A Sea Of Red

Should be a busy day and a LONG night!!


I want to be the first to say congratulations to Barack Obama on becoming our first black president. That is quite an honor, and no matter what side of the political fence you are on, it is nice to see that our country has come this far in our views of minorities! (of course I was hoping that JC Watts would have gotten this priviledge )

I am glad you are confident because I sure am not. Of course, I live in MN where they don't know who to vote for unless they happen to be something like 'Jesse Ventura', but I digress. I am ready to get to the polls, get my FREE Starbucks, and move on.

cheerbren wrote:I am glad you are confident because I sure am not. Of course, I live in MN where they don't know who to vote for unless they happen to be something like 'Jesse Ventura', but I digress. I am ready to get to the polls, get my FREE Starbucks, and move on.

McCain's closed the gap in some key states, especially Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina, and Missouri, but even if he won ALL those states, he'd still have to pick up Virginia plus another 10 electoral votes. Colorado would tie it, but Democrats hold a edge in congress on a state-by-state basis, so he'd need to pick up one of Maine's votes or another state (Obama wins in a tie).

In short, McCain is an ultra long shot. He needs all the undecideds to break his way plus some more. It is just not going to happen this year. We will get to see what the Democrats will do the next 4 years.

belcherboy wrote:

cheerbren wrote:I am glad you are confident because I sure am not. Of course, I live in MN where they don't know who to vote for unless they happen to be something like 'Jesse Ventura', but I digress. I am ready to get to the polls, get my FREE Starbucks, and move on.

McCain's closed the gap in some key states, especially Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina, and Missouri, but even if he won ALL those states, he'd still have to pick up Virginia plus another 10 electoral votes. Colorado would tie it, but Democrats hold a edge in congress on a state-by-state basis, so he'd need to pick up one of Maine's votes or another state (Obama wins in a tie).

In short, McCain is an ultra long shot. He needs all the undecideds to break his way plus some more. It is just not going to happen this year. We will get to see what the Democrats will do the next 4 years.

That's not necessarily true that Obama wins in a tie. That will be determined by the electoral college, and they are not required to vote for who won the popular vote in their state. In 2004, there was one member of the college who voted for Bush even though Kerry won their state.

ALUmnus wrote:

belcherboy wrote:

cheerbren wrote:I am glad you are confident because I sure am not. Of course, I live in MN where they don't know who to vote for unless they happen to be something like 'Jesse Ventura', but I digress. I am ready to get to the polls, get my FREE Starbucks, and move on.

McCain's closed the gap in some key states, especially Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina, and Missouri, but even if he won ALL those states, he'd still have to pick up Virginia plus another 10 electoral votes. Colorado would tie it, but Democrats hold a edge in congress on a state-by-state basis, so he'd need to pick up one of Maine's votes or another state (Obama wins in a tie).

In short, McCain is an ultra long shot. He needs all the undecideds to break his way plus some more. It is just not going to happen this year. We will get to see what the Democrats will do the next 4 years.

That's not necessarily true that Obama wins in a tie. That will be determined by the electoral college, and they are not required to vote for who won the popular vote in their state. In 2004, there was one member of the college who voted for Bush even though Kerry won their state.

That vote in 2004 did not determine the election though. There is NO way someone would vote that way to determine an election IMO. If it is a tie, it will go to the House and they will have a Democrat majority. They will vote in Obama.

ALUmnus wrote:That will be determined by the electoral college, and they are not required to vote for who won the popular vote in their state. In 2004, there was one member of the college who voted for Bush even though Kerry won their state.

you are short on details!! while that is true from a constitutional standpoint the federal government delegated control to each state on how their electoral college votes work. 48 states and dc have laws saying the winner of the popular vote in those states will earn electoral college reps that are pledged to that candidate. the other two states have mixed ec reps based on each districts vote.

what you are talking about are faithless electors and in 24 states they can be punished by law!! states have the right to govern their electoral reps. some states say faithless reps have their votes canceled. point is that it varies and it depends on the state as to how it works. in most states they do have to vote for whoever won the popular vote in their state.

besides in a tie of the college the house of representatives votes as whole states and it would take a majority to win.

belcherboy wrote:If it is a tie, it will go to the House and they will have a Democrat majority. They will vote in Obama.

that is not how that works. states have to vote as whole states not as individual reps.

gquin035 wrote:

belcherboy wrote:If it is a tie, it will go to the House and they will have a Democrat majority. They will vote in Obama.

that is not how that works. states have to vote as whole states not as individual reps.

Not true. If there is a 269-269 tie in the electoral college, the Rep's in the House can vote for whomever they like (they don't even have to vote for McCain or Obama)

belcherboy wrote:

gquin035 wrote:

belcherboy wrote:If it is a tie, it will go to the House and they will have a Democrat majority. They will vote in Obama.

that is not how that works. states have to vote as whole states not as individual reps.

Not true. If there is a 269-269 tie in the electoral college, the Rep's in the House can vote for whomever they like (they don't even have to vote for McCain or Obama)

"Contingent presidential election by House

Pursuant to the Twelfth Amendment, the House of Representatives is required to go into session immediately to vote for President if no candidate for President receives a majority (270 votes) of the 538 electoral votes.

In this event, the House of Representatives is limited to choosing from among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. Each state delegation votes en bloc - its members have a single vote collectively. A candidate must receive an absolute majority of state delegation votes (currently 26) in order for that candidate to become the President-elect. Additionally, delegations from at least two-thirds of all the states must be present for voting to take place. The House continues balloting until it elects a President.

The House of Representatives has chosen the President only twice: once under Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 (in 1801) and once under the Twelfth Amendment (in 1825)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-wei ... 06637.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008 ... 278&page=1

Under the 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, if one candidate does not get 270 votes, the decision gets kicked to the House of Representatives, where each state gets a vote -- a formula that would likely guarantee an Obama victory.

I'm just going by what I've read, so perhaps I am wrong here.

belcherboy wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-wei ... 06637.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008 ... 278&page=1

Under the 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, if one candidate does not get 270 votes, the decision gets kicked to the House of Representatives, where each state gets a vote -- a formula that would likely guarantee an Obama victory.

I'm just going by what I've read, so perhaps I am wrong here.

yes which means each state gets A vote, not multiple votes, so California would have as much say in this as North Dakota.

Okay, so each state groups together it's delegation of reps. They vote and whoever wins each mini-election, gets that state's single vote. So I guess you'd have to determine how many states have a majority of Democrat representatives.

Am I understanding that correctly?

McCain with the early lead: 8-3
McCain has won Kentucky, Obama has won Vermont. Polls are closed in Virginia, South Carolina, Indiana, and Georgia as well but those states remain too close to call.

We lose

Yep. Fox just said PA is gone.


I for one, welcome our new socialist overlord.

sadly NC is looking blue

ALUmnus wrote:Okay, so each state groups together it's delegation of reps. They vote and whoever wins each mini-election, gets that state's single vote. So I guess you'd have to determine how many states have a majority of Democrat representatives.

Am I understanding that correctly?

Yes.

Game over. Drive home safely.

Looking like a route.

Ha. Only 12k votes in PA have been reported. Less than 1%. Exit polls are garbage.

President Obama!?? That's it. I'm ill.

According to that, with Florida still in play, PA was losable but he had to win NH and OH to make up for it.

Also, with NH and NC losing an R senate seat, 60 (unstoppable) Ds is looking likely. The next 2 years are going to be so so bad for us.

Stokes County stayed red in NC.

*phew*

I'm just saying my people did their part. Didn't help though.