This is not a political discussion

So please don't make it one...

I am not surprised because I think the reason that the Democrats did not garner more support is because Barack was not on the ballot. As much as I dislike his policies I think he is a charismatic figure that people generally like. Without his draw I think many of these races were bound to flip.

The next two years should be interesting. I wonder how often the Senate and House will need to file lawsuits against the administration for circumventing Congress via executive action.

I saw one report that said the reason voter turnout for "millenials" was so low was that the candidates did not discuss topics they felt were pertinent - examples given were lowering interest rates on student loans and legalizing marijuana.

So i guess any candidate in a runoff needs to make their slogan "I propose lower student loan interest rates so you can afford to buy more legal marijuana."

Sound Tactic, I disagree with your link to Obama. His charm has faded as evidenced by his sinking popularity numbers.

He was here in my home state, along with Mrs BO and Bill Clinton, stumping for the Dem candidate for governor. I think their appearances, especially POTUS', caused more harm than good. Many Dem candidates have been distancing themselves from him and I'm betting the lady candidate here wishes she had too.

How is a topic about politics not politcal??

Just wondering.

Topic is about voting. You can spin any discussion into politics if you want.

I was not saying he has popularity but he has charisma sufficient to bring out his base. An election is all about who votes not actual approval. You can have a net negative approval rating and win an election if your voting base is motivated.

Not sure if i count as a millenial, but as someone who's relatively young, I feel that the whole system is broken. Very few candidates really stand out to me. I may agree with one or the other on an issue or two, but they all seem phony and beholded to the status quo. Basically, i dont see a big difference. Yeah, on some social issues they make a big show of it, but none of them are trying to reform lobbying or donations or gerrymandering. It's all a bunch of corruption and greed.

I dont even care that a candidate will push the exact things i am in favor of. I would prefer a candidate who had actual evidence and logical arguments who disagreed with me but was thoughtful and open-minded. I mean, when was the last time a politician admitted they were wrong in the past or changed their mind or said "hey, i dont know what exactly will work".

And it's our own fault. If a candidate was that honest and acknowledged the complexities of situations, they'd be run out of town. We want simple answers and clear lines between good and bad. We want a superman who has all the answers to tell us we're awesome and we'll be safe. And since that doesn't exist, we're left with liars who are willing to SAY that that's who they are. And we buy it.

So it's not that the candidates dont talk about pot or lowering student loans. it's that none of them have any substance beyond empty rhetoric. None of them say anything worth getting excited about.

Very well said

Well said, Stupendous.
My comment at the end of the evening yesterday was that I hope the next election doesn't focus on race or gender or what someone has done wrong in the past. It's the quality of the grey matter between the ears that make a candidate worth voting for.

For a different point of view: it would seem that candidates love to hide among complexities, using supposed complexities like a smoke screen to hide what they actually believe and what they actually will do as our elected officials. They acknowledge the complexities far too much. The true answers to the nation's issues are actually quite simple but the gullible voting public willfully embraces the notion of complexities.

SM, I think the problem with most candidates (almost all) is they are willing to do or say anything weather they believe it or not. They have no affiliation to you and do not stand up for their constituency.

Not trying to make this political but for the sake of argument I will use a name of a person I supported. In 2012 and 2011 I was a big Paul Ryan fan.

In 2009 and 2010 Paul Ryan submitted some excellent budgets for the Senate and I thought, this guy represents what I want America to be like. Then he ran for VP on the Romney ticket. I didn't like the choice as much because I wanted him to stay in the Senate and fight for rational spending. But then in 2012 the Republicans (him included) approved a budget that had massive spending. Their justification was, well we are slowing the rate of increase (commonly known as the sequester cuts). The problem is, that last year, Ryan was instrumental in actually removing almost all of the sequester cuts. Thus, the entire budget was not only excessive, any controls in place to reduce the amount of ridiculousness fell by the way side. http://www.politicususa.com/2013/02/24/p...ey-anymore.html

These people are all frauds. The majority of them are not qualified to be making the major policy decisions they are taking part in (although. to be fair, some are).

I consider myself conservative but I do not think that Mitch McConnel or John Boehner (SP?) should be the two people who are the face of conservatism. Neither are conservative and both of them want to negotiate. This means, allow for more liberalism provided they get a few things to go their way (IE liberalism in their jurisdictions).

You can find it both ways. I am just using these examples because these are a few I have followed.

Oh! Voting!! OK.

I've never once voted on American Idol, have you?

I did however, vote for the best jack o lantern recently. That thing was awesome!

Being in Iowa, elections are a really big deal. Apparently we're important on the national scale, though most people (myself included) don't see why. I find that most elections, I find myself voting against the person I dislike the most. Rarely do I ever feel I'm voting for anyone. I'm not overly pleased with my state's results, but in the end, I don't expect it would have made much difference one way or another. Lots of emphasis on electing our first female US senator, but I won't comment on her one way or the other, lest it get political.

I was pretty impressed with the amount of discussion and prompting I saw among people in my own age group and younger about getting out to vote, and being educated on the candidates. Not sure if it translates to a state-wide trend or not. Maybe it's just another sign of me getting older though, and not of younger people getting more involved/interested.

You think subjects like the economy or the middle east or taxes are simple? OK, but I disagree. How could they be when there are thousands (millions?) of interconnected variables that we can't even measure (and may not even realize exist) and we have a small sample size with tons of random variation we dont even realize. There's no way to control the variables to measure their impact.

Yes, we've noticed.

Thanks for contributing.

I agree 100%. Several of my votes were based on my dislike of the "other" candidate. Sometimes dislike of their positions and other times just a general dislike/distrust. Although a trustworthy politician is more rare than a unicorn.

I voted. Surprised in your pole that 25% did not.

I had a date with a much younger chick. Sorry.

The ethnic, economic, political(as in relative balance of power as bound up in various treaties), historical, and geographic variables wrapped up in the Axis powers' expansion prior to World War II were immensely complex; way more complex than anything we're facing in the middle east today but, until the Allies came together and spent much time, blood and treasure swatting the Axis in the manner illustrated by Sound Tactic's avatar, the issue festered. The end solution was simple and would have been simpler if addressed sooner rather than later. Instead, the world had to sustain a First World War, an ineffective League of Nations, a Maginot Line, U.S. isolationism, and a dithery Prime Minister Chamberlain proclaiming that he'd secured "peace for our time."

Taxes are needlessly complex because we are manipulated and stand for it and not because it is a necessary method of filling the treasury.

The economy is needlessly complex because of bureaucratic albatrosses and the tax burden (see above).

Yeah ... simple solutions can be found with the will to do so.

OK

Who are you, Lena Dunham?

No idea what this means.

Thanks for contributing, Scrappy.

It's impossible to find unbiased analysis of candidates and their platforms so that one can make an informed decision on who to vote for.
Then there's all the hype and spin and gender and color and 'we need this because' thrown in.
I wish elections could be run like a blind coke vs pepsi test.
Give me the ability to inform myself and let me chose which I like best.

Truff - gonna disagree with you on that one. In Louisiana there is a non-partisan group that for every elections lists the ballot, and what a pro and con selection for each can mean (if i can find the link i'll post it). Does not put any political spin on the asnwers, simply lists facts.

Sadly, the last place to look for unbiased information is from a political party or a candidate...

I've not found anything like that up this far north, HG. Would be pleased to know that something like this is available.

Ditto re: the last place to look for unbiased info....

But can you imagine the outcome if say, the last presidential election was done as a blind test with only facts available and no idea of race, ethnicity or gender? I am so tired of being told a vote for someone is a vote against someone else's rights.

I vote for a person based on their qualifications and ability to do a specific job...period. Wow! That's the same criteria used to hire someone for any job. Go figure.

I'm going to start picking my candidates based off who has the best rolled-up sleeves during their "everyman" speech in front of miscellaneous factory. Or whoever does the best "coat-over-my-shoulder" holding. It makes me feel like they really know who I am... "What? I roll my sleeves up too!"

I try to vote against incumbents as much as possible. What's the line about politicians and diapers?

IF they don't smell right they are probably full of shift.

I am just happy all of the political commercials are over. Those ads, more than any single candidate, annoy me beyond words

There ought to be a UDAAP rule for political advertising. We got tons of junk mail that was nothing but distortions and misleading twisting of the facts. I've gotten to the point that I don't believe anything in political advertising.

over? not here in La., where 3 elections have gone to runoff for senate and house seats...5 more weeks of these ads, but with more rhetoric and much nastier now...

I expect by the weekend, we'll be seeing commercials for the 2016 presidential election.

Here in Iowa, one of our local tv stations ran a 30 second spot (a couple times each evening) of water lapping onto a beach with a graphic that read 'a political ad break - you're welcome'.

If we see '16 presidential election commercials, so far ahead of the conventions, then it would be like promoting Christmas before Labor Day and that'll make my brain hurt.

interesting to see that 22% of people responding did not vote. Did not every state have elections yesterday? or did some states not, which would explain? or are people just apathetic to it?

Hey, Fantasy Politicos, spin this thread however you want, but it absolutely IS a political thread. And it's pretty shameless that the mods have let it continue. The BOL mods for the cooler are biased and unfair.

It's like having a discussion about automatic weapons and saying it's not about efficient ways to kill people.

oh Buggs...i fail to see how asking if people voted and if they feel their vote counts is political. but then, i don't get my rose-colored glasses at the same store you get yours from.

then again, likely if i did a poll on the type of cars people drove you would claim it is a thread about the bailout of Chrysler in the 80s and GM in the 2000s and also political...

Say what you like buggs but this thread hasn't crossed any guidelines. BOL admin is the one making that determination, not you.

Given the IQ of some, it's a good thing that 22% did not vote.

well, i'd like to think that the people on this site are a little more informed and professional than the average votre

"votre" is that a Louisiana pronunciation?

I did not vote for many reasons. 1) I'm from Idaho, so everyone with an R in front of their name automatically wins, 2) I don't follow local politics, so I didn't even know who the people where who were running, 3) I fail to see how voting for county coroner affects my life, 4) as an added benefit of not being registered to vote, I don't have to worry about jury duty.

Sorry TMatt, in Idaho you can still be selected for jury duty unless you also do not have a drivers license. Most states have moved to including drivers license information in their jury pools.

from: http://sjdc.isc.idaho.gov/JuryInformation.aspx

Some reason when I read this I hear Nevil's voice (From iCarly)

oh sure, after a weekend of eating wild mushrooms and huffing paint a lazy first responder may put you in a body bag and pronounce you dead

the coroner may be your last hope in determining you're in fact, still alive

Bummer

Reminds me of this gem of an attorney's questioning of a coroner (supposedly from an actual court case):

Q: Before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?

A: No.

Q: For blood pressure?

A: No.

Q: Breathing?

A: No.

Q: Then it is possible the patient was alive ?

A: No.

Q: How can you be so sure?

A: Because his brain was in a jar on my desk.

Q: But could the patient have still been alive?

A: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere.

Wow you really do misunderstand the other side of the argument. Do I have to educate you on this one as well?

Then hit notify. You do it all the time so you might as well. I thought that most of this thread was pretty innocent but that is just my opinion. In theory, the college football thread is also about politics. So is that everything is going to kill you thread. In fact, pretty much every thread can be Kevin Bacon'd to politics.

LOL @ "Kevin Bacon'd"

this is not a love song
this is ----- not a love song
this is not a love song
this is ----- not a love song

Yesterday morning, on election day, the morning anchor on the local fox channel said that he was not going to vote and urged his audience not to vote because the political ads were so dirty. He felt by not voting, it would send a message. I was surprised they allowed him to say that. I was listening for about forty minutes, he must have repeated his view at least four or five times.

those same politcal ads pay his salary, so if he really wanted to send a message he should quit his job

Good Point

Truffle,
About the grey matter between the ears. That would be a lofty goal and attainable, if ....if the voters predominantly had the same quality grey matter between their own ears. Sadly today in America that is not true. Fully 50% of the country shops at Walmart in PJs & slippers and are in a hurry because America's Dummest is coming on TV in 10 minutes. We are indeed our own problem.
Now where's that remote!

oh, my!

Sorry, but I gotta call bull on this one. Not about the pjs, that much is true and you probably low-balled it. But, never, ever, not even once, in all my trips to the Walmarts, have I ever encountered any other single person besides myself who was in a hurry. Shoppers, stockers, cashiers, NO ONE! EVER!

Maybe it's because everyone ('cept rj) has DVRs now and can watch America's Dummest anytime they want...

don't the self check out lanes speed things up?

Self check out lanes? Next thing you know, they'll be wanting you to grow your own vegetables, churn your own butter, and slaughter your own beef.

I'm not too concerned about the first thing you listed

Not in the Walmarts around here. You have to wait in line behind people in no hurry whatsoever with carts full of [censored] that don't know how to use they self check out so they call over the nice attendant lady and they get to talking and come to find out they have a second cousin in common by marriage. The other lines aren't moving because they're having to wait on the nice attendant lady come help them and find out if they're related too (odds are, they are!). Because there's only one manned check out open unless you want to go all the way down to the other end of the store even though the two items you needed were from this side, and it's usually the express lane for 20 items or less, where all the people miscounted by roughly 50 items. Maybe it's not their fault though, because many (certainly not all) only have 20 fingers and toes, so setting the limit at 20 may not have been the best idea. I mean, know your customer, right? So there I stand, tapping my foot impatiently, getting a lot of "you ain't from 'round here, is ya?" looks.

Perhaps it has less to do with Walmart, and more to do with living down yonder. I suspect it's a dynamically synergistic relationship.

But thanks for asking. Would you believe that I had to run to Walmart today to pick up a furnace filter, the size of which I can't find anywhere else locally, and it took 40 minutes between walking in and out the door?

That's just dumm

Wal Mart? I try hard to avoid it completely. Two, maybe three times per year, and usually then only on a trip when we fall off the interstate to pick up something we forgot or need.

I don't do self-checkout under any circumstances. Seems that Home Depot is really trying to steer customers to self-checkout. I'm enough of an old geezer that I expect to be waited on when I spend money in an establishment.

I'd rather use self-check out when I can, unless I have a whole bunch of stuff.

Me too blade scrapper. The thing that frustrates me is when the stupid self check is constantly chiming for "Wait for attendant" or "Remove unexpected item for bagging area"

and insted of getting half a dozen so you wouldn't clog the shopping aisles in the future, you bought just 1...thereby guaranteeing return trips of which you can further complain about.

a tip for walmart shoppers...the best time to go to walmart is........NEVER. It is always crowded, never has sufficient lines open, self-checkout is no faster.

On the rare occassion i find myself in this wasteland, i check out in either the auto section or outdoor section.