• 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.

Official NeoGAF US Mid-term Elections 2006 Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
jgkspsx said:
If it's any consolation, Ward Connerly's bill in CA was basically abandoned by higher ed institutions very quickly. I think by this point it's not really in force anymore -- the governmental and education entities affected found many loopholes.

You don't think that income-based admissions multipliers, or admission multipliers based on school district (i.e. a good student from a crappy district would get an advantage over a better student from a very good district) would be an effective replacement, anyway? I don't want it to pass, but I don't know how much of an effect it will have if it does.
The Michigan one was written by the same people to get around the loopholes that the California one had. It says implicitly: "No public institution shall use race, gender, ethnicity, or anything else in consideration of personnel to acceptance." or something like that. This would pretty much destroy the Supreme Court decision that upheld todays iteration of affirmative action.

And there's no way people can say they understand AA and agree with getting rid of it, unless they don't think minorities deserve extra help. The people I see by and large who oppose AA are the people who go around saying that racism doesn't exist anymore, but they ignore that it's been around so long that ti's completely institutionalized. Ugh.

I need a pizza and some beer... I just know Michigan is gonna elect DeVos. :(
 
They're not even talking about them. In other news, from The Corner (scroll down -- the timestamps aren't linking properly), Rich Lowry sez:

The DSCC... [Rich Lowry]
I hear they are confident about Webb, cautiously confident about McCaskill and giddy about Santorum. Fwiw...
Posted at 4:37 PM
 

Cheebs

Member
Diablos said:
I'm shocked about Iraq, really. I wonder if Saddam's death sentence had anything to do with it. Did people not see this coming from the day he was captured? Come on!
It is similar to the jump when we killed Zarqawi...but that wasn't a day before an election.

Wtf how can nearly HALF of those voting approve of his handling on Iraq.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
maynerd said:
They are probably referring to the fact that tax revenues are higher than when Clinton was in office. Which is true.
That's not the same thing though. Corporate tax revenue is certainly up, but they were talking about personal income tax.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
wxyz.com said:
With just a few hours before the polls close there are allegations of voting irregularities. Tuesday afternoon, the NAACP called for an emergency news conference in Detroit.

The NAACP said at least 70 people have called to say they have not been able to vote in Detroit.


Stay with Action News and wxyz.com for continuing coverage.
hmm... that's from the website of the biggest news station in detroit
 
Oh ****, I forgot to vote against Kennedy.

:(

Only now did I remember hes against the Cape Wind project. ****er.

It was a surprise to see his name on the ballot because I had no idea that was a race....no commercials. :(
 

Cheebs

Member
jamesinclair said:
Oh ****, I forgot to vote against Kennedy.

:(

Only now did I remember hes against the Cape Wind project. ****er.

It was a surprise to see his name on the ballot because I had no idea that was a race....no commercials. :(
Thankfully. Ted Kennedy is a great senator.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
haha, huge voter turnout in Michigan so far. They're worried about running out of ballots in Oakland County... some communities are up at 90-93% turnout. This expert on the news is saying that it'll probably be at least in the 60% range.
 

Cheebs

Member
whytemyke said:
haha, huge voter turnout in Michigan so far. They're worried about running out of ballots in Oakland County
country wide it looks to be the biggest mid-term turnout since '82.
 
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/11/07/exit_polls.html

Take with grain of salt

CNN reports corruption was the number most important issue to voters who responded to exit surveys. Early Senate numbers (uncomfirmed and with caveats):

Democrats are leading in Rhode Island (+7), Virginia (+7), Pennsylvania (+15), Ohio (+14), New Jersey (+8), Montana (+9), Missouri (+2).

Republicans are leading in Tennessee (+4) and Arizona (+4).

Again, take with grain of salt.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
If this election doesn't spur bipartisan election process reform...

*sigh*
 
http://mydd.com/story/2006/11/7/174759/728

You know the caveats.

Don't know if these are accurate, but I just heard these.

Democrats leading in:
VA: 52-47
RI: 53-46
PA: 57-42
OH: 57-43
NJ: 52-45
MT: 53-46
MO: 50-48
MD: 53-46

Republicans leading:
TN: 51-48
AZ: 50-46

Double super caution: These numebrs are both unconfirmed and they are exit polls. I am going to keep looking into this.

Update: The numebrs I saw didn't change. I just noticed some typos.

Turnout expected to hit 70% in Connecticut.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Don't expect to stay up and quickly learn the results. The dust probably won't settle until tomorrow morning sometime. Get your sleep.
 

Shard

XBLAnnoyance
Amir0x said:
some time!

at least until 9:00pmEST, when we begin to see with some definitive numbers where things are trending!


Hell, that is good enough for a 2 1/2 hour nap, I need some post-test sleep.
 
Shard said:
I'll be back by 9 PM EST, this is what alarm clocks are for after all.

Dude, by that time, Bush will have signed Presidential Order #1 titled "What now, bitches?" in which he dissolves the election and claims that e-voting machines are unreliable and as such until the problems are fixed, the election will be postponed.
 

WedgeX

Banned
whytemyke said:
hmm... that's from the website of the biggest news station in detroit

I wish the Free Press had some type of coverage. Right now all they can muster is that people look foward to less phone calls (which is true, but still!).
 

Diablos

Member
For reference.

481wi0p.jpg
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Father_Brain said:
FWIW, Lamont's exit polls show him four points ahead of Lieberman. You heard that right. Anyway, I don't expect him to win, but I have little doubt that the results will be much closer than the pre-election polls would suggest.
I kind of like this massive "**** YOU" that Lieberman is giving to everyone in the DNC. Gets kicked off the ticket and then runs an independent campaign so well that he could beat both major parties :lol
 
Kicked off the ticket? His voters in Connecticut voted him off the ticket. The DNC had nothing to do with his problems and the DNC would do well to heed the voice of their constiuents. Their (DNC) little tap-dance with Lieberman up to this point is nothing short of sickening and I truly hope Lamont pulls it off. Not even Barack Obama is willing to place his ass on the line for Lamont. How do you think that makes the Democrats who voiced their concerns with their vote, feel? I can think of about only two prominent, national Democrats who have gone to bat for Lamont since September: Kerry and Edwards. Everyone else has abanonded ship. Talk about banana republic.
 

Amir0x

Banned
CNN is saying that those who chose Economy as the most important issue, voted Democrat by more than 20 points. And although those who chose terrorism as the most important issue mostly voted for Republicans, it was extremely close there.

So maybe the Exit Polls aren't so bad!
 

maynerd

Banned
Diablos said:
I really wish Lieberman would've just taken his loss like a man and not switched to Independent.

It just goes to show that he didn't give a shit about the democratic party and only cared about his own power. What a punk azz.
 

Triumph

Banned
Hitokage said:
Don't expect to stay up and quickly learn the results. The dust probably won't settle until tomorrow morning sometime. Get your sleep.
Yeah, but for us unemployed bums, this is major theater. I'm about to head to the store and pick up some more provisions. I'm gonna need a couple of generic mountain dew 2 liters, some veggie hotdogs, oooh, and a 12 pack of shitty beer, let's call it High Life just in case I need to sip some champagne later, I can do it with the Champagne of Beers.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Incognito said:
Kicked off the ticket? His voters in Connecticut voted him off the ticket. The DNC had nothing to do with his problems and the DNC would do well to heed the voice of their constiuents. Their (DNC) little tap-dance with Lieberman up to this point is nothing short of sickening and I truly hope Lamont pulls it off. Not even Barack Obama is willing to place his ass on the line for Lamont. How do you think that makes the Democrats who voiced their concerns with their vote, feel? I can think of about only two prominent, national Democrats who have gone to bat for Lamont since September: Kerry and Edwards. Everyone else has abanonded ship. Talk about banana republic.
I'm sorry, does getting "voted off" the ticket somehow not mean that he was kicked off? He was on the ticket, then lost the primary, and is no longer on. He was kicked off.

maynerd said:
It just goes to show that he didn't give a shit about the democratic party and only cared about his own power. What a punk azz.
:lol it just goes to show that the democratic party got rid of him but a shitload of his constituency in the state still wants him around. why should he be loyal to a party that was so ready to push him aside instead of working with him? **** that noize.
 

maynerd

Banned
whytemyke said:
I'm sorry, does getting "voted off" the ticket somehow not mean that he was kicked off? He was on the ticket, then lost the primary, and is no longer on. He was kicked off.


:lol it just goes to show that the democratic party got rid of him but a shitload of his constituency in the state still wants him around. why should he be loyal to a party that was so ready to push him aside instead of working with him? **** that noize.

What are you talking about? The voters decided who should run in the primary. You want two democrats running against each other in the actual election? Neither would win due to the split vote. You are koo koo.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
whytemyke said:
I'm sorry, does getting "voted off" the ticket somehow not mean that he was kicked off? He was on the ticket, then lost the primary, and is no longer on. He was kicked off.
...by his constituents in the democratic party. Why is that so hard to grasp?
 

jjasper

Member
maynerd said:
What are you talking about? The voters decided who should run in the primary. You want two democrats running against each other in the actual election? Neither would win due to the split vote. You are koo koo.

But primary voters don't represent the state. His constituents consist of everyone in the state not just the democratic party.
 

Donono

Member
I bet this goes down like a zeppelin after all the republicans (cause they're the only ones who have jobs, lol, am I rite?) get off work.
 

maynerd

Banned
jjasper said:
But primary voters don't represent the state. His constituents consist of everyone in the state not just the democratic party.

I think the people who support the democratic party should have the choice on who runs to represent their party....what on earth are you trying to say?
 

maynerd

Banned
Donono said:
I bet this goes down like a zeppelin after all the republicans (cause they're the only ones who have jobs, lol, am I rite?) get off work.

No way man poor people have shitty jobs that don't allow them time to go vote during the day. They are the one who will go vote late and they will vote democrats! :)
 
I don't know what the hell whytemyke is talking about anymore. His largest constituency right now are Republicans, not Democrats. Registered Democratic voters of Connecticut voted him out in their primary in August, not the DNC.
why should he be loyal to a party that was so ready to push him aside instead of working with him? **** that noize.

Are you joking? Is this serious? The voters of Connecticut booted his ass out, not the DNC. What is hard to understand? The DNC didn't just decide to throw up Lamont in the primary againt Lieberman -- in fact, they were against Lamont running in the first place and only came behind him with minimal support after he won the primary. Maybe you want the party to select your candidates and the losing candidates to brush off the official results, but that's not how a democracy works.
 

jjasper

Member
maynerd said:
I think the people who support the democratic party should have the choice on who runs to represent their party....what on earth are you trying to say?

That he has support of people that don't align themselves with a party. I am just saying if he runs and has the most support of the state he represents them over a stupid political party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom