By
contributing to Online
Onslaught,
you'll help make sure we're around for years to come. Toss us as little as
a few bucks, or as much as your generosity allows. Thanks!
Posts 1993
Registered 2-17-2006 Location columbus, oh Member Is Offline
Mood: witchy
posted on 11-9-2012 at 07:31 PM
OOMike: http://www.punshouse.com/ for my two cents about voting.
I'll probably be up to my eyeballs in stats and exit polls so I'll see what I can find out about educated white women. Although usually
the polls don't get that specific, at least at this stage.
resident sorceress and necromancer in training.
[DevSop] god your sex life scares me
MHJ: "if it is kinky, depraved, erotic, or a fetish, you will find it"
chretienbabacool
The Great One
Posts 3347
Registered 3-5-2003 Location Columbia, MO Member Is Offline
Mood: Go Cubs!
posted on 11-9-2012 at 07:34 PM
Even if you don't vote for President, there's always a host of issues and down ticket candidates to vote for. Sometimes the more local it
is, the more rewarding it is to vote.
doctorb
Posts 1320
Registered 6-27-2007 Location Where everyone is rich but me Member Is Offline
Mood: need coffee
posted on 11-9-2012 at 08:40 PM
quote:Originally posted by OOMikeOn a slightly different topic, I would like some opinions on a thought I have had kicking around for a couple
of days. There are a lot of people who did not like anyone running and decided not to vote at all, my thought is would it be more effective to have
their voices heard by showing up to vote and not voting in that race? I have not heard the numbers but I am assuming about 50-55% of eligible voters
actually voted (about normal), so politicians know that 45% of the voters don't bother and so they ignore them for the most part. My thought is
if instead of being a non-voter, some of these people become abstaining voters by showing that they care about the election, they just don't
like what the canidates are offering. You don't think Mitt would love to know that he could have done a couple of tweeks to pick up 1-2%
points? Maybe this would lead to more moderate canidates from both parties, less negative campaigning, more resposiblity in government. My wife
pointed out that the draw back would be more targeted ads and phone calls for her before election. What do you guys think? Would it be more trouble
than its worth, or would it have the possiblity of changing things for the better?
They should vote third party, even if it means a write in.
quote:Originally posted by salmonjunkie
It's absolutely the social issues.
I'm not so sure. I would agree for the white 18 to 35 demographic, but blacks and latinos are traditionally more socially conservative.
Latino's don't support abortion, blacks don't support gay marriage, black men don't support any marriage! ~zing! And yet they
vote for democrats 90something% for blacks and 71% for latinos, and I think they outnumber white 18 to 35 singles.
I think the republicans shutting the hell up on all matters gay would be a good thing, but if they say, Hey, the democrats went from safe, legal, and
rare to safe, legal, and free for all so we'll take up the safe, legal, and rare position it won't help them with minorities.
I don't know what will, and I'm rather disillusioned about it.
I think the idea of liberty still works. The left says the democrats want to let me live my life and the republicans want to dictate what I can do
with myself. The right says the democrats want to control what I buy and how I do my job and what I can do with my own house. I think a consistent
message about personal liberty would go far.
I'm not sure if it would go far enough, though. There are an awful lot of people who simply don't want liberty. 25% unemployment among
young adults and $8 gas hasn't changed any minds in Europe, so I think we may be screwed. There's a joke that republicans sign the front
of the check and democrats sing the back. If there's any truth to that, the republicans are going away quickly.
The "B" is for Bargain!
Thom
The Immortal One
Posts 4045
Registered 1-14-2003 Location At the Sink Member Is Offline
Mood: Dirty
posted on 11-9-2012 at 08:52 PM
quote:Originally posted by doctorb
They should vote third party, even if it means a write in.
That's what I did. I'm under no illusion that my vote is going to change anyone's mind. However, if enough people that are
disillusioned with the major party candidates voted for write-ins - or whatever 3rd party is on the ballot? That might wake some people up.
On the other hand, I wonder how many people don't vote simply because they realize that the person they vote for is going to win their state,
anyway? Such as someone from California not voting for President Obama because he was all but guaranteed to win California anyway. Same thing with
someone from South Dakota not voting for Mitt Romney because he was going to win SD regardless. I'm sure there's more than a few people
out there that didn't vote simply because they didn't want to "waste their time" voting for someone that was obviously going to win -
and vice versa.
