Just moments ago I spoke with John McCain and congratulated him.....
Trust No One®
Who knows? It's not all over until the fat lady sings.
Anyone staying up to watch the US shenanigans?
A lot of pollsters will have a huge amount of egg on their faces if the old
codger pulls this one off.
--
Peter <X-Files fan>
middl...@googlemail.com
<dana....@usa.xnet> wrote:
>on becoming the 44th president of the United States.
>
>Who knows? It's not all over until the fat lady sings.
Indeed it isn't. What people tell the pollsters and where they decide
to actually place that cross once in the polling booth can be two
entirely different things.
>Anyone staying up to watch the US shenanigans?
Er, no.
>A lot of pollsters will have a huge amount of egg on their faces if the old
>codger pulls this one off.
I'd rather not think about an old codger pulling it off, if it's all
the same with you. :)
I can see a worst case scenario where Obama wins the popular vote, but
doesn't actually win the presidency. There'll be trouble if that
happens. Why does the US have this ridiculous "electoral college"
system anyway? It's always a two horse race, so why not just let
everyone have their vote, count 'em up, and the one who gets the most
votes wins? Or is that just too simple and straightforward for them?
I always think it's just a bit rich when they talk about exporting
democracy around the world, when they can't seem to get it right in
their own country. ;)
Sam Nelson
says...
> on becoming the 44th president of the United States.
>
> Who knows? It's not all over until the fat lady sings.
>
> Anyone staying up to watch the US shenanigans?
If it's anything like 2000, there won't be a result until mid-December.
> A lot of pollsters will have a huge amount of egg on their faces if the old
> codger pulls this one off.
C4 News finished just now. USonians can't do elections. Queuing for
hours in the rain, machines breaking down, thousands of lawyers and
hundreds of judges on-call to keep polling stations open... The more
you see of other countries doing elections, the more you realise that
wandering into a local primary-school classroom and putting a cross on a
piece of paper is what makes sense. I just wish I trusted my powers-
that-be not to backtrace every vote.
--
SAm.
Jeff Lawrence
news:is91h4pcvetpmvsc4...@4ax.com...
> I can see a worst case scenario where Obama wins the popular vote
Blimey, they have elections for everything in the US it seems. Just how
popular is Obama then? He seems like a decent enough chap, I'd say
he must be pretty popular.
Cheers
Jeff
Schrodinger
"Sam Nelson" <s...@ssrl.org.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.237ab944c...@news.zen.co.uk...
I think much of it is because they have tens of votes to cast; we were just
in California with some friends. They were telling us that you vote for the
president, the mayor (of LA), the congressman (I think), plus a load of
"propositions" - for example "prop 8" was to define marriage as between just
a man and a woman, "prop 7" was about renewable resources and it goes on.
Faced with that, it could easily take 10 or 15 minutes unless you went in
knowing exactly what you are voting for. Even Obama took 10 minutes in the
voting booth.
They tried using computers, until it was found they were open to fraud and
rigging (they may still do). Pre punched cards, while used, have the
problem of "hanging chads" and "normal" voting papers that we would use look
hellishly complicated and are easy to mix up.
Fred Finisterre
> hours in the rain,
I'm sorry to say that if I ever had to queue more than a few seconds to
vote, I'd walk away without doing so.
It's ridiculous in this day and age.
Fred.
Col
> to actually place that cross once in the polling booth can be two
> entirely different things.
>
The worst fear of the Democrats is that people, when it comes
down to it, no matter what they have told opinion pollsters, won't
be able to bring themselves to vote for a Black man.
An analogy happened during the 1992 UK election. Despite
a healthy opinion poll lead Kinnock still managed to lose. It has
been said that this was due to people when finally faced with
the stark reality of the ballot paper they simply couldn't bring
themselves to vote Labour.
As for this election, well I think Obama will win, but perhaps not
with quite the majority the polls are predicting.
