're done with the discussion of "USian" in this thread. Start another one if you want to pick it apart.

Ah.

I keep wondering what would have happened if the Dems had run a better candidate in GA. Maybe we wouldn't even need the run-off! Oh well.

I keep wondering what would have happened if the Dems had run a better candidate in GA. Maybe we wouldn't even need the run-off! Oh well.

too bad vernon jones was the other option

yeah, his big problems are rampant hypocrisy and issues involving violation of trust and abuse of power-relations. the kids involved were 17-18ish.So other than the pederasty, Foley's just like any other Congress(wo)man.

I keep wondering what would have happened if the Dems had run a better candidate in GA. Maybe we wouldn't even need the run-off! Oh well.

I guess they figured that Georgia was going red anyway - until it became clear there MIGHT be a shot, by which time it was too late. That said - there's a pretty fine line between how much better you can get, and STILL be electable in Georgia...

Desperately hoping Norm Coleman holds off Franken in MN. I wanted a divided government, but at the very least I don't want a filibuster-proof congress. It would completely undermine the separation of powers.

Not that it matters anymore, but I thought USian was an original term for an Asian-American when I clicked on this thread. Guess I was wrong.

not if the people in question lived in the georgian or azerbiajan soviet socialist republics...

Of course, I had a brain freeze last night. then why don't you just call the republicans?

Desperately hoping Norm Coleman holds off Franken in MN. I wanted a divided government, but at the very least I don't want a filibuster-proof congress. It would completely undermine the separation of powers.

if the republican party were sane, there might be an argument in favor of power sharing. but you go to congress with the opposition party you have, not the opposition party you wish you had.

these fuckers spent the past congress obstructing literally everything.

Desperately hoping Norm Coleman holds off Franken in MN. I wanted a divided government, but at the very least I don't want a filibuster-proof congress. It would completely undermine the separation of powers.


What about the same situation with the parties reversed? It seems to me this 'we need a divided government' mantra... only arises when Democrats seem in a position where it might happen for them.

Considering the last 8 years an the apparent inability to separate state powers and church... separating state powers and... other state powers... seems a little partisan.

too bad vernon jones was the other option

Not the only other option. There were 4 or 5 guys running in the primaries.

But I do agree that Jones is even more scummy than Martin.


I guess they figured that Georgia was going red anyway - until it became clear there MIGHT be a shot, by which time it was too late. That said - there's a pretty fine line between how much better you can get, and STILL be electable in Georgia...

There is that....

Ah well.

has mcclintok vs brown been determined yet? (california 4th district)

(mcclintok; hier appearent to a seat long held by republican dolittle, lives outside the entire district, and has never lived in it, but appears to be ahead of retired air force colonal charles brown (dem), except in nevada county, where he (c.brown) led last time too)

hahahaha, lieberman

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/14/10476/841/187/660873
Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 11/11-13. Likely voters. MoE 4%

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Joe Lieberman is doing as U.S. senator?

Approve 36 (45)
Disapprove 61 (43)

If the 2012 election for U.S. Senate were held today would you to reelect Joe Lieberman would you consider voting for another candidate or would you vote to replace Lieberman?

Reelect 35
Consider Someone Else 18
Replace 48

If Joe Lieberman loses his committee chairmanship at Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and switches his allegiance to the Republican Party would you that make you more likely reelect Lieberman more likely to consider voting for another candidate or more likely to vote to replace Lieberman?

Reelect 31
Consider Someone Else 15
Replace 52

has mcclintok vs brown been determined yet? (california 4th district)
I saw that one last night on a list of House races still "too close to call", along with Goode/Pierrot in Virginia and a third one that I don't remember.

So, whats the update on senate numbers and the remaining contests?

So, whats the update on senate numbers and the remaining contests?

Alaska has been hideously slow in updating their elections results site (http://www.elect.alaska.net/). So far, the PDF version has been updated twice, on 5 Nov and 12 Nov. The HTML page is still showing 5 Nov numbers. Last I heard, they still had 40,000 ballots to count.

Edit: From ADN (http://www.adn.com/elections/senate/story/588675.html)
The Division of Elections will count the remaining ballots as follows:

Today (14 November 2008)
• About 510 questioned ballots from Southeast, the Peninsula and Southwest Alaska
• About 5,180 absentee and questioned ballots from Mat-Su
• Questioned, absentee ballots from Richardson Highway and the Interior
• About 3,600 absentee and questioned ballots from Western and Northwest Alaska, and North Slope

Monday
• Leftover absentee ballots from Richardson Highway and the Interior

Tuesday
• About 15,700 questioned and absentee ballots from Anchorage
• About 8,300 absentee ballots from Southeast, Kenai Peninsula and Southwest Alaska




Georgia is going to have a runoff on 2 December. Numbers are pointless until then.


Minnesota's Secretary of State has posted numbers from the general election count (http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20081104/ElecRslts.asp?M=S&R=all&P=A&Races=%27%27), showing Franken trailing Coleman by 206 votes. If there's a separate site for the recount, it's not in any obvious place. Your guess is as good as mine.

If there's a separate site for the recount, it's not in any obvious place.
That's because it hasn't started yet. Whenever Minnesota starts recounting, Alaska updates its counts, and Georgia gets some polls on the upcoming re-do, Nate Silver (http://fivethirtyeight.com) will be the guy who has the numbers first and will tell you what they mean.

has mcclintok vs brown been determined yet? (california 4th district)

(mcclintok; hier appearent to a seat long held by republican dolittle, lives outside the entire district, and has never lived in it, but appears to be ahead of retired air force colonal charles brown (dem), except in nevada county, where he (c.brown) led last time too)
I meantioned earlier that the race you want to know about was one of three House races: now it is the last.
Good news---we have declared victory in two more seats since Election Day -- Democrat Tom Perriello (VA-05) and Frank Kratovil (MD-01). Thanks to your generous support, that means we gained 24 Democratic victories since last cycle. We are still ecstatic about last Tuesday's historic night---Americans voted in record numbers for President-Elect Obama and to expand our Democratic majorities. Almost never has a party won back-to-back wave elections. This feat is truly historic.

The best part: we won’t have to listen to Periello's vanquished foe, Virginia Rep. Virgil Goode, spew any more un-American crap like this: "The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran." I think this calls for the traditional C&J sendoff: "Bye, asshole."

So other than the pederasty, Foley's just like any other Congress(wo)man.
Ooh, that reminds me:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/244/story/563716.html

So what are the current senate numbers? How many democrats and how many Republican? I cant seem to find an updated figure anywhere, but my google-fu is weak.

This election has exposed Americans for the criminally moronic oafs they are. They hate congress more than the president, some polls placing them with single digit approval ratings. With this in mind people voted for more of the same. Either people just don't know what party has been in control of congress for the last 2 years or they just don't care. Or maybe they love having something to funnel all of their anger at and a big faceless government makes as good a target as anything.

This election has exposed Americans for the criminally moronic oafs they are. They hate congress more than the president, some polls placing them with single digit approval ratings. With this in mind people voted for more of the same. Either people just don't know what party has been in control of congress for the last 2 years or they just don't care. Or maybe they love having something to funnel all of their anger at and a big faceless government makes as good a target as anything.

awww, someone is bitter.

Of course this ranting ignores the fact that a significant number of people who voted "dissatisfied" with congress did so because they were dissatisfied with the republican side of it, and felt the democrats weren't doing enough to end the war.

And when you look at it from that perspective, what happened was pretty logical.

awww, someone is bitter.

Of course this ranting ignores the fact that a significant number of people who voted "dissatisfied" with congress did so because they were dissatisfied with the republican side of it, and felt the democrats weren't doing enough to end the war.

And when you look at it from that perspective, what happened was pretty logical.

This. Most Americans main beef with congress is the Republicans being bitches and the Republican president vetoing everything.

This election has exposed Americans for the criminally moronic oafs they are. They hate congress more than the president, some polls placing them with single digit approval ratings. With this in mind people voted for more of the same. Either people just don't know what party has been in control of congress for the last 2 years or they just don't care. Or maybe they love having something to funnel all of their anger at and a big faceless government makes as good a target as anything.

Or, you know, they realised that it was a combination of Republican fillibuster-isation and a VETO-happy president that was hampering Congress from achieving anything useful...

EDIT: NA, KoL, you have strong logic-fu

also, and more importantly, don't forget, congress is not a national election, it's several hundred local or state elections. How a voter feels about congress as a whole is considerably less important than how that voter feels about his or her representative/senator specifically.

also, and more importantly, don't forget, congress is not a national election, it's several hundred local or state elections. How a voter feels about congress as a whole is considerably less important than how that voter feels about his or her representative/senator specifically.

The trend seems to be "God I hate congress. Its everyone there but my guy' fault. Hes working really hard."

This election has exposed Americans for the criminally moronic oafs they are. They hate congress more than the president, some polls placing them with single digit approval ratings. With this in mind people voted for more of the same. Either people just don't know what party has been in control of congress for the last 2 years or they just don't care. Or maybe they love having something to funnel all of their anger at and a big faceless government makes as good a target as anything.

*hugs*

You looked like you needed it.

also, and more importantly, don't forget, congress is not a national election, it's several hundred local or state elections. How a voter feels about congress as a whole is considerably less important than how that voter feels about his or her representative/senator specifically.

which is somewhat stupid of them, but true.

awww, someone is bitter.

Of course this ranting ignores the fact that a significant number of people who voted "dissatisfied" with congress did so because they were dissatisfied with the republican side of it, and felt the democrats weren't doing enough to end the war.

And when you look at it from that perspective, what happened was pretty logical.
And here I thought it was because roughly half of Americans just didn't know the majority party. Seriously, that's what a Pew (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/993/who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics) poll found. Only 53% of Americans in 2008 knew the majority party in congress (the Democratic Party), only 42% knew the Secretary of State (Condoleezza Rice), and only 28% knew the current British Prime Minister (Gordon Brown).

Strangely listeners of Rush Limbaugh scored higher than CNN viewers. I repeat, most Americans are moronic oafs. These were simple questions about our government and a close ally (that we fought 2 wars with, we have one fucked up country).

And here I thought it was because roughly half of Americans just didn't know the majority party. Seriously, that's what a Pew (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/993/who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics) poll found. Only 53% of Americans in 2008 knew the majority party in congress (the Democratic Party), only 42% knew the Secretary of State (Condoleezza Rice), and only 28% knew the current British Prime Minister (Gordon Brown).

Not that big a surprise. The state of our Politics education in America is horrible. We barely do a passable job teaching American Politics. We teach no real Comparitive Politics in our schools. Really stupid, but instead we insist on more math and science. Kids can calculate rate-of-change but they don't know who Hu Jintao is.

Strangely listeners of Rush Limbaugh scored higher than CNN viewers. I repeat, most Americans are moronic oafs. These were simple questions about our government and a close ally (that we fought 2 wars with, we have one fucked up country).

Not a shock, actually. Rush Limbaugh is an opinion journalist with a highly political audience. They'll know more about politics than CNN viewers who are much more proletarian. It's no surprise that Rush's listeners know the Democratic Party is in power. The windbag has a rant about it every other week, when he isn't bitching about black people or hippies. I expect that you would find Keith Olbermann's viewers knew the answers better than Rush's listeners, and that PBS watchers blew the whole lot away. It has to do with education level, interest in politics, and elite status, more than anything else.

And here I thought it was because roughly half of Americans just didn't know the majority party.

so then this would tend to imply that the election was a pure repudiation of republican ideals, rather than some more nuanced or pragmatic view about the particulars of politics, yes? because it means people were buying what the dems were selling, knowing that whatever was happening before, it wasn't that.

so then this would tend to imply that the election was a pure repudiation of republican ideals, rather than some more nuanced or pragmatic view about the particulars of politics, yes? because it means people were buying what the dems were selling, knowing that whatever was happening before, it wasn't that.

To be fair, he's right that the electorate isn't very bright. Obama won, and that is good because Obama was right on the issues, but that doesn't mean that he won because he was right on the issues.

To be fair, he's right that the electorate isn't very bright. Obama won, and that is good because Obama was right on the issues, but that doesn't mean that he won because he was right on the issues.

but all he's shown is that the electorate doesn't pay much attention to the particulars of politics - especially that over which they have no control at all (who everybody else in the country voted for in their districts' elections, what foreigners are up to these days). as far as i have seen, non-republicans are pretty good on picking out who supports what more generally, or at least use identifiable stereotypes that are mostly good enough. republicans, on the other hand... (http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_9_29_04.html)

Not a shock, actually. Rush Limbaugh is an opinion journalist with a highly political audience. They'll know more about politics than CNN viewers who are much more proletarian. It's no surprise that Rush's listeners know the Democratic Party is in power. The windbag has a rant about it every other week, when he isn't bitching about black people or hippies. I expect that you would find Keith Olbermann's viewers knew the answers better than Rush's listeners, and that PBS watchers blew the whole lot away. It has to do with education level, interest in politics, and elite status, more than anything else.
NPR listeners scored high but viewers of NewsHour (PBS) slipped, so those that worship Fox commentary and Hardball actually were more informed than the people who just watched Fox News and MSNBC. This means that Keith Olbermann's viewers actually scored below Limbaugh and Hannity audiences. CBS audiences scored just above National Enquirer peeps.

This disturbs me. If you don't know a damn thing about how government works or who's in it then you probably shouldn't vote. People have a responsibility to cast an informed vote, not just a vote.

Next time you might want to click on the link in the post to see the results for yourself before commenting on them.

but all he's shown is that the electorate doesn't pay much attention to the particulars of politics - especially that over which they have no control at all (who everybody else in the country voted for in their districts' elections, what foreigners are up to these days). as far as i have seen, non-republicans are pretty good on picking out who supports what more generally, or at least use identifiable stereotypes that are mostly good enough. republicans, on the other hand... (http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_9_29_04.html)

I'm not an expert on the American electorate, but in my experience, yes, Democrats tend to be slightly more aware of national issues (in part because Democrats tend to be more highly educated), but at the end of the day, the electorate as a whole aint too bright.

NPR listeners scored high but viewers of NewsHour (PBS) slipped, so those that worship Fox commentary and Hardball actually were more informed than the people who just watched Fox News and MSNBC. This means that Keith Olbermann's viewers actually scored below Limbaugh and Hannity audiences. CBS audiences scored just above National Enquirer peeps.

This disturbs me. If you don't know a damn thing about how government works or who's in it then you probably shouldn't vote. People have a responsibility to cast an informed vote, not just a vote.

Next time you might want to click on the link in the post to see the results for yourself before commenting on them.

Olbermann's viewers aren't separated out, so that's making a statistical projection that you have no information to back up. To be exact, you're assuming that a sample weighted down by people who think Morning Joe, the midday crap, and David Gregory are anything but nonsense in its highest and least exalted form is representative of Olbermann's viewers.

No shock that Katie Couric's viewers aren't too bright. Neither is Couric.

I'm a little surprised that NewsHour was so low, but NPR's rating largely backs up my point, so I shall assume that NewsHour, like the other Nightlies, has more broad viewership, in general.

I'm not an expert on the American electorate, but in my experience, yes, Democrats tend to be slightly more aware of national issues (in part because Democrats tend to be more highly educated), but at the end of the day, the electorate as a whole aint too bright.
Democrats more highly educated? The typical democrat is a retail clerk who votes the way his union tells him. That or a welfare deadbeat. Republicans, on the other hand, are callipygian gods descended from Jesus to save us from the greatest threat to ever face mankind: GAY MARRIAGE!

Democrats more highly educated? The typical democrat is a retail clerk who votes the way his union tells him. That or a welfare deadbeat. Republicans, on the other hand, are callipygian gods descended from Jesus to save us from the greatest threat to ever face mankind: GAY MARRIAGE!

I'm gonna guess that you're not being serious (I can't be sure, because some folks do seem to believe such things, these days), but I'll take it as an opportunity to back myself up, because I'm not being partisan here. I'm doing my best to offer a clinical opinion.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1

You'll note that people with Graduate Degrees (and, in general, college degrees) trend towards democrats, as do those with no High School degree. Democrats tend to split the bill between low education and high education voters, whilst Republicans tend to draw middle-level education voters. Thing is, the Dems have the highly educated folks pulling their numbers up, while the Republicans draw on a group that tends to be fairly apathetic about politics except around election time.

some new ads out for the georgia race.
first, from the dscc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuFd--osc_g

and one from the martin campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjauxs2j5W4


also, anyone else think youtube has changed the way political ads work?

Minnesota recount getting fun.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1859543,00.html?iid=tsmodule

Can't believe we're going to have to wait til mid December...

no. any thoughts on the senate races, or are you just here to hijack?
As a proud USian, I approve your use of the term. Feel free to ignore the naysaayers (I do) :tongue:

And here I thought it was because roughly half of Americans just didn't know the majority party. Seriously, that's what a Pew (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/993/who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics) poll found. Only 53% of Americans in 2008 knew the majority party in congress (the Democratic Party), only 42% knew the Secretary of State (Condoleezza Rice), and only 28% knew the current British Prime Minister (Gordon Brown).

Strangely listeners of Rush Limbaugh scored higher than CNN viewers. I repeat, most Americans are moronic oafs. These were simple questions about our government and a close ally (that we fought 2 wars with, we have one fucked up country).

*Is apparently in the top 28% of Americans most knowledgeable about foreign affairs*

That's kinda depressing, really

*Is apparently in the top 28% of Americans most knowledgeable about foreign affairs*

That's kinda depressing, really
More shocking than depressing for me.

I don't like mobs. In my opinion, if you need one to get what you want, it's not worth getting.

Latest from Nate (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/penultimate-alaska-update-uncalled.html#comments) on unresolved House races:
In California's 4th House district, Republican Tom McClintock leads Democrat Charlie Brown by 622 votes with roughly 25,000 absentee and provisional ballots left to be counted. Both men are attending freshman House member orientation.

In Ohio's 15th House district, another extremely close open seat race, a federal judge today listened to arguments about the counting of provisional ballots, and will rule on the counting of approximately 1,000 ballots by Thursday 5pm Eastern. With thousands of ballots left to count, Republican Steve Stivers leads Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy by 149 votes.

Alaska update (http://www.elections.alaska.gov/08general/data/results.htm): Last Updated 12:39:28 AKST, November 18, 2008

146286 to Begich
143912 to Stevens

No published accounts of the number of ballots remaining, but NPR had it down under 10,000 remaining. They started today with 24,000 to count.

Ted's losing ground. I think he's toast.

(Edit: 538 has an uncounted figure of 14,626)

ap calls it for begich (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/STEVENS?SITE=MABED&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens has lost his bid for a seventh term. The longest-serving Republican in the history of the Senate trailed Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich by 3,724 votes after Tuesday's count. That's an insurmountable lead with only about 2,500 overseas ballots left to be counted."

begich's lead is also outside the mandatory recount level, and high enough that a reversal in one would be very unlikely

so, bets on the last two?

Franken wins, by a minute amount that the Republicans challenge in endless litigation. Chambliss, however, pulls off his re-election bid as turnout is low.

Franken - not sure, Chambliss will get his.

59-41 in the Senate. Franken will win on undervotes and Chambliss will win on voter apathy. If Pres. Elect Obama really wants a Filibuster proof Majority, he could appoint either of Maine's Senators to a cabinet post.

If Pres. Elect Obama really wants a Filibuster proof Majority, he could appoint either of Maine's Senators to a cabinet post.

i think i remember that episode of the west wing. only i think it was about stacking the federal elections commission.

ap calls it for begich (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/STEVENS?SITE=MABED&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens has lost his bid for a seventh term. The longest-serving Republican in the history of the Senate trailed Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich by 3,724 votes after Tuesday's count. That's an insurmountable lead with only about 2,500 overseas ballots left to be counted."

begich's lead is also outside the mandatory recount level, and high enough that a reversal in one would be very unlikely



I was so happy when I read this.

Franken has actually lost ground due to random audits before the finals were certified and the recount triggered. Not good news for him but good news for America, the only way that democrats (and republicans) can deliver on most of their promises is by stripping freedoms of one kind or another. A gridlocked government is a less powerful government.

Franken up a few dozen in early stages of the recount, will be nip and tuck.

Here's a fun site where you can recount the actual votes (http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2008/11/19_challenged_ballots/) yourself!

