I have left the members of the IBC off of my email blasts these past two weeks, mostly because I thought we had a rule somewhere regarding spamming GMs. Though, now that I think about it, Aaron might have received one or two.
Anyway, for those who know me, you know that I am very political and two weeks ago I joined the South Florida chapter of Barack Obama's grassroots compaign. I have been bothering my friends and famliy with emails and have talked to anyone who would listen about Obama.
Now, I'm talking to you guys. This election matters. Your vote counts. Most people will tell you to vote, no matter who you're voting for. Vote if you're voting for Barack Obama. If you're not, stay home.
Democrat, Republican, Independent...whatever you are, head over to BarackObama.com and read up about the junior senator from Illinois. Read about his positions, see if they match your ideals. If they do, listen to him speak. Listen to this man for five minutes and you will know for sure he is the man who can unite a divided country.
But before he can become our next president, he has to win his party's nomination. And now is the most important time in the primary season. SC, Nevada, and Super Tuesday are all coming soon. This means money is needed. Barack has been riding a wave this last week and the money has been pouring in, but its not enough. I am a poor college student and I have given. If Barack speaks to you, you should give to.
No man can be elected alone. It may seem like a waste to some of you. That's fine. He may not be the guy for others of you, and that's fine too. But everyone should give him a chance. Listen to him. There is hope for America. We can heal the division and right the course with a leader like Barack. Please, head over to BarackObama.com and think about donating.
Change The World
Moderator: DBacks
-
Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
I was firmly on the Richardson train, so I'm going to vote for whoever he tells me to vote for. Clearly looked like Edwards was lobbying for the vote last night. I think Richardson is still going to play a very key part in this race, though - he gained a ton of positive national exposure, has an impeccable background, and would be a tremendous asset for any one of these candidates as a VP.
His agenda was directly on point with my views on almost every issue - and he presents himself incredibly well.
My problem, Gabe, is your "if you're not voting for Obama, don't vote" attitude. Shouldn't it be, "if you don't educate yourselves on the candidates and have a reason why you're voting for who you're voting for, don't vote." I think Obama is a fantastic candidate, and I'm thrilled with the quality of the Democratic candidates - but to tell people to just not vote isn't going to help Obama's cause. I've taken this election very seriously, for the first time in my life, and felt very confident in my decision to back Richardson - even knowing that he would not win. Richardson's name, from what I hear, will remain on the ballot, and if it is, I will vote for him.
And on to Jake's assinine point on the Presidential election - What on earth are you talking about? You vote in your state, if the person you vote for receives more votes then the other person in your state, then he wins the state. When he wins your state, those electoral college votes move over to his side. Winning states is important in the primaries and the general election, it's not like it changes a hell of a lot. If you don't vote, you have no right to express your opinion because you don't care enough, in the first place, to let your opinion show in your actions.
His agenda was directly on point with my views on almost every issue - and he presents himself incredibly well.
My problem, Gabe, is your "if you're not voting for Obama, don't vote" attitude. Shouldn't it be, "if you don't educate yourselves on the candidates and have a reason why you're voting for who you're voting for, don't vote." I think Obama is a fantastic candidate, and I'm thrilled with the quality of the Democratic candidates - but to tell people to just not vote isn't going to help Obama's cause. I've taken this election very seriously, for the first time in my life, and felt very confident in my decision to back Richardson - even knowing that he would not win. Richardson's name, from what I hear, will remain on the ballot, and if it is, I will vote for him.
And on to Jake's assinine point on the Presidential election - What on earth are you talking about? You vote in your state, if the person you vote for receives more votes then the other person in your state, then he wins the state. When he wins your state, those electoral college votes move over to his side. Winning states is important in the primaries and the general election, it's not like it changes a hell of a lot. If you don't vote, you have no right to express your opinion because you don't care enough, in the first place, to let your opinion show in your actions.
Z 1st off I respect your decision on richardson he is someone who has great experience in foreign affairs and hopefully will hook up with Obama on the ticket.
2nd...A faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not cast his/her electoral vote for the person whom they have pledged to elect.
On 158 occasions, electors have cast their votes for President or Vice President in a manner different from that prescribed by the legislature of the state they represented. Although it has never changed the outcome of an election its the fact that we have to vote for someone to hopefully vote for us. I just do not agree with the electorial college therefore i do not vote in it.
2nd...A faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not cast his/her electoral vote for the person whom they have pledged to elect.
On 158 occasions, electors have cast their votes for President or Vice President in a manner different from that prescribed by the legislature of the state they represented. Although it has never changed the outcome of an election its the fact that we have to vote for someone to hopefully vote for us. I just do not agree with the electorial college therefore i do not vote in it.
-
Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
It's tough to detect sarcasm smack in the middle of a serious "Vote for Barack" message - unless the entire thing was sarcasm, and I just totally missed it.
If everyone is smart, they'd listen to all the candidates - not just Barack, and then decide who's best for them. It's fantastic that you've decided to back Barack - a very worthy person to back - but just telling people to vote for him, or just go visit the website is not what helps people make a decision. If you want to make a difference, tell us what Barack stands for - What are his policies that will touch the people who write on this board? How does he distinguish himself from the other candidates?
