This election season was exhausting...I ran out of sarcastic and cynical things to say before they even started the debate.

Now we get a whole couple months (maybe) before they start going on about 2016. But the rest will be nice while it lasts.

... on the Republican Party.

Here.

Actually it's mostly interesting as an example of how to say nothing. The opening paragraphs read as:

What's next for the Republican Party? Some say they should be more conservative; some say they should be more moderate; and some, believe it or not, say they should stay as they are!

... which is kind of a weird way to open an article, but!

hS

I had to take mum to the polling place and help her vote. But my family's staunchly for Obama, since we're not very excited about Romney's foreign policy. Being immigrants from China (recently naturalised and stuff), we're extremely concerned about his... ahem... knack for getting people in other countries pissed off at the US.

That kinda man's not a good commander-in-chief for me. Also, the slashing PBS thing wan't cool, or the fact that his running mate is an utter idiot and the entire party wants to force their own beliefs into the uteri of other women, etc, etc.

I think one of the cooler things I got out of this was that I had a discussion about politics with the friend who inspired Scientist Lori Starrett, and now I've got plenty of fodder for her characterisation. Now to actually do something with it...

And I think that the "Obama hasn't done much since he took office" opinion is kind of a misconception. He's actually done a lot, but a lot of his accomplishments have been a bit understated and marginalized. I realize that there's a lot more he could be doing, and he did seem to be caving to opposition rather easily a couple years ago, but most media sources tend to accentuate the negative a bit. There's also the matter of the fact that half way through his term, there was a bit of a shift in power in Congress that allowed the Republicans to have more pull, and they've pretty much been fighting him tooth and nail. That's really the problem with this whole two-party system; for much of the time they tend to spend more energy in knee-jerk disagreements with the opposite side than they do in actually trying to fix things. This is a problem with both Democrats and Republicans.

Also? It's going to take a loooong time to fix things. We were told that four years ago; it's not going to take one term, or even two terms, to bring the country back to where it was before somebody effed up the whole thing. Heck, FDR took three terms to fix the Depression, and in the end it only really recovered because of the Second World War, which we do not have right now, thank Glod, knock on wood.

Just my two cents. Oh, speaking of cents, Prop 30! Hooray! Maybe tuition will stop rising. God, I need to get a job.

Hey, I'm happy. I don't think Obama will be the Most Amazing Leader Ever, but... yeah, Romney was scary.

I'd also correct your first two lines, there. We all possess a population capable of voting except Florida. Bloody Floridians. Every single term! For the first time, I watched the election coverage on BBC*, instead of one of the usual news channels** - far, far better coverage. I think it's just overall easier to be objective about a race when you don't have personal stake in it.

*Which was also the link on the IRC
**...okay, and the Daily Show***
***...Which was not.

Uh oh, you sparked my snark fuse again.

(It happens a lot - I'm subscribed to a british guy on DeviantART who gets pretty snarky about political stuff, and I snark back when he does.)

In terms of voting: sure, we can do it. Of course, it took us from the very late seventeen-hundreds to get it to a workable system, and we're still arguing about it.

In terms of presidency: I think both are idiots. But at least the idiot who got elected probably won't go out four years from now on the jewels of a comment that sounds like "and I would have gotten away with it, if it weren't for those meddling voters!"

That, and Obama is probably still slapping his knees over nailing Bin Laden to really do much in terms if hurting us worse, right?

One can hope, anyhow.

[/snaaaaaaaaark.]

I'm sorry, what was I saying?

As a woman, I feel I can't afford not to—not when scant generations ago we had to fight through crap like this just to get the chance. In the images, I note a recurring theme of "Oh no! If women get the right to vote, men will lose their freedom!" This is represented by men losing their pants and having to take care of children and do laundry and stuff. Terrifying, eh?

This seems to be a popular refrain among anti-equality types today, too: more people getting rights will magically take them away from people who already have them, so we should be afraid. Rights are finite, doncha know. (?!?!???!!??)

So that's why I voted. I think I owe it to the women who suffered and even went to jail so I can.

~Neshomeh

Is it just me, though, or do the elections get scarier every year? When Obama and McCain ran, I didn't get the sense that the country would fall apart based on the outcome (though I did get a sense that we'd either go up or down a notch in other countries' respect,) and when Bush and... was it Nader? Nope, Kerry. Anyway, it was presumably going to be business as usual whoever won and the main difference would be what kind of legislation got pushed forward in the next few years, and what kinds of funding got priority. I don't remember any elections before that because I was eight when the 2000 election happened.

Or maybe that's just me growing up and elections (especially ones where we have a current president running) have always been this scary.

What a depressing thought.

I could really care less about politics, as I believe you should never trust people in a position of higher power, 'cause you don't know what their intentions are.

Or maybe that's just me being paranoid...

Some of the Romney supporters had me wondering if they'd mistaken The Handmaid's Tale for a utopia. And as a single female, this had me worried.

As a Californian, I'm rather happy to say that the majority of the propositions voted on alongside the presidential selection did not pass.

Why am I happy about this, especially when one promised better funding for schools and another promised better funding to the individual counties?

Because the majority of the propositions voted on this year were also loopholes. The ballots and the giant book I got explaining each proposition in detail both had the same line for all but the redistricting proposition: 'the majority of the funds would go to [whatever the proposition said they would go to]'.

Majority. Not all. Majority.

Don't get me wrong, I love my state. It's beautiful. The people south of Mendocino County are wonderful. The way the State manages money is another story altogether, and I've never liked being played for a fool with little throwaway lines the writers hope I'll miss like everyone else. If a majority of the funds - taken from taxes - is all any proposition can promise, and if the remainder is left mysteriously unaccounted for on the ballot and in the official booklet, it smells like fish and I'm not voting 'yes'.

As for the presidential candidates, though... I was impish and voted for the Peace and Freedom Party's candidates, because while Obama strikes me as a wonderful, trustworthy person, I'm not entirely satisfied with him as a President. And because Romney scares the [PUDDING] out of me.

/end political rant

-looks up at political rant-

GAH, how boring! Here, have a Scottish fold munchkin.