"I'm actually not wearing pants, and that's how I watch NXT every single week." - CM Punk
"These replacement refs couldn't find a pimp hand to smack down with if Shaft personally showed them." - cbbc, in the NFL 2012 thread
doctorb
Posts 1320
Registered 6-27-2007 Location Where everyone is rich but me Member Is Offline
Mood: need coffee
posted on 11-10-2012 at 02:32 PM
quote:Originally posted by Thom
On the other hand, I wonder how many people don't vote simply because they realize that the person they vote for is going to win their state,
anyway? Such as someone from California not voting for President Obama because he was all but guaranteed to win California anyway. Same thing with
someone from South Dakota not voting for Mitt Romney because he was going to win SD regardless. I'm sure there's more than a few people
out there that didn't vote simply because they didn't want to "waste their time" voting for someone that was obviously going to win -
and vice versa.
To me, that's still a cop out. I typically vote libertarian because I know the democrat is going to win IL, but that's actually freeing to
me. I can vote for the best candidate regardless of electability. And even though it doesn't count it still adds to the vote total. If the
presidential election started going from 50.1 to 49 to "all others" adding up to 0.9% to 49-47-4 to 43-40-17 then people might sit up and take
notice.
Of course, Perot got 17 or 18% once and then said Bush tried to kill his daughter on her wedding day, so I may be totally full of shit and nothing
will ever change.
[Edited on 11-10-2012 by doctorb]
The "B" is for Bargain!
firewoman
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1993
Registered 2-17-2006 Location columbus, oh Member Is Offline
Mood: witchy
posted on 11-10-2012 at 07:58 PM
Third party candidates can and have won elections all over the place. The only thing they can't YET win is the presidency, and that's
thanks to the stranglehold the two main parties have on the FEC. When the board is half Republican and half Democrat, that's what you get.
Change that, though, and it's a whole new ball game.
Only way TO change that would be if at some point a third party wins the majority in a state and gets the electoral votes. Well, I mean, the FEC can
decide to accept it, but I nearly laughed out loud at that. Only way to get THEM to change it, is to demand it. Via your vote.
Third party candidates have ALSO had an affect by influencing the platform of the two big parties. Historically the platforms have shifted, and
that's at least in part due to the increasing power of third parties, especially I think, the libertarians. It's a slow change, but
it's there nonetheless.
resident sorceress and necromancer in training.
[DevSop] god your sex life scares me
MHJ: "if it is kinky, depraved, erotic, or a fetish, you will find it"
Paddlefoot
Posts 2369
Registered 1-19-2008 Location basement Member Is Offline
Mood: Hurr durr derp
posted on 11-10-2012 at 08:46 PM
From Ross Perot through to Jesse Ventura, independents are rife with all sorts of baggage and kookery of their own. That's why most of them are
one-termers (Jesse) or flash-in-the-pan types (Perot) who get a lot of short term attention and then disappear just as quickly. If anything,
what's gone wrong with the GOP over the last decade (the last four years especially) is that the radical and violent nutcase independents that
were once banished from the party have now been successfully re-integrated courtesy of the Tea Party movement. The John Birchers were gone, but they
got into the Tea Party under different names and are now back. Ditto with the fundy fuckfaces from Operation Rescue, the most obvious example of which
in this last cycle was Todd Akin. By making life impossible in the GOP for Nixon/Reagan/BushTheElder-era moderates, they drove them out of the party
and the spaces got filled by the types advocated by hate-radio and the astroturf groups set up by Karl Rove, Dick Armey, and the Koch brothers. With
no counter-balance provided by the essentially extinct old northeast Republican elite or moderates anymore I doubt that the GOP ridding themselves of
the troublemakers, even if they wanted them to all get lost, is even possible at this point.
The conventional wisdom being pushed now is that conservatives are finally going to have to re-examine themselves, their policies, their behaviours,
and their overall approach to how they go about things. I dispute this. I think this latest loss is going to piss them off even more and they're
going to double-down on the irrationality, the partisan hatred, the congressional obstructionism, and most of all with the overall douchebaggery on
the radio, the internet, and on FOX. Conservative, moderate, and liberal might all be dead terms from a bygone age anyway. The real fight now seems to
be, to borrow from chemistry and physics, between stable and radical elements. At the moment the Dems are controlled by stables and the GOP are
controlled by radicals. Whether or not any progress or compromise is even possible between two such polar opposites is debatable.
