If you're using celebrities as a deciding factor in who to vote for, you shouldn't vote. I can understand people voting for someone because they have done their own personal research and think, based on that, that their candidate is the best choice. However, if you're gonna vote for someone just because someone you like says so, KEEP OUT OF THE VOTING BOOTH.

 

(This is nothing against anyone here, and I understand we all have the right to vote. It's just irritating to see some of the logic that people use to vote.)

If you're using celebrities as a deciding factor in who to vote for, you shouldn't vote. I can understand people voting for someone because they have done their own personal research and think, based on that, that their candidate is the best choice. However, if you're gonna vote for someone just because someone you like says so, KEEP OUT OF THE VOTING BOOTH.

 

(This is nothing against anyone here, and I understand we all have the right to vote. It's just irritating to see some of the logic that people use to vote.)

 

Well said! Apparently studies have shown that celebrity endorsement in national elections like these has done nothing to whoever they're supporting and only alienates the celebrity from many of their fans.

 

Fortunately there wasn't a line at my polling location; but I'd say it took me about 15 minutes to complete the ballot itself.

 

What's the procedure there? Was it electronic? How many papers did you fill in?

If you're using celebrities as a deciding factor in who to vote for, you shouldn't vote. I can understand people voting for someone because they have done their own personal research and think, based on that, that their candidate is the best choice. However, if you're gonna vote for someone just because someone you like says so, KEEP OUT OF THE VOTING BOOTH.

 

(This is nothing against anyone here, and I understand we all have the right to vote. It's just irritating to see some of the logic that people use to vote.)

 

:nod:

 

What's the procedure there? Was it electronic? How many papers did you fill in?

 

In Texas it's a machine with a click wheel, kinda like this- http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/033/072/iFF/voting-machine-shst-121105.jpg?1352157083

^ Actually, that's not entirely true. I'm from Texas, and I filled out a paper ballot.

If you're using celebrities as a deciding factor in who to vote for, you shouldn't vote. I can understand people voting for someone because they have done their own personal research and think, based on that, that their candidate is the best choice. However, if you're gonna vote for someone just because someone you like says so, KEEP OUT OF THE VOTING BOOTH.

 

(This is nothing against anyone here, and I understand we all have the right to vote. It's just irritating to see some of the logic that people use to vote.)

Oh, yeah, I totally agree with that.

 

I guess celebrities mostly have an effect on awareness and making people vote, whether than making people vote for someone.

 

 

A French TV channel invited a Mormon priest (I am sorry if it's not the correct term, it's how they translated it, I am not very familiar with Mormons). France being REALLY pro-Obama...you can feel a bit of awkwardness :uhoh:

But don't you think it's a bit unfair the Romney has Chuck Norris on his side? :P

^ Actually, that's not entirely true. I'm from Texas, and I filled out a paper ballot.

 

I guess it depends on the city/district.

Yeah, probably.

 

On a related note, I'd like to say how disappointed I am in my city. It seems that the polls weren't exactly active here. As of 1:30 pm today, there were 156 votes tallied. (My mom and I voted about 1:45 pm, so our votes aren't tallied in that. My dad's is, though.) My mom passed by the voting location later this evening on the way home from her other trip to town, and she said it looked dead. :\

THey aren't allowed to close the polls til the official closing time. I'd report irregularities if I were you. And I would certainly look into knowing your votes weren't tallies. This is going to be close.

I don't think that's the case here. The workers seemed very reputable, and they had signs up indicating when the polls would be open. I'm hoping that maybe a lot of people sent in absentee ballots. (This is quite possible, actually, as I live in a university town.)

I hope you're right. I'm REALLY uncomfortable with thenumers right now. We have a very concervative leader here who has very similar ideas as Romney. In terms of trade, things are bad enough here.

I love friends telling me the US elections don't affect us...:p

Man i wish I could vote...I miss it by 9 days. I would have voted for Obama too.

^ It's okay, your vote would have been irrelevant if you're from California. :nice:

So I decided to hold off on watching any of the streaming results until now, nearly 10pm. Sure enough, it's close... the popular vote is 50%/49% with Romney having a slight edge, and he's winning in the electoral votes (162 vs. 157 for Obama). This will be interesting indeed.

 

What's the procedure there? Was it electronic? How many papers did you fill in?

It varies for each precinct, and actually mine was slightly more technologically advanced than last time. For my precinct, you walk over to a table and hand them your drivers' license, and fill out a little piece of paper with your name/address/signature. Then scoot over 5 feet to another table, and give another person the form that you just filled out, and you swipe your drivers license (in the past they didn't have anything to swipe your license, they would just go through this long list of names/addresses and check off your name). Then they give you the ballot which had something like 30 different things to vote for, which you "fill in the oval" with a pen. When you're done you go over to this bin (which oddly resembles a paper shredder) and feed it through the top.

 

I'm bummed, they didn't have any "I voted" stickers left. :bigcry:

Commentators here are calling it for Obama already.

Ohio looks good for Obama right now, but only 49% of the vote is in, and a lot of that is absentee balloting. Historically, Democrats have taken Ohio in the early vote and Republicans take it on election day.

Commentators here are calling it for Obama already.

 

Pretty much into Romney's post mortem talk on the BBC here in the UK. Watching CNN online which is very exciting! BBC has the graphics (not info overload like CNN) but it's all very calm in comparison.

 

Avalanche of projected electoral college votes to come from the West coast and in favour of Obama in 7 minutes!

^ That's not really true. In 2000 and 2004 is was blue until it went for Bush.

 

But Republicans have never won without Ohio.

:uhoh:

Obama won!!! :awesome:

Wooohoooo! Obama is re-elected. My 2 geeks Nates were right.

:bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

And it happened... winning the electoral vote whilst (up to this point) losing the overall popular vote.

 

Gotta love the U.S. system! :freak:

Fox News is trying to make the case that Obama might not have won Ohio

Fox News is trying to make the case that Obama might not have won Ohio

Well, it is 50%/49% in Ohio right now, and not all the precincts have reported yet.

 

At this point it might not matter anyway. Currently the (projected) electoral votes are 275 Obama / 203 Romney. Ohio is 18 electoral votes. So if you give Ohio to Romney, that makes it 257 / 221. Obama would still likely get 13 more electoral votes to hit the magical 270.