[709]

Curious about how many of us have already voted, or are waiting for the Big Day™

Myself, I've already tossed my absentee ballot into the mailbox. Did it last cycle too.

I just thought it may be fun to see how many here at AN did the same or are waiting until Tuesday to get in line.

[Messiahtosh]

Voting for Romney/Ryan and George Allen on Tuesday in the battleground state of Virginia.

[Quagmire]

Sent in my absentee ballot today. Wrote in Stewart/Colbert. MD goes blue anyway, so I voted in protest. I can't stand Romney and disappointed in Obama and I hate voting for the lesser of two evils.

[709]

That's not a protest vote, Quag, it's a vote. Point. Protest votes don't exist.

I applaud you for writing in a capable candidate (comparatively), but "LOL my vote doesn't matter because my state will go this way regardless" is a bit off. Still, you voted, and that's saying something.

Hopefully you were a bit more concise with your state elections and propositions.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by 709 That's not a protest vote, Quag, it's a vote. Point. Protest votes don't exist. I applaud you for writing in a capable candidate (comparatively), but "LOL my vote doesn't matter because my state will go this way regardless" is a bit off. Still, you voted, and that's saying something. Hopefully you were a bit more concise with your state elections and propositions.

I know it's a vote, but I called it a protest vote as I was making a statement that I am disgusted with our current system. I never said my vote doesn't count, but it is fact that MD goes blue anyway. If I was in a battleground state, I may have voted differently since I do hope Obama wins over Romney. But since there wasn't pressure to vote for the lesser of two evils, I voted to make my voice heard.

As for the state elections, I haven't kept up on the senate/house race, so I didn't vote on state officials. As for the props, I know there is a proposition to expand gambling to fund education. I voted for it because people don't want to see their taxes raised so might as well have the people stupid enough to gamble it away pay for education. If people were willing to have their taxes raised, I would have voted against it.

[709]

Yeah, I get that. Hell, one of my deepest secrets is that I voted for Nader.

Just saying though.

I'm glad you at least took an interest in the state politics. So many people don't.

[Ryan]

I voted last week in early voting.

There really weren't any competitive races on my ballot. I'm pretty sure I live in *the* most conservative zip code in America. I was in Ron Paul's district but starting next year I've been redistricted into another one and I have no respect for the incumbent (R) but his opponent is absolutely insane.

I give you Kesha Rogers. Democrat running for the TX-22.

Our Senate race isn't even worth talking about—Cruz will win around 99% of the vote. No gubernatorial race this time around.

Other than Congressional rep, I voted L down the ballot, including Gary Johnson. Every non-statewide race is a contest between an R incumbent and an L challenger who doesn't stand a chance. I don't live inside city limits so there are no city council seats to vote on and Texas doesn't have ballot initiatives.

[thegelding]

voted first day of early voting...with my wife...thank god New Mexico is no longer a swing state and we had almost zero political commercials...I got spoiled by my years in Maryland...Now New Mexico is the same...yeah for all us libs....

g

[Bryson]

Holy crap, I see what you mean about Kesha Rogers. She's the democrat candidate? Wait, what?

[709]

Wait what. Was that Obama with a Hitler mustache that just slid by me? wtf?

What are LeDouche Democrats? Like, Douches, but Le New? Holy Fuck do I miss living in Texas. The weirdest and most awesome state in the union.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by 709 Wait what. Was that Obama with a Hitler mustache that just slid by me? wtf? What are LeDouche Democrats? Like, Douches, but Le New? Holy Fuck do I miss living in Texas. The weirdest and most awesome state in the union.

Yea, the campaign signs are fun. Half of them just say "KESHA ROGERS - LAROUCHE DEMOCRAT." I laugh every time—who the hell knows what a LaRouche Democrat is?

There's also someone here going around cutting the middle of campaign signs out and replacing them with these:


Re-Elect Guns and Tacos for Mayhem! I'd get behind the food portion. #Dunlavy #Westheimer by kalebdf, on Flickr

[torifile]

I voted last week. I also spent some time calling NC voters and knocking on doors over the weekend. I plan to spend much of Tuesday doing whatever is needed to GOTV.

[709]

Originally Posted by Ryan Yea, the campaign signs are fun. Half of them just say "KESHA ROGERS - LAROUCHE DEMOCRAT." I laugh every time—who the hell knows what a LaRouche Democrat is? There's also someone here going around cutting the middle of campaign signs out and replacing them...

See? SEE?!?!

I swear I'll get back there for good someday.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by Quagmire I know it's a vote, but I called it a protest vote as I was making a statement that I am disgusted with our current system. I never said my vote doesn't count, but it is fact that MD goes blue anyway. If I was in a battleground state, I may have voted differently since I do hope Obama wins over Romney. But since there wasn't pressure to vote for the lesser of two evils, I voted to make my voice heard. As for the state elections, I haven't kept up on the senate/house race, so I didn't vote on state officials. As for the props, I know there is a proposition to expand gambling to fund education. I voted for it because people don't want to see their taxes raised so might as well have the people stupid enough to gamble it away pay for education. If people were willing to have their taxes raised, I would have voted against it.

Oh yeah, MD is just awesome!

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Messiahtosh Oh yeah, MD is just awesome!

I never said taxes don't need to be reformed. But at the same time, our financial situation isn't going to be solved by simply cutting spending on low spending programs since the GOP won't touch the Defense Budget and the Dems won't touch the social programs.

[709]

Not sure why I cant get Spec's blocking thing going, but whatever.

[edit]: Wooo! Now it's working. I love it.

[Kickaha]

It's glorious.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by Quagmire I never said taxes don't need to be reformed. But at the same time, our financial situation isn't going to be solved by simply cutting spending on low spending programs since the GOP won't touch the Defense Budget and the Dems won't touch the social programs.

Entitlement spending = 54% of federal spending. Defense is around 17%.

[AWR]

I voted from abroad by absentee ballot (pdf to Wake County, NC - so simple, no more shipping all of these documents forth and back) a few weeks ago. Wanting to confirm a couple of procedural details before doing so, I had an eye-poppingly civilized, informative, and prompt exchange with an official working in the County Board of Elections. Someone was reading my simple questions and fashioning relevant responses rather than dumping 14 paragraphs of boilerplate on my screen. It was like a dream.

[Matsu]

Voting for Romney is incomprehensible to me - you'd have to have had you head in the sand for the last 30 years.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Messiahtosh Entitlement spending = 54% of federal spending. Defense is around 17%.

Both still need to be cut and/or reformed. There is no reason why we need a $700 billion defense budget. We need to stop waving around the Teddy's big stick and mind our own freaking business.

[Naderfan]

Voting on election day here in Ohio, the only state that matters. I'll be so happy when this election is over. The other day, I made the mistake of watching a show on a local network during primetime (rather than DVRing it). Honest to goodness, the commercial breaks were exclusively political ads.

[ronmexico]

Originally Posted by Matsu Voting for Romney is incomprehensible to me - you'd have to have had you head in the sand for the last 30 years.

Trillions of debt, a higher unemployment rate than when he took office, failed promises on major issues, and a health care system in disarray. Sure...Obama looks very attractive! But hey...he took out Bin Laden

[Quagmire]

Unemployment is back where it was when he took office. Next talking point....

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Quagmire Unemployment is back where it was when he took office. Next talking point....

I believe unemployment is actually still higher than in January 2009.

Jan. 09: 7.6%

Oct. 12: 7.9%

The number of those marginally attached to the labor force went from 2.1 million in 01/09 to 2.4 million in 10/12. Same links. Discouraged worker numbers are up from 4 years ago but down from one year ago.

Not taking sides, just pointing out some relevant statistics.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Ryan I believe unemployment is actually still higher than in January 2009. Jan. 09: 7.6% Oct. 12: 7.9% The number of those marginally attached to the labor force went from 2.1 million in 01/09 to 2.4 million in 10/12. Same links. Discouraged worker numbers are up from 4 years ago but down from one year ago. Not taking sides, just pointing out some relevant statistics.

My point is that it is a talking point. Discuss something more than just, " DEBT!!! SOCIALISM!!! JOBS!!!!". The president can only do so much to effect the economy( especially with the deadlocked Congress we have). What will improve the economy is consumers. If there is more demand, companies will hire more people. They are not going to hire more people than necessary. If they can get the production they need from their current work force, they will. Just because the government lowered taxes for the purpose of spurring job growth, doesn't mean the companies will take the money saved in taxes and use it to hire more people. Most likely they will just pocket it into the companies bank account or the executives will give themselves fat bonuses for a job well done. There is only so much the government can do. The Stimulus plan would have been more effective in areas the government can control like rebuilding our aging infrastructure. There was more infrastructure spending in the original stimulus bill, but the GOP successfully labeled it as pork/pet projects and we got tax breaks, credits, etc instead.

What I find funny is that I believe Romney is saying that he can fix our economy in 8-10 years. So why shouldn't we give Obama 8 years to fix our economy? It took us 8 years to get us into this mess. Four years is not enough to fix it. Look at how long it took to get out of the Great Depression..... And it took us getting involved in WWII( due to the increased DEMAND for a bigger workforce to build war materials) to fully get out of it. What FDR did was prevent it from getting any worse.

[Ryan]

I agree that the President really can't do that much to directly fix the economy.

However, I don't think jobs are coming back and I think we're quickly heading back to >10% unemployment. Automation—robots, software, etc.—are going to eliminate great swaths of today's workforce. Taxi and truck drivers will be gone due to self-driving vehicles. The manufacturing that is in the US is increasingly turning to automated production. Nothing will turn back that tide. We're in the awkward transition period where jobs are being eliminated but the next wave of employment hasn't been invented yet.

This isn't a defense of either candidate, just how I see our current situation. The key is to free entrepreneurs to create these jobs and I don't believe the policies of either man will help that.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by Ryan I agree that the President really can't do that much to directly fix the economy. However, I don't think jobs are coming back and I think we're quickly heading back to >10% unemployment. Automation—robots, software, etc.—are going to eliminate great swaths of today's workforce. Taxi and truck drivers will be gone due to self-driving vehicles. The manufacturing that is in the US is increasingly turning to automated production. Nothing will turn back that tide. We're in the awkward transition period where jobs are being eliminated but the next wave of employment hasn't been invented yet.

which is why its wise to invest in education, alternative energy, and scientific and medical research.

One party in this two party race has actually acknowledged everything you said... the other has completely denied all of that.

I don't think the key is necessarily to free entrepreneurs to create these jobs. For all this talk about how hard it is to start a business in this country, we have witnessed before our eyes in the last 8 years beyond explosive growth in certain industries, most notably the technology industry.... and the only thing holding it back is a lack of experienced workers... not government policies. Groupon hired close to 200 people in chicago alone.... in a month.


But education in America is at a standstill and Americans want the reward without working for it and investing in our future. And that's not an endorsement of the republican thinking... they just think things should go back to the way they always were.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses One party in this two party race has actually acknowledged everything you said... the other has completely denied all of that.

I don't think either party has acknowledged this. Both seem to be stuck in the idea that jobs can just be brought back from China. Some will, but what happens as accounting departments go from 100 people to 10 because software can made those other 90 redundant?

It's no longer just manual labor that's being taken over, automation is quickly reaching into skilled labor and the realm of supposedly-safe knowledge workers.

10%, frankly, would be an understatement of the unemployment level this will bring us to. I wouldn't be surprised by 25-30%.

The people Groupon is hiring aren't going to be retrained auto workers. That's a pipe dream.

[Brave Ulysses]

I don't think either party has acknowledged this. Both seem to be stuck in the idea that jobs can just be brought back from China.

from the 2nd debate:

CROWLEY: Let me to go the president here because we really are running out of time. And the question is can we ever get -- we can't get wages like that. It can't be sustained. OBAMA: Candy, there are some jobs that are not going to come back. Because they are low wage, low skill jobs. I want high wage, high skill jobs. That's why we have to emphasize manufacturing. That's why we have to invest in advanced manufacturing. That's why we've got to make sure that we've got the best science and research in the world. And when we talk about deficits, if we're adding to our deficit for tax cuts for folks who don't need them, and we're cutting investments in research and science that will create the next Apple, create the next new innovation that will sell products around the world, we will lose that race.

And he has actually been torn apart by the republicans and Fox News for saying that.
http://www.mittromney.com/news/press...oing-come-back

t's no longer just manual labor that's being taken over, automation is quickly reaching into skilled labor and the realm of supposedly-safe knowledge workers. 10%, frankly, would be an understatement of the unemployment level this will bring us to. I wouldn't be surprised by 25-30%.

That is not a new problem. That is the way the world works and has forever. You don't think the computer 30 years ago replaced a lot of workers? Architecture firms use to staff hundreds of drafters. Now a single architect with maybe 2-5 staffers (if not alone) can draft an entire building and associated documents.

The people Groupon is hiring aren't going to be retrained auto workers. That's a pipe dream.

Of course not. But cars still need to be built.... all those employees hired by tech companies spend money, build houses, build offices, buy goods and services.....

There use to be a lot of shipbuilders and railroad track layers in this country too. Do you know anyone who builds ships today?