2012 US Presidential Election

[zherok]

However seeing this stupid 50 - 49 result every fucking time in US election concludes that US election is rigged. There is nothing natural about these results. It seems like the whole thing was manipulated by news network because they benefit from such close elections, which provide thrilling newsflashes for them.

I'm not sure how you reconcile MSNBC and FOX colluding together to manipulate the vote count. Or why CNN would be so ridiculously hesitant to avoid repeating the 2000 election by calling stuff early that they opt to call things ten minutes after every other network does.

The gap has never been that wide in American politics. There has never been a popular vote separated by more than 26%. And that's definitely not a typical spread even then. Unless you're suggesting that the media has had this sort of influence throughout the entire history of the United States, it's just how US politics operate.

I suspect it has to do with the strength of the two parties and the virtual insignificance of most third parties in most elections. It allows the two to operate rather close together on the political spectrum. They may call each other communist or nazies, but you can see European elections with ACTUAL communists and nazis running at the same time. And they win seats! The closest the US comes is seating the occasional independent (or a former democrat/republican dropping the label to become one while in office.)

[AceHigh]

Not that wide? 1% or less is ridiculous. You can tell me all you want about people being split in the middle, but that evenly? Bullshit.

[zherok]

Right, media corporations with dramatically different political drives manage to pull a con over a nation of nearly 315 million people spread out across 3.7 million miles without anything leaking out. Totally Occam's Razor.

The networks obviously seek to overplay the closeness for ratings purposes. But the results have been predictable for months. See Nate Silver's blog at the NY Times, for example.

Even the idea of election fraud doesn't suggest that someone manipulate the entire election. Manipulating the result to favor a candidate in a single swing state would be a huge endeavor as is, to manipulate it across the entire United States in order to ensure it stays close is pure tin foil hat territory.

And again, it's hard to argue the merits of such a plan when there's pretty clear winners and losers based specifically on how they covered the election. If they all knew the end result in advance, you certainly wouldn't have seen FOX acting the way it did tonight, or again, CNN so worried it'd repeat it's 2000 performance.

[AceHigh]

Don't assume that I am talking about some grand conspiracy. However it is the same principle as the hysteria at the stock exchange: fucking contagious. It's the same thing with general population, the networks aren't orchestrating something grand, but their actions do manipulate the outcome on the national level.

This must be especially easy when the typical average population of the country are mindless passive receptors that park their ass in front of the TV. Let's bomb them with political ads and see how it tips the polls, then let's report the doom and gloom on the result and see how it raises the viewers hungry for some dramatic development.

This is not a conspiracy we are talking about, it's business that is causing a side effect. Roughly six billion dollars spent on this election. About half of that on ads in media, obviously you must be right how little role the media plays in this.

There is an old saying in politics, "half the money spent on campaigns is wasted," the problem is you don't know which half it is. At some point, the spending is only serving the financial interests of the TV stations, who are making a fortune from ads, and the campaign consultants - not the interests of the American people. Spending money in a campaign in the abstract is not a problem. But there are problems where it floods the system, where the candidates have to put themselves on the auction block to get money, and where a small handful of millionaires, billionaires and influence-seekers can exercise an undue influence on the results. This money is not innocent money. Fundraising in Washington, DC is 24/7 365 days a year - it never stops. It's a terrible situation we have right now - it's not serving the country. I think there is a high level of disgust with what is going on.

- Fred Wertheimer, president of the advocacy group Democracy 21

[Ixarku]

Obama wins the presidency, the Dems win the Senate, but not with a large enough majority to prevent a filibuster, and the Reps retain control of the House. Looks like the next two years is going to be a lot like the last two years.

Pretty much exactly what I'm expecting -- at least a couple more years of partisan bickering with nothing getting done.

[Tiffanys]

The US political system is based on a delegate system. So even if a high population state had a 49.4% to 49.6% vote the entire x number of delegates get awarded to whoever won even by that tiny margin.

I hate the delegate system personally. It means your vote doesn't even matter if you don't live in a "battleground" state. Pure red or pure blue states, good luck as the opposite party. Your vote means literally nothing.

If we're going to assign delegates, it should actually be based on the votes. If a state has 20 delegates and the vote is like the initial example, then it maybe it should be split like 11/9 delegates rather than 20/0. Makes more sense that way. But overall, the entire delegate system to begin with just seems really stupid. If it's to prevent certain states from dominating the election by having way more votes due to their populations, then well... that already happens with the delegates. Maybe it's not quite as bad with delegates though. Since California, Texas, New York, & Florida would pretty much control the election.

Still think proportional representation would be better than a winner-take-all system... but ah, whatever.

Candidate I voted for won. Didn't even bother watching it later than ~9-10pm last night. After Romney lost his backup state and was starting to get such a narrow possible route to victory and Florida's only counties left to count their votes were all strong blue counties... I knew how the race was going to go. Didn't feel like watching reporters dick around for 3 or 4 more hours while waiting for the inevitable to happen.

Wasn't all that surprised to see Obama win with a 100 delegate lead when I woke up. Was a little surprised to see pot was legalized though lol... wth.

[vicious796]

I'm with Tiff on a few things, actually. After they called PA to Obama, I turned it off. PA was crucial to Romney and he had no shot in hell without it (not that he had a shot, anyway). Furthermore, elections really should be by popular vote, now, and not the electoral college. We have the technology and since the 2000 election, the popular vote has always been very close.

As was mentioned before, nothing changed on the federal level. Our only hope is that Congress saw how thrilled Americans were to see President Obama working closely with Governor Christie in New Jersey and that they understand WHY. Nobody gives a shit what party sponsored you - fucking work, asshole. Do your job.

The big "wins" last night were from the two issues I tend to lean liberally on - drugs and marriage (oh, how closely intertwined you are). Though I still don't understand gay people biologically and don't support their marriage economically, socially and ethically I couldn't be more for it. Talking with my wife about it, if/when it becomes a voting cause in Virginia, I'm going to vote for it. Sure, the taxes don't make sense and it goes against biology but that's not their fault and it's not their choice. As such, there's no good reason to prevent them from inheriting the fortune (or lack thereof) that they spent a lifetime building with their significant other. There's no reason to prevent them from being with their partner on their deathbed. The latter actually makes me sick to my stomach.

"Legalizing" marijuana in 3 states for recreational use is also a big win. Of course, federal law supercedes state but those states can and will actively decriminalize it and set a solid example for how to stop overcrowding our jails and ruining peoples lives over a recreational drug.

[Tiffanys]

By the way... Obama's victory speech really sucked, didn't it? I mean, save for the last like 30 seconds or so of the 20 minute ordeal.

And the crowd, most of them looked tired and irritable like they just wanted to go home. You didn't see anything remotely like the energy we saw in '08. Though... I can't say I expected to, either. Wasn't a Hope & Change election. Was more like... Vote for this guy and hope he's more consistent than this other douchebag.

I almost feel bad for Conservatives - they're just so out of touch. Though, "almost"... should probably be stressed. Cause I don't. I mean, lol I'm not exactly very subdued about how I feel on the matter... Hell, that could probably be a thread all on its own. I'm sure it'd enrage some people into a furor. Alas, I digress from that.

Still, disappointing speech though.

[vicious796]

By the way... Obama's victory speech really sucked, didn't it? I mean, save for the last like 30 seconds or so of the 20 minute ordeal.

And the crowd, most of them looked tired and irritable like they just wanted to go home. You didn't see anything remotely like the energy we saw in '08. Though... I can't say I expected to, either. Wasn't a Hope & Change election. Was more like... Vote for this guy and hope he's more consistent than this other douchebag.

I almost feel bad for Conservatives - they're just so out of touch. Though, "almost"... should probably be stressed. Cause I don't. I mean, lol I'm not exactly very subdued about how I feel on the matter... Hell, that could probably be a thread all on its own. I'm sure it'd enrage some people into a furor. Alas, I digress from that.

Still, disappointing speech though.

Meh, the far right is no more or less crazy than the far left, they just get more attention for some reason. Aside from marriage and marijuana, I'm rather conservative. Well, Libertarian is probably a better description but that fits more with "conservative" than "liberal" in America, today.