Here's a fun site where you can recount the actual votes (http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2008/11/19_challenged_ballots/) yourself!

that site reminds me. we really need to idiot proof the voting process. a worthwhile system would make damn sure that the vote was properly made before letting you leave the booth.

There is no way to "idiot proof" any system. Idiots are ingenious!

There is no way to "idiot proof" any system. Idiots are ingenious!

true, but we could fairly easily weed out a good portion of them. a system which records one and only one choice and has you verify that that is in fact your choice, for example.

Could you pleas stop with the USian thing?

You're supposed to insult people from the US at every possible moment on NSG. It's in the sticky.

There is no way to "idiot proof" any system. Idiots are ingenious!
There is a way to idiot proof the voting process. Touch screen voting machines. A lot of people are understandibly worried about the lack of a paper trail but that can be solved with something called a printer. Just have them confirm their choices on screen, print, and then check the printout to see that it matches the screen before turning it in to a ballot box. If there is a recount you just recount the printed ballots.

There is a way to idiot proof the voting process. Touch screen voting machines. A lot of people are understandibly worried about the lack of a paper trail but that can be solved with something called a printer. Just have them confirm their choices on screen, print, and then check the printout to see that it matches the screen before turning it in to a ballot box. If there is a recount you just recount the printed ballots.

And, every person who forgets to put the paper in that box is disenfranchised. What happens if the numbers don't add up? Either way?

true, but we could fairly easily weed out a good portion of them. a system which records one and only one choice and has you verify that that is in fact your choice, for example.

I don't see why it can't be done almost ATM style...record your registration info on your photo ID. Put the card in any voting machine in any area...your vote is recorded to your precinct and ward. To leave, you must give a paper printout.


I should mention that I just found out I could have voted twice...once in CT and once in MA. Evidently, my registration is still valid in CT, even though I have registered in MA. Had I been able to drive from Boston to Central CT, I could have double voted, and never have been noticed.

And, every person who forgets to put the paper in that box is disenfranchised. What happens if the numbers don't add up? Either way?
What happens if they forget to put their paper ballot in the box or scanner right now? Same fucking thing. All this whining about disenfranchisement over proposed printer-equipped touchscreen machines is a bullshit smokescreen. Admit it, you just want to keep it easy to rig an election.

What I proposed would provide real-time same-day voter registration/verification and security, a paper trail to facilitate a recount, and make it pretty damn hard for voters to fuck things up. We wouldn't have to worry about interpretting voter intent based on illegible scribbles or what other candidates they voted for, it'd all be clean and secure and open to all legal voters.

No real update on the American races, but in The Most Important Race Of The Century (according to a thread that's fallen into zombieland), Labour beat the SNP in Glenrothes (http://demockracy.com/a-scottish-bounce-labour-stuns-the-snp/).

What happens if they forget to put their paper ballot in the box or scanner right now?

So, your claim that 'idiotproof' was possible was hyperbole, because - when it came down to it - the best you could offer was 'about the same'?

So, your claim that 'idiotproof' was possible was hyperbole, because - when it came down to it - the best you could offer was 'about the same'?

except that they aren't 'about the same'. one way makes sure those that actually manage to cast some sort of ballot have cast a clearly determinable ballot and the other doesn't. which means that the one is clearly a step forward.

No real update on the American races, but in The Most Important Race Of The Century (according to a thread that's fallen into zombieland), Labour beat the SNP in Glenrothes (http://demockracy.com/a-scottish-bounce-labour-stuns-the-snp/).

fuck!

except that they aren't 'about the same'. one way makes sure those that actually manage to cast some sort of ballot have cast a clearly determinable ballot and the other doesn't. which means that the one is clearly a step forward.

First - that's not 'idiotproof'.

Second - no, it doesn't. It is still entirely possible for the numbers to not match, and fairly easy to get to that point.

First - that's not 'idiotproof'.

its closer

Second - no, it doesn't. It is still entirely possible for the numbers to not match, and fairly easy to get to that point.

how?

its closer


Tell you what. Rather than you and I fighting about it, why don't you go back and read the claim Indri made, and then see if the 'explanation' matches the claim, hmm?


how?

And this can probably be solved by going back and reading the post I made.

So, your claim that 'idiotproof' was possible was hyperbole, because - when it came down to it - the best you could offer was 'about the same'?
It would have eliminated the disputed ballots in the Coleman-Franken race. Cereally, there would have been no double-votes or scribbles or improperly filled-out ballots. It would be a simple matter of recounting all votes cast. You could even add a barcode to the prinouts to make it more difficult for people to sneak in some fake ballots. The fact is that it's as close to idiotproof as you can get and would provide security and a papertrail without turning away eligible voters.

returns from georgia are coming in:

Chambliss (Incumbent)
668,699 59%

Martin
456,057 41%

52% precincts reporting

returns from georgia are coming in:

Chambliss (Incumbent)
668,699 59%

Martin
456,057 41%

52% precincts reporting

No big surprise there, and none expected. It was pretty clear that the Democrats weren't really expecting much.

Well...Besides the obvious stupidity of the word "USian"......It doesnt even make grammatical sense...

But, Im hoping they all go Republican, if they havent already (havent been keeping up with them lately, college work and whatnot)...

I voted Obama, cause i dont want republican rule any longer...but, One party government is good for no one...

http://projects.ajc.com/election-results/2008/12/02/us-senate/

But, Im hoping they all go Republican, if they havent already

Stevens lost, Chambliss won (effectively), Coleman's still in limbo. So it will be 58-42 or 59-41 for the Democrats, assuming Lieberman's assholery doesn't get even more exceptional.

Coleman's still in limbo

news on the franken front (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/12/its_official_franken_picks_up.php)

Stevens lost, Chambliss won (effectively), Coleman's still in limbo. So it will be 58-42 or 59-41 for the Democrats, assuming Lieberman's assholery doesn't get even more exceptional.
now that the dems officially dont need him, lieberman better be very careful how he proceeds from now on.

news on the franken front (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/12/its_official_franken_picks_up.php)

Ill be so happy if he wins.

And so the One Ring slips from the Dark Lord's finger. :p

Thank God for Georgia. Now it's up to Minnesota not to shame itself any further and not send that assclown Stuart Smalley to the Senate.

And so the One Ring slips from the Dark Lord's finger. :p

Thank God for Georgia. Now it's up to Minnesota not to shame itself any further and not send that assclown Stuart Smalley to the Senate.

Is it nice having delusions of grandeur? Or is it just one disappointment after another?

You realize that if the dems have 58 or 59, that every single republican has to back a filibuster in order for it to work right? Oh, and the two independents do as well.

Face it, your little Bushevik fantasy land is dead. It aint coming back.

Oh, and the two independents do as well.

No, they caucus with the Democrats, and thus are included in the Democratic totals.

Is it nice having delusions of grandeur? Or is it just one disappointment after another?

You realize that if the dems have 58 or 59, that every single republican has to back a filibuster in order for it to work right? Oh, and the two independents do as well.

Face it, your little Bushevik fantasy land is dead. It aint coming back.

there's something to be said for this. I mean, it's a sad day for the republican party when having JUST enough people to TRY and block the opposition, assuming that all their members fall in line, even in the absence of clear party leadership is a GOOD thing.

Though I suppose "Yay, we're...not totally irrelevant!" has an interesting ring to it.

Of course, that's assuming that the republican party can maintain a 95% party unity, something they couldn't even do when Bush was in office and they were the majority. But, you know, I'm SURE all those republicans are going to be so very eager to block Obama's policies.

You know, the polices the american people wanted him to enact.

The same american people who will be voting for them in two years.

No, they caucus with the Democrats, and thus are included in the Democratic totals.

Oh, thats right. Well my point about the Republicans all having to always follow party lines now to filibuster still stands.

there's something to be said for this. I mean, it's a sad day for the republican party when having JUST enough people to TRY and block the opposition, assuming that all their members fall in line, even in the absence of clear party leadership is a GOOD thing.

Though I suppose "Yay, we're...not totally irrelevant!" has an interesting ring to it.

Of course, that's assuming that the republican party can maintain a 95% party unity, something they couldn't even do when Bush was in office and they were the majority. But, you know, I'm SURE all those republicans are going to be so very eager to block Obama's policies.

