Election Day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOTO13

I saw this like 3 weeks ago. Have you seen the same information? I am going to get the HCA if available and read it. Yes, you heard right...I can read.

---

Yes, I have seen this before as this is the same tired and debunked nonsense that's been circulating for years on the subject.

Is anyone else gonna point out that he said the twin tower attack was in 1991?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _Lost_

Is anyone else gonna point out that he said the twin tower attack was in 1991?

---

I was going to say something but was at work and I didn't have time. Oh Moto... he is something else lol. For someone who's all about facts and history he sure cant get that right. 2001.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _Lost_

Is anyone else gonna point out that he said the twin tower attack was in 1991?

---

There was a bombing in 91 that was intended to destroy the towers but failed. But yeah. No planes were involved in that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llamas

Voter turnout this year was lower than usual, at 57.5 percent. 1996 was the last time the US voter turnout was under half, at 49%. And that was the only election since any of us here have been alive that turnout was a "minority" (one percent under half = stretch to call a "minority"...) And maybe - just maybe we have a 10% lower turnout than most countries because a lot of Americans don't like either of the parties and know that the other parties don't have enough money to run the country. Some don't feel that there's any difference. Others find registering difficult (especially the poor) - hell, I found it difficult to register for my first vote in 2004. I voted in 2004 and 2008, but didn't vote this year. Does that make me apathetic? Nope. Not at all.

---

The papers I read at the time I made my first post had these numbers, but they were corrected later. There was a bare majority who voted, and Obama won with 3 million votes. The point with Obama winning with 600 000 votes (which is now confirmed to not be accurate) was not meant as a critique. I was just fascinated with the very close election. 3 million votes in between the two candidates is also close.

I still think the US has a low turn out, but I can understand it. If I were a Democrat living in Texas, I don't know if I would have bother going to vote for Obama. I know that state would've be won by the Republicans. If I nevertheless had voted, my vote would have been thrown away. And that's what I dislike with the First Past the Post system. The whole thing with Electoral Colleges makes it even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llamas

No, I didn't say that. I just said that's where it comes from. Your joke wasn't obvious, so I was explaining. It'd require an amendment to remove the electoral college, and that's not easy. There have been proposals to alter the process, but none have made it. Two-thirds majority in both houses, plus three-fourths majority of Americans is required to pass an amendment. It's not easy. But proposals will keep coming in and hopefully one of these days one will pass.

---

I am glad we agree upon this. I hope for the sake of the US that this will be changed as soon as possible. I can't understand why this doesn't create a debate every 4th year when the presidential election is around. I would be very frustrated if my vote was only advising my state's Electoral College.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebDudette

If by '600,000' you mean '~3,000,000 and potentially rising' and if instead of 'the majority can't be arsed' you actually me 'a majority of those able to vote turned out', then you are totally right.

Why do you blindly hate America so much, Rage?

---

Oh boy, here we go again. For the numbers, read above. For the supposedly "blind hate of America", I don't see where you get that from in this thread. The thing is about this BBS is that all we talk about in regards of politics is the USA. I comment therefore to the various issues in the political realm of the US. The voting system which happens to be the one the US uses is in my opinion flawed and not very democratic. The UK has the same issue with their voting system, and I would be the first one to criticise their system if it were brought up in a thread here. The problem is, it never is. How often do we discuss British elections, or British politics in general? Almost never.

So in short, I don't "blindly hate America". I criticise the First Past the Post voting system which the US happens to use. Start talk about other countries and their (in my opinion) flawed voting systems, and I will surely criticise them too. Start talk about aspects of the US which I agree upon, and I will argue that they are good things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llamas

I don't even live in the US, I'm no patriot, and I dislike the US more than most Americans (I get accused of hating America by a lot of people back home)... and yet I find Rage's blind America-hate to be beyond obnoxious.

---

Read above. I don't have a blind hate towards the USA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RageAndLov

I still think the US has a low turn out, but I can understand it. If I were a Democrat living in Texas, I don't know if I would have bother going to vote for Obama. I know that state would've be won by the Republicans. If I nevertheless had voted, my vote would have been thrown away. And that's what I dislike with the First Past the Post system. The whole thing with Electoral Colleges makes it even worse.