For every idiot that believes creation should be taught as science with evolution there's an equally idiotic man or woman who believes the government should regulate our intake of soda. Unfortunately, those idiots are in office in various places around the country.

[Semnae]

However seeing this stupid 50 - 49 result every fucking time in US election concludes that US election is rigged. There is nothing natural about these results.

The numbers make sense when you consider that just a 1% difference is a difference of about 1,168,000 votes. A 2% victory is a solid victory, and a 3% victory is a landslide.

[Tiffanys]

I may not be great at math. But uh... Statistically speaking, with two possible choices the most logical outcome is 50/50 anyways, no?

[Burkingam]

Damn, schmoyoho's peoples work fast.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0q2eGAjyGg&feature=g-u-u

[Tiffanys]

btw does anyone else find Barack & Michelle amusing in this pic?

[Pharismo]

The Terrorist was elect as president AGAIN!!!!!!!

[AceHigh]

However seeing this stupid 50 - 49 result every fucking time in US election concludes that US election is rigged. There is nothing natural about these results.

The numbers make sense when you consider that just a 1% difference is a difference of about 1,168,000 votes. A 2% victory is a solid victory, and a 3% victory is a landslide.

I disagree, since I think percent gives a better picture of the whole, you can get big numbers on a lot of things, but the numbers only give meaning when paired with a context. For example I can turn it around and say that 1,168,000 votes are only like 1/8th of the population of New York. So tell me, is 3% which is roughly 3/8 of NY population a "landslide" compared to the whole population?

I may not be great at math. But uh... Statistically speaking, with two possible choices the most logical outcome is 50/50 anyways, no?

Math works only when you add all the factors. After adding factors like interests of ethnic groups, social classes and other factors relevant to a demographic, it actually becomes very odd and unbelievable that it would go 50/50.

If you want to use logic, then I will claim that logically the best achievable result is a consensus. Population split in half is the furthest away from it and could be seen as the worst possible result. After all it means that the slightly lesser half is living in a dictatorship at the moment.

[occasional]

For every idiot that believes creation should be taught as science with evolution there's an equally idiotic man or woman who believes the government should regulate our intake of soda.

The latter is far more reasonable than the former, as it's a possible way to address a real problem.

[Burkingam]

For every idiot that believes creation should be taught as science with evolution there's an equally idiotic man or woman who believes the government should regulate our intake of soda.

The latter is far more reasonable than the former, as it's a possible way to address a real problem.

This and I'm pretty sure there are more people in the former category than in the latter as a matter of fact.
Edit: and I'm not too sure people who want to regulate sodas are all left leaning. After all, prohibition has always been associated with the right.

[AceHigh]

By the way there is a true democratic progress within a US territory right now. Apparently Puerto Rico is holding a referendum where people vote if they want to become the 51st state, keep the status quo, or become completely independent. So far it looks like it swings towards it becoming a state, so if the US congress approves it, USA just might have to change their flag design again.

[zherok]

Math works only when you add all the factors. After adding factors like interests of ethnic groups, social classes and other factors relevant to a demographic, it actually becomes very odd and unbelievable that it would go 50/50.

It's only odd if you don't bother to examine how the demographics break down. All of these factors are in play. Consensus is much more pronounced when factoring for ethnicity, social class, or just where you live (take a look at some of the states and see a handful of urban centers carry an otherwise conservative state.)

The more conservative majority group ("Angry white guys," married white women, etc.) currently offset the Democratic leaning minority groups for the most part. Well, not enough to keep the Democrats from winning. And the momentum is clearly with Democrats at the moment. Minority groups will continue to grow larger while the majority isn't reproducing fast enough to keep pace. The Republican party will have to become more accommodating and lean more leftward to adapt (I recall hearing an Australian say that even their conservative groups assume socialized medicine), or continue mining out the diminishing returns of pandering to their increasingly fringe base.

[Monkeyfinger]

The only consolation is republicans still have a firm grip on the House. Gotta stave off cap n tax for 4 more years. In other news, I lost 5% on my investments today =(