The Official US President Election Thread

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

*ponders about Kerry*
What does Bush have to say about the environment?

Not much - I'm not too happy with some of his stands on the environment. I do support his view on thinning out forests to prevent the widespread forest fires (that is what nature used to do naturally). I however don't agree with his stand on certain things such as power plants and reducing the water standards and so forth.

[Nurvingiel]

Forest thinning is a good idea - my home city is in a very dry area whose forests are naturally controlled by fire. If we supress the fires we have to do something else...

I bet many Californians would also support this too.

I guess both candidates are carefully not saying anything about the environment.

Go Green Party!

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Forest thinning is a good idea - my home city is in a very dry area whose forests are naturally controlled by fire. If we supress the fires we have to do something else...

I bet many Californians would also support this too.

Well actually - most liberals seem to be against it. They say it's just Bush trying to get logging in through a back door. They would rather have the forest fires it seems.

Go Green Party!

NO COMMENT - might as well vote for the communist party.

[Nurvingiel]

Odd about the fires..... I'm quite liberal and support thinning anyway. And uncontrolled forest fires are generally disliked in society. And I have no problems with forest fires, I just don't want people's homes to burn down. Thinning is only really necessary as a management tool near populated areas, but you can't make general statements in forestry (except the one I just made ).

Voting for your principles is as important as selecting a President - but I think I know what you're getting at, they will obviously not win.

I don't think someone would be wasting their vote if they voted Green.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Odd about the fires..... I'm quite liberal and support thinning anyway. And uncontrolled forest fires are generally disliked in society. And I have no problems with forest fires, I just don't want people's homes to burn down. Thinning is only really necessary as a management tool near populated areas, but you can't make general statements in forestry (except the one I just made ).

I think thinning throughout the forests are necessary to encourage good growth and a healthy forest.

Voting for your principles is as important as selecting a President - but I think I know what you're getting at, they will obviously not win.

I don't think someone would be wasting their vote if they voted Green.

No - actually what I was getting at was when Nader was with the green party in 2000 - it was basically a communuist party. Wanting employee ownership of all companies and things like that. It was rididulous. I don't agree with the Green Party - because it seems that it's environment regardless of anything else (not to mention the employee ownership of companies and so forth)

I have voted Libertarian - but only locally.

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

*ponders about Kerry*
What does Bush have to say about the environment?

I believe something along the lines of "We will be opening the bids at..."

Bush has by far the most attrocious record on the environment then any president since the ecology movement started keeping records. He even has made James Watt look good. He really has no environmental policy to speak of. His policy is more about how can we help big business and ranchers and strip miners and polluters get around environmental regulations to maximize their profits.

[jerseydevil]

Polls are open...

NJ - 6:00am - 8:00pm (14 hours)
NY - 6:00am - 9:00pm (15 hours)

I find it very hard to believe that people would not be able to get to the polls in that time frame.

[BeardofPants]

... and it's all on... anyone's guess who's gonna win...

Don't forget folks, vote kerry, and boot that hick out.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by BeardofPants

... and it's all on... anyone's guess who's gonna win...

Don't forget folks, vote kerry, and boot that hick out.

That's funny - considering who Kerry's running mate is.

VOTE GEORGE BUSH!!!!

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Is Kerry still green? What I mean by "green" is is he still passionate about the environment. I hope so!

Sorry, but i had visions of John Kerry turning a rather peculiar shade of Martian Green!!

Can I ask, what a 'Running Mate' is, and what they do, please?

[Jonathan]

The running mate is the presidential candidate's choice for vice president. Vice president Cheney is Bush's running mate and John Edward is Kerry's. They take part in the campaigns.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

The running mate is the presidential candidate's choice for vice president. Vice president Cheney is Bush's running mate and John Edward is Kerry's. They take part in the campaigns.

thanks, still trying to understand all the differing concepts from our (UK) system

[Valandil]

The US model is very much patterned after the Entmoot Elections, if that helps.

[Nurvingiel]

That's right! I was Hectorberlioz's running mate. Weren't you somebody's running mate Val? SGHs?

Cheney (sp?) and Bush, and Kerry and Edwards, wanted to be as cool as us Mooters!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Polls are open...

NJ - 6:00am - 8:00pm (14 hours)
NY - 6:00am - 9:00pm (15 hours)

I find it very hard to believe that people would not be able to get to the polls in that time frame.

If you lived in a rural area, or worked a 12 hour day and had kids etc etc... there are factors, I'm sure, that would make it difficult. But not impossible.

If you're away from your permanent address (ie. living in another town or city) do you need an absantee ballot, or can you simply vote at the local polling station?

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

ta muchly, i believe i understand now.
Deputy PM is chosen by PM after PM wins election over here

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

May the best man win tomorrow! If things turn out the way they did in the last elections - forgive me, but I'll crack up totally.

With you on that. Let's hope it doesn't get to that.

In other news I read this was on the Belgian teletext today. It's in Dutch so I'll translate the important bits.

The American presidential elections are followed by European observers from the Organisation for Safety and Cooperation in Europe.

Among them also some parliament-members, like Geert Lambert who visted the campaign bureaus of the republicans and the democrats in Florida.

The observers weren't welcomed with open arms everywhere, especially not with the republicans.

Lambert was told that they had received 'instructions from Washington' not to talk with him because he would be 'a dangerous person'.

Now I can understand people disliking some of us Europeans observing your elections like you're a banana republic in the third world. But isn't terming these observers as dangerous persons a little over the top? Just wondering...

[Jonathan]

I remember reading about the European observers who were going to monitor the elections in Florida a while ago and I was certain some people wouldn't like that at all, considering America has never had observers before. However the observers were invited by the state mainly to prove to the world that the elections are entirely democratic (a good thing, other western democracies should do that too). Florida probably wouldn't have invited any observers if they weren't positive that the voting is going to be fair. So there's nothing to fear from these 'dangerous persons'

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

If you lived in a rural area, or worked a 12 hour day and had kids etc etc... there are factors, I'm sure, that would make it difficult. But not impossible.

A lot of things are difficult in this world. I may or may not have to stand in line for hours - I have no idea. I'm about ready to leave now.

If you're away from your permanent address (ie. living in another town or city) do you need an absantee ballot, or can you simply vote at the local polling station?

Then you MUST get an absentee ballot. You have to vote at your local polling station - the US elections for NOT national elections and only your polling station where you are registered has any information on you. There is not a list of 100+ million names.

By the way - Oregon is the only state that has 100% mail in ballots.

Eärniel -
ALL Europeans are "dangerous persons" and should be avoided at all costs. Actually what I think they are saying is that NO ONE should be interfering in our elections. Also - there is NO reason for observers to HAVE to come to view our elections - it's fine that Florida invited them - but it would be wrong if the world came here to observe them as we do in developing countries. The US has INTERNAL laws which handle these things, we are NOT a lawless developing county who is just getting out to vote for the first time - like Afganistan. I can guarantee that European elections aren't 100% accurate either.

[Jonathan]

They said something quite interesting on CNN just now. If there is a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College, then the president would be chosen by the House of Representative while the Senate would have to choose the vice president. The House would most likely elect Bush since the Republicans are in the majority there. However, if the Democrats gain a couple of more seats in the Senate, then they would be in the majority and pick Edwards as vice president! That would mean a Bush/Edwards administration!
That outcome is very unlikely but what if...?

Found an article about it - In a tie, Edwards could be named Bush's VP