[Edited on 11/10/2012 by Paddlefoot]
GW Bush read Camus because "everyone has to read a book written by a killer whale" - General JC Christian
I downloaded the soundtrack to "Song of the South," and it's 45 minutes of whipcracks, women pleading "please, no," and people screaming.
- the esteemed Dr. Mobute
When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir? - John Maynard Keynes
firewoman
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1993
Registered 2-17-2006 Location columbus, oh Member Is Offline
Mood: witchy
posted on 11-10-2012 at 09:39 PM
Yeah, but one of the guys on the Today show today (name blanking) said it this way.
"We have to re examine our message and change it so that it is more palatable to the changing demographic."
Or words to that affect. Not change what we're saying. Change how we're saying it, so we can trick 'em back over to our side.
resident sorceress and necromancer in training.
[DevSop] god your sex life scares me
MHJ: "if it is kinky, depraved, erotic, or a fetish, you will find it"
drmuerto
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1302
Registered 11-17-2005 Location Charlotte, NC Member Is Offline
Mood: PhDeceased
posted on 11-11-2012 at 12:08 AM
quote:Originally posted by doctorb
....latinos are traditionally more socially conservative.
Not quite true. "Some 32% of Hispanics and 34% of all U.S. adults say
their political views are �very conservative� or �conservative.�
However, Latinos are more likely than the general public to describe their views as liberal. Overall, 30% of Latino adults say this, while just 21% of
all U.S. adults say the same."
quote:Latino's don't support abortion
Sort of true. But it's by no means universal. In fact it's 51% who say that abortion should be illegal in "all or most cases", and
there's probably a bit of a split between the all or most. (see link above)
quote:blacks don't support gay marriage
Not quite true. A national exit poll by
Edison Research shows that black voters favored their state legalizing gay marriage, 51 to 41 percent.
This suggests that Republicans maybe need to rethink their strategy on this sort of wedge social issue. I think that there is good evidence out there
that the African-Americans and Latinos were much more motivated to vote for social and economic policies that they took to be much more important
like, oh I don't know, improved access to health care.
quote:There's a joke that republicans sign the front of the check and democrats sing the back.
It's funny 'cuz it's not true.
"Among states that voted
Republican in the last three elections, all but one gets more money back from the federal government than it pays in taxes. For most Democratic
states, it�s the opposite. Looked at this way, the red states are the moochers and the blue states are the makers."
BBMN
HAVES A CROOKED DICK!! !
Posts 1505
Registered 6-27-2007 Location 1984 Member Is Offline
Mood: Prayer Fight
posted on 11-11-2012 at 10:57 PM
...
BBMN has attached this image:
BBMN
HAVES A CROOKED DICK!! !
Posts 1505
Registered 6-27-2007 Location 1984 Member Is Offline
Mood: Prayer Fight
posted on 11-11-2012 at 11:00 PM
...
BBMN has attached this image:
Oh Japan....
Live Better.
williamssl
Steers and Queers
Posts 4894
Registered 1-11-2004 Location Hippieville Member Is Offline
Mood: Fuck USC
posted on 11-12-2012 at 08:47 PM
Don't Mess With Texas
LAST CHANCE FOR A TWILIGHT AVATAR PARTY!
williamssl
Steers and Queers
Posts 4894
Registered 1-11-2004 Location Hippieville Member Is Offline
Mood: Fuck USC
posted on 11-14-2012 at 06:52 PM
Well...so much
for that wishful thinking.....
I thought the members elected their leadership, not their leadership saying "fuck you I'm still your leader".
Don't Mess With Texas
LAST CHANCE FOR A TWILIGHT AVATAR PARTY!
OORick
Intellectual Savior of the Masses
Posts 2383
Registered 12-27-2001 Location - The Birthplace of Aviation Member Is Offline
Mood: You're Welcome.
posted on 11-16-2012 at 02:54 AM
Presented without editorial comment, for those interested in post-mortem-y stuff:
For full size, or if the img link is broken/disallowed by NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2012/11/10/opinion/marshpdf.html?ref=sunday-review
I also thought this series of maps was moderately interesting: http://news.yahoo.com/photos/2012-election-maps-slideshow/
Rick
[Edited on 11-16-2012 by OORick]
"He's from Mars, Officer; whiskey does not affect alien beings." -- Venus Flytrap speaking on The Rick