You know, the polices the american people wanted him to enact.

The same american people who will be voting for them in two years.


Stop being such a minion for the Dark Lord (the fact that NM imagines himself in a Lord of the Rings esc struggle against Obama is rather...well, you get the point).

Stop being such a minion for the Dark Lord (the fact that NM imagines himself in a Lord of the Rings esc struggle against Obama is rather...well, you get the point).

I think it's unintentionally ironic, consider the...erm...stature of the main hero.

Does he figure himself a hobbit, I wonder?

I think it's unintentionally ironic, consider the...erm...stature of the main hero.

Does he figure himself a hobbit, I wonder?

God knows hes about as obnoxious as Frodo...

I think it's unintentionally ironic, consider the...erm...stature of the main hero.

Does he figure himself a hobbit, I wonder?

"This is the hour of the Shire-folk, when they arise from their quiet fields to shake the towers and counsels of the great." --Elrond, "The Fellowship of the Ring", Book Two, Chapter 2.

Hobbits achieved what Men, Elves and Dwarves couldn't.

But since you raise the subject, there are several other races of Middle Earth I haven't mentioned that you might successfully impersonate :tongue:

Of course, that's assuming that the republican party can maintain a 95% party unity, something they couldn't even do when Bush was in office and they were the majority. But, you know, I'm SURE all those republicans are going to be so very eager to block Obama's policies.

You know, the polices the american people wanted him to enact.

The same american people who will be voting for them in two years.

I'm sure you said the same thing in 2000 and 2004.

Er, hold on . . . that was when teh ebil Wepubbwicans won, so filibustering and blocking those policies was just fine, wasn't it?

I'm sure you said the same thing in 2000 and 2004.

Er, hold on . . . that was when teh ebil Wepubbwicans won, so filibustering and blocking those policies was just fine, wasn't it?

I have no problem with attempts to block bad legislation. And given the results of the last two years, it appears that the American people agree with me, given that they stripped the republican party of any power to push through any legislation what so ever. So yeah, blocking Republican attempts at legislation seems just fine to American democracy, given what that American democracy did to republicans the last few years.

And I bet that just burns you up doesn't it?

I have no problem with attempts to block bad legislation. And given the results of the last two years, it appears that the American people agree with me, given that they stripped the republican party of any power to push through any legislation what so ever. So yeah, blocking Republican attempts at legislation seems just fine to American democracy, given what that American democracy did to republicans the last few years.

And I bet that just burns you up doesn't it?Aagh! Legislation blocking! Nasty Democratses twisted it!

And so the One Ring slips from the Dark Lord's finger. :p

Thank God for Georgia. Now it's up to Minnesota not to shame itself any further and not send that assclown Stuart Smalley to the Senate.

Dark Lord? Racist.

Assuming it's supposed to be using LoTR imagery in a representative fashion... the 'dark lord' is the reigning power, and the Fellowship are the emissaries of the people, personifications of hope, overthrowing a regime that ruled through a combination of fear, croneyism, and draconian measures.

It's cute to use the imagery, but actually applying the imagery to the best fits, Obama would Frodo, Biden would be his erstwhile comrade Samwise, the Republican Party regime would represent Mordor... and you would just be a troll.

And I bet that just burns you up doesn't it?

Damn America turning its back on the people it owes so much.

Dark Lord? Racist.

Assuming it's supposed to be using LoTR imagery in a representative fashion... the 'dark lord' is the reigning power, and the Fellowship are the emissaries of the people, personifications of hope, overthrowing a regime that ruled through a combination of fear, croneyism, and draconian measures.

It's cute to use the imagery, but actually applying the imagery to the best fits, Obama would Frodo, Biden would be his erstwhile comrade Samwise, the Republican Party regime would represent Mordor... and you would just be a troll.

Obama and Biden are gay for each other?

You realize that if the dems have 58 or 59, that every single republican has to back a filibuster in order for it to work right?

including, at best, one republican that will have very nearly lost an election to stuart smalley. and a couple new england republicans desperately hoping to avoid the fate of their compatriots that used to be in the house.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/03/jeb.bush/

Good luck.