Big night for our neighbours, should be interesting to see how it plays out. I predict 271 - 267 for Obama, but time will tell.
I can't help but lolz over some Republican supporters, obviously they're not all like this, and I'm sure some of the dems are just as ignorant, but I really don't think you'd see this level of sheer stupidity amongst Canadian voters.
PivotTechno
Just the fact that the election is being touted as such a close race shows how very little choice Americans actually have in the political arena. It would be interesting to see what a second Obama term would look like - some are saying that he'll embark on a slow and steady path to loosen the corporate stranglehold on U.S. policy, but I'm not holding my breath.
If Romney somehow wins...well, hide yer wimmins, gays and abortions.
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
I really don't think you'd see this level of sheer stupidity amongst Canadian voters.
Nope, just apathy.
hardcore trancer
This sums up the whole so called elections.
Orko
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
I can't help but lolz over some Republican supporters, obviously they're not all like this, and I'm sure some of the dems are just as ignorant, but I really don't think you'd see this level of sheer stupidity amongst Canadian voters.
I think if you interviewed the average democrat voter, you would end up with quite a long blooper reel as well.
Most voters, vote based on sound bites.
yankeeBaby
Just came home. The reality that today decides the next four years, for both our own country, and its influences outside the country, has my stomach in knots. I hope my fellow Americans make the right choice (no pun intended). Although, my faith is wavering. :( :(
feelgood
Im a huge Ron Paul supporter, but given the situation, the economist summed up my thoughts nicely...
Yet far from being the voice of fiscal prudence, Mr Romney wants to start with huge tax cuts (which will disproportionately favour the wealthy), while dramatically increasing defence spending. Together those measures would add $7 trillion to the ten-year deficit. He would balance the books through eliminating loopholes (a good idea, but he will not specify which ones) and through savage cuts to programmes that help America’s poor (a bad idea, which will increase inequality still further). At least Mr Obama, although he distanced himself from Bowles-Simpson, has made it clear that any long-term solution has to involve both entitlement reform and tax rises. Mr Romney is still in the cloud-cuckoo-land of thinking you can do it entirely through spending cuts: the Republican even rejected a ratio of ten parts spending cuts to one part tax rises. Backing business is important, but getting the macroeconomics right matters far more...
...As a result, this election offers American voters an unedifying choice. Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.
Sasha
it's like voting for what you would rather have Gonorrhea or AIDS
geroin
Forever Forward
American Elections are like Jim Henson playing both Kermit and Ernie. Two voices, two characters-- same puppeteer.