Col
Col
"Schrodinger" <n...@way.com> wrote in message news:8f2Qk.14212$eT6....@newsfe28.ams2...
>
>
> I think much of it is because they have tens of votes to cast; we were just
> in California with some friends. They were telling us that you vote for the
> president, the mayor (of LA), the congressman (I think), plus a load of
> "propositions" - for example "prop 8" was to define marriage as between just
> a man and a woman, "prop 7" was about renewable resources and it goes on.
What an insane system.
That would be like us voting in a general election, local council elections
and various other local referenda all at once.
Madness.
Col
DAB sounds worse than FM
news:_NmdnSzGe9ZLLI3U...@bt.com
> <middl...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:is91h4pcvetpmvsc4...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Indeed it isn't. What people tell the pollsters and where they
>> decide
>> to actually place that cross once in the polling booth can be two
>> entirely different things.
>>
>
> The worst fear of the Democrats is that people, when it comes
> down to it, no matter what they have told opinion pollsters, won't
> be able to bring themselves to vote for a Black man.
>
> An analogy happened during the 1992 UK election. Despite
> a healthy opinion poll lead Kinnock still managed to lose. It has
> been said that this was due to people when finally faced with
> the stark reality of the ballot paper they simply couldn't bring
> themselves to vote Labour.
Perhaps they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a ginger-haired
Welshman?
> As for this election, well I think Obama will win, but perhaps not
> with quite the majority the polls are predicting.
If he doesn't win with the polls the way they've been, and this all
happening straight after the biggest financial crisis in decades which
was caused by the Republicans, I think we can safely say that a
largish percentage of Americans are still racist as fuck.
There was someone on the 6 o'clock news who said she was "scared" of
Obama being president. What on earth does she think he's giong to do?
--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info
The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
Sofa - Spud
Hmm so if Obama doesn't get in it's because they are all racists. Bit of
a catch 22 really isn't it?
DAB sounds worse than FM
news:geqe45$d63$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Read what I bleeding said. I said if he doesn't get in *with the polls
the way they've been* and *with the election following teh worst
financial crisis in decades, which was caused by the Republicans*.
He's been leading in the polls by a mile, so if McCain gets in you're
talking about 10% of people who said they'd vote for Obama and they
ended up voting McCain, and that'll probably be because they couldn't
face voting for a black president.
Sofa - Spud
*probably* but you've no evidence of this have you? Catch 22
Anyone who thinks they'll wake up Thursday with Obama in the whitehouse
and everything will be hunky dory will be in for a shock. Nothing will
change, he won't pull out of iraq or turn the US into something new.
Lets sit back and watch the fun
creepy
"Trust No One®" <dana....@usa.xnet> wrote in message
news:6nbmerF...@mid.individual.net...
There could be a BIG black backlash if Obama doesn't win now.
Accusations of vote rigging (again), and MEGA riots...
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/police-prepare-for-unrest-2008-10-21.html
Maybe it's all planned. You can't beat a *good* riot.
Sam Nelson
m...@address.invalid says...
The world is in doodoo anyway.
--
SAm.
Trust No One®
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:34:41 -0000, "Trust No One®"
> <dana....@usa.xnet> wrote:
>
>> on becoming the 44th president of the United States.
>>
>> Who knows? It's not all over until the fat lady sings.
>
> Indeed it isn't. What people tell the pollsters and where they decide
> to actually place that cross once in the polling booth can be two
> entirely different things.
>
--
Peter <X-Files fan>
Sofa - Spud
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:31:22 +0000, Sofa - Spud
> <comfy...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>> Read what I bleeding said. I said if he doesn't get in *with the polls
>>> the way they've been* and *with the election following teh worst
>>> financial crisis in decades, which was caused by the Republicans*.
>>>
>>> He's been leading in the polls by a mile, so if McCain gets in you're
>>> talking about 10% of people who said they'd vote for Obama and they
>>> ended up voting McCain, and that'll probably be because they couldn't
>>> face voting for a black president.
>> *probably* but you've no evidence of this have you? Catch 22
>
> won't.
The news just said *more* whites voted for Obama than had voted for
previous democrat candidates at elections. It's a landslide.
>
>> Anyone who thinks they'll wake up Thursday with Obama in the whitehouse
>> and everything will be hunky dory will be in for a shock. Nothing will
>> change, he won't pull out of iraq or turn the US into something new.
>
> Change and pulling out of Iraq by Thursday? Who said he would?
>
>> Lets sit back and watch the fun
>
> If Obama doesn't win by a landslide it will show how insane the
> betting is. Right now Obama is 1/20 to win, while McCain is 19/1.
>
> If America didn't have such a Marxist Government, and were allowed to
> gamble, they could all put $10,000 on McCain and become Republicans
> overnight.
>
> But if you think it's close, even the odds on Obama winning 251-300
> Electoral College votes (270 wins the election), are 10/1 and McCain
> to win 251-300 is 15/1.
>
Paul Hyett
wrote in uk.media.tv.misc :
>
>Anyone who thinks they'll wake up Thursday with Obama in the whitehouse
>and everything will be hunky dory will be in for a shock. Nothing will
>change, he won't pull out of iraq or turn the US into something new.
>
blacks excuses for under-achievement.
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
Sofa - Spud
I was thinking only of foreign policy - US internal problems don't
really concern me . Thouhg they were interviewng black americans in the
stret and a young bloke was going *get an education young blacks and
PULL YOUR TROUSERS UP!!**
LOL
DAB sounds worse than FM
news:germp6$7uu$1...@registered.motzarella.org
> Froot Bat wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:31:22 +0000, Sofa - Spud
>> <comfy...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>>> Read what I bleeding said. I said if he doesn't get in *with the
>>>> polls
>>>> the way they've been* and *with the election following teh worst
>>>> financial crisis in decades, which was caused by the
>>>> Republicans*.
>>>>
>>>> He's been leading in the polls by a mile, so if McCain gets in
>>>> you're
>>>> talking about 10% of people who said they'd vote for Obama and
>>>> they
>>>> ended up voting McCain, and that'll probably be because they
>>>> couldn't
>>>> face voting for a black president.
>>> *probably* but you've no evidence of this have you? Catch 22
>>
>> The evidence would be people saying they'll vote for him, when they
>> won't.
>
> The news just said *more* whites voted for Obama than had voted for
> previous democrat candidates at elections. It's a landslide.
I should hope so too. The Republicans were responsible for the
financial crisis and the Iraq war and Bush has had the lowest approval
ratings of any president since records began.
DAB sounds worse than FM
I was going on about the Bradley effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect
Clearly it didn't happen, thankfully.
> Anyone who thinks they'll wake up Thursday with Obama in the
> whitehouse
> and everything will be hunky dory will be in for a shock.
Yep, he doesn't start the job until January.
Seriously though, he will be a massive change from Bush. He's about at
the opposite end of the political spectrum to Bush and the neo-cons.
> Nothing will
> change, he won't pull out of iraq or turn the US into something new.
Before the financial crisis struck, the main issue in the US election
was Iraq, and he voted against the Iraq war, and he pledged to pull US
troops out ASAP. Now that he's got the job it remains to be seen how
long it'll take, but McCain was basically saying he was in favour of
keeping the troops there for as long as it takes (whatever "it" is) -
which could be years.
Sofa - Spud
Wasn't it Clinton who deregulated the mortgage market in the US?
Sofa - Spud
It will be interesting to see what happens - the want for change in the
US saw them queuing up to vote , you wouldn't get that here.
NOSP...@gmail.com
What did I hear? .95% voter turnout in some places ... Fat chance of
that happening here . Lucky if you get 60%
DAB sounds worse than FM
I think you must've mixed a few things up. There was a thread posted
by John Rowlands a few weeks ago where a right-wing magazine
unbelievably and ridiculously and disingenuously blamed the mortgage
crisis on Clinton despite the fact that he's not been president for
the last 8 years, and their logic was that they blamed it on him
because he encouraged mortgage lenders to lend money to poorer
families to allow them to own their own home.
That's a million miles away from saying that he deregulated the
mortgage market, and it's obviously ignoring the fact that as he's not
been president for 8 years so the people to blame are the Bush
governments over the last 8 years - it was teh financial shitstorm
that ultimately won the election for Obama, and as he only got 52% of
the vote, I reckon he'd have lost without the financial shitstorm.
Another thing you might have mixed this all up with was that the
Tories said last year that they were in favour of deregulating the
mortgage market because the mortgage companies were the ones taking
the risk.
Also remember that Clinton (and Obama) is a Democrat, and they're the
left-wing party, whereas deregulation is a right-wing policy, and Bush
and his neo-con freaks are as right-wing as you get.
Sofa - Spud
Well that's cleared that up then!
Mark A
> Also remember that Clinton (and Obama) is a Democrat, and they're the
> left-wing party, whereas deregulation is a right-wing policy, and Bush
> and his neo-con freaks are as right-wing as you get.
Democrats are right-wing. It's just that Republicans are
even more right-wingier. There is no true left-wing in US
politics.
Regards
Mark
DAB sounds worse than FM
Indeed. :-)
Frank Booth Snr
> "Sofa - Spud" <comfyso...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:ges75s$qkb$1...@registered.motzarella.org
> That's a million miles away from saying that he deregulated the
> mortgage market, and it's obviously ignoring the fact that as he's not
> been president for 8 years so the people to blame are the Bush
> governments over the last 8 years - it was teh financial shitstorm
> that ultimately won the election for Obama, and as he only got 52% of
> the vote, I reckon he'd have lost without the financial shitstorm.
>
Obama was likely to win whether the credit crunch had happened or not.
Even if you go back to summer of last year just before the credit
crunch broke, the US polls were already showing GWB as the most
unpopular President in history, and the Republicans were totally out
of favour. Had the credit crunch not occurred Obama would probably
still have won, helped by McCain's poor campaign and the public's
fatigue with the Repubicans..
Col
"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message
news:eU2Qk.828$dU....@newsfe13.ams2...
> >
> > The worst fear of the Democrats is that people, when it comes
> > down to it, no matter what they have told opinion pollsters, won't
> > be able to bring themselves to vote for a Black man.
> >
> > An analogy happened during the 1992 UK election. Despite
> > a healthy opinion poll lead Kinnock still managed to lose. It has
> > been said that this was due to people when finally faced with
> > the stark reality of the ballot paper they simply couldn't bring
> > themselves to vote Labour.
>
>
> Perhaps they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a ginger-haired
> Welshman?
The ginger-factor could have come into it, I must admit :)
>
> > As for this election, well I think Obama will win, but perhaps not
> > with quite the majority the polls are predicting.
>
>
> If he doesn't win with the polls the way they've been, and this all
> happening straight after the biggest financial crisis in decades which
> was caused by the Republicans, I think we can safely say that a
> largish percentage of Americans are still racist as fuck.
Well he ended up getting a point lead, however some of the last
polls I saw gave Obama a 10 point lead, or even more.
If not racism it could simply be more directly akin to the Kinnock
situation, people were scared of the step into the unknown, what
with Obama's relative lack of experience.
> There was someone on the 6 o'clock news who said she was "scared" of
> Obama being president. What on earth does she think he's giong to do?
No doulbt there are still a few Americans who are not all that far from
the line of thinking that the nasty black man will come and gobble their
children in their sleep.
Col
Col
>
> Well he ended up getting a point lead, however some of the last
^^^^^
4 point lead that is!
Col
Fred X
wrote:
The difference between the two candidates polls numbers was minimal
until the US government bank bail out. The Republicans could have still
won the election up until that point.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/629/7360265.stm
Fred X