• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

United States Election: Nov. 8, 2016 |OT| Hate Trumps Love

Status
Not open for further replies.

UCBooties

Member
20th in line when my polling place opened this morning! Voted and got to work early.

I did have an older woman say to me that she hoped the best "man" won (she used scare quotes)

I thought she was making a joke about wanting Hillary to win, but then she said "I don't think a woman should be president, I think it's a sin."

ಠ_ಠ

I wished her a good morning and left...
 

Cornbread78

Member
Ho0150p.jpg

I did my part and got this pretty sticker
 

Par Score

Member
But that doesn't mean you have to vote for a potential winner. If your politics aren't represented by either of them, why vote for either of them? Not voting for third-parties based on this logic means that binary between potential winners will remain forever.

No, the Electoral College system and the near impossibility of amending the US Consitution means that binary between potential winners will remain forever.

People have a misapprehension that voting for third parties will somehow magically change the US electoral system into one that allows for more than a binary choice, but it can't possibly do that.

In the event that no candidate receives a majority of Electoral Votes the House of Representatives gets to choose the President and Vice President. They can choose between the top three Presidential candidates in terms of EV, but only the top two Vice Presidential candidates. If the Presidential selection is deadlocked, the VP selection becomes President. If the VP selection is deadlocked too, the Speaker of the House becomes President.

The system is fixed, top-to-bottom and side-to-side, to present a binary choice.

At the end of the day, regardless of which two parties they are, there will always only be a maximum of two parties with a realistic chance of gaining the Presidency. One of those will always be the party that currently controls the House, and in the event of a particularly strong third of fourth party challenge, that would be the only one that had a chance.
 

Ooccoo

Member
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.
 
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.

They have to choose to run.
 

Ruruja

Member
Good stuff, so most of the important states will be decided at around 2 in the morning for me here.

I'm in for the ride. I need to see this happen in real time.

I remember watching Obama give that victory speech in Chicago at like 5am here lol, definitely won't be staying up that late this time.
 

kirblar

Member
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.
We do have a younger POTUS right now. Clinton is a GOP-style exception to the rule (they almost always nominated the runner up from the previous race) due to the circumstances in '08. '16's candidate will be young.
 
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.

You do know life expectancy has risen greatly over the last several decades right?
 

sonicmj1

Member
Thank you. That's unfortunate that I misunderstood. But, Georgia almost definitely won't go to Clinton, right? :/

As to state and other races, my district is 80% Democrat here, so, in that case wouldn't the district dictate local abdstate races?

I can't speak to your local races, but Georgia does have a chance of going to Clinton. 538 puts it at about 20%. Upshot has it in the tossup column.
 
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.
We just had a younger candidate. His name was Obama. Anyone can run past the age of 30. Gotta get through the gauntlet first tho.
Man if we were really worried about heath we wouldn't have greats like Franklin D. Roosevelt.
 
D

Deleted member 80556

Unconfirmed Member
Cwvcp3SWIAA3R3Z.jpg:large


Google Trends prevision

I'll feel like I'm in an alternate universe if that ends up being the electoral map hahaha. If Texas goes blue, and Florida is goes red, then lol.
 

tbm24

Member
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.
A younger one with the qualifications and drive was welcome to run. People like to question if these are the best the country could come up with but dont present a better candidate who earned the vote.
 
Happy voting day, GAF!

I voted early but am proud to have been +1 for Clinton.

I'd also urge any MA undecided ballot voters to consider voting no on question 2. Charter schools can be a wonderful addition to communities, but as a public school teacher I have seen firsthand the realistic effect that they can have on district budgeting. We need better regulation before we raise the cap on charters.

I hope everyone has a wonderful Election Day!
 
D

Deleted member 80556

Unconfirmed Member
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.

There were younger people in the primaries. Guess what? People made themselves heard and chose them.
 

TheFuzz

Member
I've voted in the last two presidential elections at my location (metro Atlanta). Typically the voting demographic here is about 50/40/10 white black latino split.

This morning my location is an easy 80/20 white/black. I've never seen a whiter electorate here. Take that as you will.
 
It baffles me that you get to choose between two seniors. I mean, why couldn't you guys have a younger POTUS? At 70 years old (Trump) and 69 years old (Hillary), these guys could easily die in the next few years. But what I think is infuriating is how you give the power of a whole country to 'dinosaurs.' Power should be given to the new generations, with younger candidates.

It's good to have an elder statesman (or stateswoman) every now and then.
 

gaugebozo

Member
Prediction:

3bYJQ.png


I was thinking Florida would go red, but I think the Hispanic turnout and GOTV will give it to her.

Edit: Damn images.
 

Nepenthe

Member
I've voted in the last two presidential elections at my location (metro Atlanta). Typically the voting demographic here is about 50/40/10 white black latino split.

This morning my location is an easy 80/20 white/black. I've never seen a whiter electorate here. Take that as you will.

It's early in the morning and people may have to work. Enthusiasm between the Dem candidates was also different. Don't take it as a sign just yet.

Granted, I feel this is easy for me to say since I vote at a school in an area that's 99.9% black.
 
Pretty big line at my local school to vote.

The lets talk about Jesus and you get free coffee thing that was out front was kinda weird.
 

maxcriden

Member
I can't speak to your local races, but Georgia does have a chance of going to Clinton. 538 puts it at about 20%. Upshot has it in the tossup column.

Thanks. I was just looking at 538 and NYTimes. On NYT I saw 68-70something percent for Trump, and on 538 in polls plus the figures were nearly identical to the polls only figures you mentioned from there. I'm not familiar with Upshot unfortunately.
20% is averaged across all polls for the past year. The statistical difference seems to be about 45ish for Hillary to 48 or 49ish for Trump. In that sense, every or almost poll from many different polling sources would've had to be wrong. You can tell I'm trying to salve my guilty conscience here. Hopefully Georgia doesn't go Republican by just one vote.
 
What a load of bullshit. Polling places closing at 7pm and people have to work until 5pm or later.

No wonder likely voters are primarily old people.
Well it's not like you don't get almost a month to early vote. But yes it's bullshit. Reminder people. They can't close if your in line! Don't leave the line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom