First results in

[Ab]

First runs on the board for Obama!

First Results: Obama Takes Dixville Notch Away From The GOP
By Eric Kleefeld - November 4, 2008, 12:23AM

The first results are in for the 2008 general election, with the small village of Dixville Notch, New Hampshire again performing its tradition of having everyone turn out to vote at midnight and then immediately reporting the results.

And the count is a real shocker, as just read on CNN: Obama 15 votes, McCain six votes -- in a place that has only voted Democratic once in the 50 years they've been doing this tradition.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpoi...takes_dixv.php

[chiQ]

Small republican town...votes for Obama. YAY!

[Sgt Seb]

lol...good start.

[CCS]

Is it too early to break out the party hats and streamers? Or would that just be naive of me?

[BloodDonor]

Originally Posted by CCS

Is it too early to break out the party hats and streamers? Or would that just be naive of me?

after the 2000 election, you bet

[Torka]

Man, if someone had told me in 2000 or 2004 that America would elect a black man named Barack Hussein Obama president...

[blynk]

But at the time of the 2000 election, the name hussein and obama would have meant nothing to them.

A black man, yes.

[Torka]

But at the time of the 2000 election, the name hussein...would have meant nothing to them.

uh

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by chiQ

Small republican town...votes for Obama. YAY!

Yep, "real" American's for Obama it seems.

[Deadmeat]

Now it's just a matter of time before bush forces the justice department to intervene, striking 10 of the votes off the record calling the whole thing 6-5 for mccain and declaring the election over.

[Jonas Undrawing]

Originally Posted by blynk

Why are they calling it Gulf War II? Why have a sequel first?

chronologically confused eh blynk?

[blynk]

Yes, I know about the Gulf War, but was that not 1991?
9 years prior, and how many would have even cared? I could imagine that the main reason everyone cares this time is 9/11 -> Terrorists -> Muslims -> "WMDs" -> Iraq.

My opinion is that the name would not have meant as much to most Americans at that point.

[DrTiTus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxl4lQ8tmdM

[Kryten]

http://isobamapresidentyet.com/

[CCS]

http://www.hastheworldvotedforobamayet.com.org


I just wanted to post a link :/

[Evoke]

watching all the different results, I realise that I have no clue how american elections work. it appears they don't just count the votes of each individual, there's various states and some states get more votes than others (I assume that's a size thing), and there is house and all those other elections.. i'm lost :/

[Macca@Work]

Originally Posted by Evoke

watching all the different results, I realise that I have no clue how american elections work. it appears they don't just count the votes of each individual, there's various states and some states get more votes than others (I assume that's a size thing), and there is house and all those other elections.. i'm lost :/

Heard that.

[BadNova]

Looks like George W. Bush is going to leave an interesting legacy. He fucked up badly enough that even racist ol' America looks to be willing to elect a black president to avoid having a new commander in chief who has a chance of being even remotely like the previous one.

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by Evoke

watching all the different results, I realise that I have no clue how american elections work. it appears they don't just count the votes of each individual, there's various states and some states get more votes than others (I assume that's a size thing), and there is house and all those other elections.. i'm lost :/

What is the ``electoral college''? What is its role in the election of the President and Vice President of the United States?
The President and Vice President of the United States are elected by electors, individuals who are chosen in the November general election in Presidential election years. The electors meet in their respective States on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to vote, separately, for President and Vice President. Although the term does not appear in the Constitution, the electors are collectively known as the electoral college.

Each State is assigned a number of electors equal to the total of its Senators and Representatives in the U.S. Congress. The District of Columbia, under the 23rd Amendment, chooses a number equal to that assigned to the least populous State (three). The electoral college currently comprises 538 members when constituted. The Constitution requires that candidates for President and Vice President receive an absolute majority of electoral votes in order to be elected (270 of the current total of 538).

From here: http://usinfo.state.gov/infousa/gove...alProcess.html

In other words, if the US population picks more blue guys than red guys in their state, then there'll be more blue 'electors' when they come around to voting for the President in December.

The more senators and congress reps a state has, the more electoral college votes it has (eg: NY has 31, California 55, Maine 4 etc).

[Ab]

Remember there are three elections going on simultaneously today.