---

That's a huge part of it. That's why I didn't vote this year - if I could've voted in Wisconsin (where I grew up), I would've because WI is a bit more of a swing state... but it turned out I could only vote in the state I last voted in, which is Minnesota... and Minnesota has voted Democrat since 1976. Minnesota and DC were the only two democrat states in one Reagan election. So I knew Minnesota was gonna go Obama, anyway, so I didn't vote. Of course, if it was about a popular vote, I would've voted for sure - or if I'd been able to vote on the MN amendments, which I wasn't.

Quote:

---

I am glad we agree upon this. I hope for the sake of the US that this will be changed as soon as possible. I can't understand why this doesn't create a debate every 4th year when the presidential election is around. I would be very frustrated if my vote was only advising my state's Electoral College.

---

Trust me, a lot of people have a problem with this. It's heavily discussed and debated in the US among intelligent Americans. It just doesn't get picked up by the media. One would think the Bush vs. Gore election would've been a huge eye-opener for EVERYONE to care and drastic steps would've begun, but no.

Quote:

---

Oh boy, here we go again. For the numbers, read above. For the supposedly "blind hate of America", I don't see where you get that from in this thread. The thing is about this BBS is that all we talk about in regards of politics is the USA. I comment therefore to the various issues in the political realm of the US. The voting system which happens to be the one the US uses is in my opinion flawed and not very democratic. The UK has the same issue with their voting system, and I would be the first one to criticise their system if it were brought up in a thread here. The problem is, it never is. How often do we discuss British elections, or British politics in general? Almost never.

So in short, I don't "blindly hate America". I criticise the First Past the Post voting system which the US happens to use. Start talk about other countries and their (in my opinion) flawed voting systems, and I will surely criticise them too. Start talk about aspects of the US which I agree upon, and I will argue that they are good things.

---

The thing is, you word things so that you're not just strictly talking about the US - you are often comparing it to Europe or at least Norway. There was no need to say, "It's not like the people are smart enough to decide who should be their own president. Well, at least the minority of the US citizens who actually vote. The majority can't be arsed."

That alone is a very anti-American way of stating your thoughts. You should read, "Uncouth Nation: Why Europe Hates America" - it's written by an American girl who's married to a Dane and lives in Denmark. Lots of Europeans carry this anti-American sentiment and don't even realize it. The fact is, while you may not feel like you hate America, your words say otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llamas

The thing is, you word things so that you're not just strictly talking about the US - you are often comparing it to Europe or at least Norway. There was no need to say, "It's not like the people are smart enough to decide who should be their own president. Well, at least the minority of the US citizens who actually vote. The majority can't be arsed."

That alone is a very anti-American way of stating your thoughts. You should read, "Uncouth Nation: Why Europe Hates America" - it's written by an American girl who's married to a Dane and lives in Denmark. Lots of Europeans carry this anti-American sentiment and don't even realize it. The fact is, while you may not feel like you hate America, your words say otherwise.

---

First of all, the things I said was based on an estimated number which appeared later to be wrong. Secondly, I was being sarcastic. Of course I don't think people are too stupid to decide who should be their own president, but that seems like the reasoning the US has for keeping the Electoral Colleges. I know it isn't easy to change an amendment, like you said, but people should at least try. Maybe my sarcasm wasn't clear enough, or my post was poorly worded. Like I said, if this would have been the case in any other country, I would have given the exact same critique.

By the way, I refrain from using Norway as comparison or as an example, because I know how that easily appears as if I think Norway is the best country in the world or that I am nationalistic. I am not. Nationalism is one of the things I REALLY loathe because I think it is one of the most irrational sentiments human kind can have. As not to appear biased, I don't use Norway as a comparison. I know very well that Norway isn't perfect. It has a bunch of flaws. I would readily have a discussion about what is wrong with Norway, but no one gives a fuck about the small country in the outermost corner of Europe, so I never get to "show" that.

And that appears as an interesting book and I should probably read it.