Reader Forum | 11/03/2008 2:40 pm

Election Night Reader Forum

The place to be on Election Night 2008

It’s finally here. We’ve come a long way together…now let’s weigh in as the states report in on Election Night 2008! All together, now… (and don’t forget to vote!)

306 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

If you know an Obama/Biden supporter who is thinking about not voting, believing their vote won’t matter because pundits and polls are predicting an Obama win … PLEASE advise them to vote. Where I live, Republicans are among the early voters. And, they are steadily streaming to their voting precincts. VOTE FOR CHANGE!! VOTE FOR OBAMA!!

By Maizie James on 11/04/2008 11:16 am

e-mail alert

Maizie, I had a similar experience this morning. At first I was very pleased, because there was a short line at the high school (our voting place) and even a police officer standing guard at the door. Usually there is no one and i mean no one except the poll workers there. So I thought oh good! people are coming out to vote … but the people I saw were tense, frowning, determined. (This is a Repub county.) Being who I am, when I left the booth I somewhat loudly thanked all the volunteers and left the building. I was behind two older women (in their 80s I would guess) who were commenting to each other on the “large” turnout. “Isn’t it great?” I butted in. They looked at me sternly, and one stopped to face me: “We’ll see!” she said, and as she turned sharply back to her companion, I heard a distinct “Humph!” Dems. Don’t think for a second this is a sure thing. Make sure everyone in your family votes. Offer your neighbors rides or babysitting services so that they vote, too. And you out there, please for the sake of us all, VOTE!

By rocky rocky on 11/04/2008 11:38 am

e-mail alert

RocKy, Thank you for sharing. At one point, while I was standing in line among grim voters, I though I was being a bit paranoid. The ‘hissing’ was not audible, but the undertone of contempt was definitely obvious. When I returned home, I called or emailed everyone I thought, who might be complacent about voting. Obama needs to win because this country needs a MAJOR change in Washington. OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT 2008

By Maizie James on 11/04/2008 12:21 pm

e-mail alert

Also, my grandchildren’s elementary school had a school-wide vote. Very close. McCain won by about 6 votes. The school “votes” around here at least usually show how the county will vote. So again, everyone … get out there and vote. It’s too important not to.

By rocky rocky on 11/04/2008 11:44 am

e-mail alert

I am hoping for a Republican White House and a heavily Democratic Legislative branch (senate and house). Checks and balances.

By Buh- Bye on 11/04/2008 11:25 am

e-mail alert

My Alias, As late as the primaries, I was undecided but leaning toward McCain. Then he chose Palin. it was then that McCain lost my vote. I believe many other Independents felt the same. I am hoping that Obama - with the right support team - will infuse this country with a sense of hope and courage to do what is needed to bring about change in the way we live. It’s time for a new page in American politics. And … IF McCain pulls ahead and win, I’m still hoping that fundamental change will take place in America.

By Maizie James on 11/04/2008 12:30 pm

e-mail alert

I heard Denis Hopper say the same thing on the few minutes I watched of The View this morning, Maizie. He also bailed after Palin. Of course, a lot more Repubs jumped in with Palin. It will be curious to see how things start to look across the map as the night wears on. I really do think we could right things with McCain in the oval and an overwhelming Democratic majority in the legislature. I worry when checks and balances are removed. Ask Canada what happened when they tossed out the Conservative govt. (actually eviscerated the party) and went all Liberal. Wasn’t long before the country was in shambles again. Balance is key. Checks and balances, checks and balances. The doubled up Repub legislature & executive branch of the first years of the Bush administration took us to ruin. The Dems under Pelosi however did not make the inroads promised. So, the scales can tip us to ruin in the other direction as well. Good lawyers will tell you that the best result in any civil case is when both parties are a little unhappy. It points to fairness.

By Buh- Bye on 11/04/2008 2:41 pm

e-mail alert

I’m having a hard time balancing my checks, Alias….ha! I’d like to see the Dems take the White House and dominate both houses in the legislature for 4 years - long enough to right the economy, end the Iraq War, and capture bin Laden. After that, I could tolerate the checks & balances.

By James the Game on 11/04/2008 1:56 pm

e-mail alert

Right on, James!!!! And I think people get confused about the whole checks and balances thing. They were established to keep any one branch from having too much power, in particular the executive branch. The Founding Fathers were afraid of someone coming in a creating their own monarchy. I personally wish they had added the law that no President’s son could be President, too!!

By Rita T on 11/04/2008 3:38 pm

e-mail alert

Well, that might’ve worked for the Bushes, but what about John Adams and John Quincey Adams? A major problem with our government is that there is too much partisanship nowadays, and Congressmembers are so entrenched in their stances that it takes forever to get important legislation passed. Having a strong majority and control of the White House, Senate & (out)House will allow swift passage of crucial health reform, ending of the war in Iraq (which would never happen under McCain. Never!) and elimination of huge tax breaks for the rich, such as Big Oil and Fortune 500 execs. McCain calls Obama the “Redistributionist”, but George W. Bush was the biggest redistributor of our times, virtually eliminating the middle class with his tax & health plans.

By James the Game on 11/04/2008 4:14 pm

e-mail alert

There are a lot of interesting comparisons with John Q. Adams and George W. Bush. The Election of 1824 had Andrew Jackson with the lead in electoral votes AND the popular vote. Because there were four candidates running and at that time only three could participate in the runoff, the fourth place guy, Henry Clay, threw his votes to John Q. in exchange for the Secretary of State job. Like Al Gore, Jackson felt the election had been stolen from him. John Q. was not the man his father was in regards to politics. He even asked Jackson to be his Secretary of War, which Jackson turned down. He tend to make appointments to placate enemies rather than to reward friends. Overall, he was one of those D+ or C- Presidents.

By Rita T on 11/04/2008 4:42 pm

e-mail alert

You are quite well read on the Adamses, Read a T.

By James the Game on 11/04/2008 5:02 pm

e-mail alert

Nah … will just be covering that section next week in my US History class.

By Rita T on 11/04/2008 5:37 pm

e-mail alert

I hope those HIS-story texts credit women a lot more now than they did when I was in grade/middle school in the early ‘70’s.

By James the Game on 11/04/2008 6:21 pm

e-mail alert

Gosh yes!! It is amazing how much data has come to light about the role of women in our early country. I am having my class read a book called “An Uncommon Soldier,” letters of a northern woman named Rosetta Wakeman who fought for the North in the Civil War dressed as a male. It is an amazing story.

By Rita T on 11/04/2008 7:51 pm