House (Congress) - each state sends a number of "Representatives" (MPs) to Washington proportional to its population, and each "District" (electorate) gets to choose its own representative from whatever party, or no party, as voters decide.

Senate - each state sends two Senators to Washington.

President - the voters of each state get to nominate their preferred candidate for President. Each state has an "Elector" in the "Electoral College" with a number of votes to cast for President proportional to the state in question. The President is determined by the votes in the Electoral College - not the number of votes cast by voters, and not by the number of states won. The convention is that the Electors will cast their votes according the popular vote in each state (although interestingly enough they don't HAVE to). It is for this reason that certain states are more important than others - a state with lots of residents like California has far more "electoral votes" than a state with few residents like Alaska.

Some populous states are predictable - California always votes Democrat, Texas always votes Republican. However there are a few hyper-important states with large populations and where the race is traditionally close. These include Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. They're so important that one could almost say something like "the guy who wins Ohio AND Florida wins everything".

Ha! In the time it took to type this, MSNBC has just reported Texas as "too close to call".

[Foggerty]

Originally Posted by Ab

The convention is that the Electors will cast their votes according the popular vote in each state (although interestingly enough they don't HAVE to).

Wait, what?!? If a state overwhelmingly votes for candidate A, there's nothing to stop the elector from voting for candidate B if they choose?

So the only real way anyone's vote could be said to count for anything is in their choice of representative and senator?

*goes off to read up on electoral college.....*

[Ab]

An Elector who votes against the popular vote of his state is a Faithless Elector.

Historically the Electoral College was a concession to the Southern states who wanted big influence in the Presidential election - non-voting slaves (as population) counted towards a state's electoral-vote count.

[BadNova]

Originally Posted by Foggerty

Wait, what?!? If a state overwhelmingly votes for candidate A, there's nothing to stop the elector from voting for candidate B if they choose?

That's right. Electoral college!

[Yoda]

Honestly, it makes mmp look simple.

[Cyberbob]

And the reason it's not just one big popularity vote, is that back when it was all about the founding fathers, they didn't want nominees just going to highly populated areas, winning them, and forgetting about the rest of the country.

Another reason for the college, is so that the popular vote doesn't just get in automagically on promises to give all the rich peoples money to the poor people.
The founding fathers put a bunch of rich people in control of the presidential voting system (ie the college) to make sure the popular vote won't take their precious pot of gold ;D
So even if the Robin Hood nominee wins the popular vote, the rich college can just choose someone else.

[Ab]

To make a ridiculous generalisation, the USA was set up so that stupid poor people couldn't override the wishes of educated rich people. There are always going to be more stupid poor people than educated rich people, so the US political system is set up with "checks and balances" so that the wishes of the many do not automatically override the wishes of the few.

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by Ab

To make a .. generalisation, the USA was set up so that stupid poor people couldn't override the wishes of educated rich people. There are always going to be more stupid poor people than educated rich people, so the US political system is set up with "checks and balances" so that the wishes of the many do not automatically override the wishes of the few.

Fix't.

[Foggerty]

Hm, reminds me, I must get around to finishing Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"; he said pretty much the same thing

[Saladin]

This one's a much better read

http://www.amazon.com/Cartoon-Histor...5854652&sr=8-1

[Evoke]

so those explanations pretty much make today's voting-watching pointless - we won't know the real deal till december..

[Foggerty]

Christ they have a lot of things to vote on.

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by Evoke

so those explanations pretty much make today's voting-watching pointless - we won't know the real deal till december..

Technically the result won't be 'official' until December; but in this case it's looking so overwhelming that the chance it will change from the popular vote is virtually zero.

[Foggerty]

Originally Posted by Evoke

so those explanations pretty much make today's voting-watching pointless - we won't know the real deal till december..

That wasn't the impression I got when I read up on the electoral college.*

* BY "read up" I mean following Ab's link and finding a partial FAQ on it

[caffiend]

[Obama] is .. projected to have won: Vermont, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Delaware, Massachusetts, District of Columbia, Maryland, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York, Rhode Island.

AKA: The Godless Liberal States.

Mr McCain is projected to have won: Kentucky, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming, Georgia, Louisiana, West Virginia, Texas, Mississippi, Utah.

AKA: The Redneck Fundamentalist States