You think people should make a decision based on a website that is totally, 150% pro-Barack? That's like me deciding Clemens is innocent because I only read the report his lawyer put out. I realize that you are merely stumping for Barack - but stump man, stump! My guy just resigned and might be off the ballot - I'm an open vote - my issues are foreign diplomacy, education, and health care - why should I vote for Barack?
If everyone is smart, they'd listen to all the candidates - not just Barack, and then decide who's best for them. It's fantastic that you've decided to back Barack - a very worthy person to back - but just telling people to vote for him, or just go visit the website is not what helps people make a decision. If you want to make a difference, tell us what Barack stands for - What are his policies that will touch the people who write on this board? How does he distinguish himself from the other candidates?
You think people should make a decision based on a website that is totally, 150% pro-Barack? That's like me deciding Clemens is innocent because I only read the report his lawyer put out. I realize that you are merely stumping for Barack - but stump man, stump! My guy just resigned and might be off the ballot - I'm an open vote - my issues are foreign diplomacy, education, and health care - why should I vote for Barack?
Jake, when was the last time that happened? The 50s or 60s? Maybe Nixon in 72? It doesn't happen anymore. That happened a lot back in the 1800s but not so much anymore. Believe me, I had a bunch of stupid people in my government class last spring that I had to explain the electoral college to that thought the same thing(I'm not calling you stupid btw).
I already know I'm voting Republican no matter what, because I don't like Hillary, Obama or Edwards and one of those will get it. One thing I do like about Obama is that he has said he will get rid of No Child Left Behind, and as a teacher(well, when I graduate in May I will be), that's fantastic.
I would love for Ron Paul to get a chance, but he scares too many people in power positions. After watching the debate the other night, I heard a lot of ideas from Huckabee, Paul and Guliani that I liked, especially on going the nuclear energy route
I already know I'm voting Republican no matter what, because I don't like Hillary, Obama or Edwards and one of those will get it. One thing I do like about Obama is that he has said he will get rid of No Child Left Behind, and as a teacher(well, when I graduate in May I will be), that's fantastic.
I would love for Ron Paul to get a chance, but he scares too many people in power positions. After watching the debate the other night, I heard a lot of ideas from Huckabee, Paul and Guliani that I liked, especially on going the nuclear energy route
2004 election: A Minnesota elector, pledged for Democrats John Kerry and John Edwards, cast his or her presidential vote for John Ewards (sic), apparently accidentally. (All of Minnesota's electors cast their vice presidential ballots for John Edwards.) Minnesota's electors cast secret ballots, so unless one of the electors claims responsibility, it is unlikely that the identity of the faithless elector will ever be known. As a result of this incident, Minnesota Statutes were amended to provide for public balloting of the electors' votes and invalidation of a vote cast for someone other than the candidate pledged for by the elector.2004 election: A Minnesota elector, pledged for Democrats John Kerry and John Edwards, cast his or her presidential vote for John Ewards (sic), apparently accidentally. (All of Minnesota's electors cast their vice presidential ballots for John Edwards.) Minnesota's electors cast secret ballots, so unless one of the electors claims responsibility, it is unlikely that the identity of the faithless elector will ever be known. As a result of this incident, Minnesota Statutes were amended to provide for public balloting of the electors' votes and invalidation of a vote cast for someone other than the candidate pledged for by the elector.
2000 election: D.C. Elector Barbara Lett-Simmons, pledged for Democrats Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, cast no electoral votes as a protest of Washington D.C.'s lack of statehood, which she described as the federal district's "colonial status".
2000 election: D.C. Elector Barbara Lett-Simmons, pledged for Democrats Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, cast no electoral votes as a protest of Washington D.C.'s lack of statehood, which she described as the federal district's "colonial status".
It might just be in Minnesota like that. This is what I came up with:
Congress has always counted electoral votes for individuals who were not candidates, with one exception: if a candidate cannot meet (or no longer meets) the Constitutional requirements to serve in the office, Congress has voided electoral votes cast for that person. This last occurred in 1872 when Horace Greeley, the Democratic Party presidential candidate died after election day, but before the electoral votes were counted. Although Greeley received some electoral votes, Congress declared them void.
Congress has always counted electoral votes for individuals who were not candidates, with one exception: if a candidate cannot meet (or no longer meets) the Constitutional requirements to serve in the office, Congress has voided electoral votes cast for that person. This last occurred in 1872 when Horace Greeley, the Democratic Party presidential candidate died after election day, but before the electoral votes were counted. Although Greeley received some electoral votes, Congress declared them void.
-
Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
That wouldn't apply to a man who has taken himself out of the presidential election to be a vice-president? It seems odd...
Either way, I would be floored if ANY of the 158 instances out of the ridiculous number elections X representated states ever changed an election. I think you can sleep at night thinking that your vote and the votes of all your state-mates will be ultimately reflected by your elected.
Either way, I would be floored if ANY of the 158 instances out of the ridiculous number elections X representated states ever changed an election. I think you can sleep at night thinking that your vote and the votes of all your state-mates will be ultimately reflected by your elected.
I'm with you Gabe, aside from the bit that Z mentioned about "If you're not voting for Obama, don't vote." If there's one thing that pisses me off in the electoral process (after the influence of corporate lobbyists and negative attack ads) it's people that don't vote. People in other countries, and in our own country, have fought and died to be able to cast a vote for their leaders. To not bother is to spit on their graves.
Vote.
Vote.
I think you are kind of twisting what I did, Z. I'm not sending you to a website that says "Vote for Barack because he's cool." This is his official website that outlines his positions and views on major political issues. It's the perfect tool for people who want to know what Barack is all about. Every major candidate has one and they are a valuable tool for the common citizen whose trying to get know a bunch of names and faces. I think they are accurate portrayals of what the candidates stand for. How else do you come to support a candidate? You see if his ideals match yours and you go from there.Royals wrote:It's tough to detect sarcasm smack in the middle of a serious "Vote for Barack" message - unless the entire thing was sarcasm, and I just totally missed it.
If everyone is smart, they'd listen to all the candidates - not just Barack, and then decide who's best for them. It's fantastic that you've decided to back Barack - a very worthy person to back - but just telling people to vote for him, or just go visit the website is not what helps people make a decision. If you want to make a difference, tell us what Barack stands for - What are his policies that will touch the people who write on this board? How does he distinguish himself from the other candidates?
You think people should make a decision based on a website that is totally, 150% pro-Barack? That's like me deciding Clemens is innocent because I only read the report his lawyer put out. I realize that you are merely stumping for Barack - but stump man, stump! My guy just resigned and might be off the ballot - I'm an open vote - my issues are foreign diplomacy, education, and health care - why should I vote for Barack?
Why would I outline his views on everything when you can go there and check on the issues that mean something to you? Like I said, after reading up on him, he might not be the guy for you. That's fine. This is not something I take lightly. It's a cause I've dedicated a lot of time and some money to. But, I'm not gonna preach to you guys. I only post this asking you to give him a chance - to head over there and read about him. Watch videos of him speaking. See if his politics of hope is more inspiring to you than the common politics of the cynics?
And, yes, I do make a difference doing exactly what I have been doing. I inform the people I come in contact with that there is an option out there they should explore. There's a voice out there that they should take a second and listen to. Because if they do, that voice just might inspire them as it has inspired me, and several other members of a generation most thought was politically dead.
I'm not telling anyone to blindly vote for Barack Obama. I'm simply asking people to listen. I genuinely believe Barack will take care of the rest.
-
Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
Because most people don't make a spreadsheet to compare candidates - that's why...
And the pro-Obama website on his issues is probably not going to list any weaknesses with the Obama candidacy - are they? Didn't think so...
I'm not asking you to outline his candidacy issue by issue, I gave you 3 specific issues and I asked you to differentiate his views (I know his views, many other people don't) from Edwards and Clinton. That shouldn't take more then a paragraph each - you wrote 4 paragraphs, including an opening that's exactly as long as what I was asking for. I'm a free vote for you to win for your candidate - win me damnit!
And the pro-Obama website on his issues is probably not going to list any weaknesses with the Obama candidacy - are they? Didn't think so...
I'm not asking you to outline his candidacy issue by issue, I gave you 3 specific issues and I asked you to differentiate his views (I know his views, many other people don't) from Edwards and Clinton. That shouldn't take more then a paragraph each - you wrote 4 paragraphs, including an opening that's exactly as long as what I was asking for. I'm a free vote for you to win for your candidate - win me damnit!
I don't know how people compare candidates. I would assume that everyone has a different way. The candidates websites are the easiest and quickest ways to see what they are all about. I am struggling to see how thats a bad suggestion.Royals wrote:Because most people don't make a spreadsheet to compare candidates - that's why...
And the pro-Obama website on his issues is probably not going to list any weaknesses with the Obama candidacy - are they? Didn't think so...
I'm not asking you to outline his candidacy issue by issue, I gave you 3 specific issues and I asked you to differentiate his views (I know his views, many other people don't) from Edwards and Clinton. That shouldn't take more then a paragraph each - you wrote 4 paragraphs, including an opening that's exactly as long as what I was asking for. I'm a free vote for you to win for your candidate - win me damnit!
I honestly don't get what you're upset about. I made a suggestion and I hope that some people follow it. You're upset because Obama's website doesn't list negatives about him? No candidate lists their negative traits. That's not a way to get elected.
I want you to support Barack, so I'm supposed to send you to a website that tells you what's wrong with him? Take the suggestion and check out the candidate, or don't. There was absolutely nothing wrong with what I suggested. I like a candidate. I am providing you with a way to check out more about him. The rest is up to you. Compare and contrast candidates however you want. Thats your perogative. But before any of you make up your mind, you should see how Barack feels about the things that mean the most to you.
From what I have seen and read about Obama if I could vote for him in the primary over the other Democratic candidates I would, but since I sit on the other side of the aisle I am with Aaron on this one and will vote for Huckabee in the NY primary (over Rudy the Yankee fan). But in the general election I have no idea who I would support if they were running against each other.
