Thank you, Jim.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:55 AM by Adrian

Well put. I'm gonna crib it if you don't mind.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:56 AM by Linkmeister

Very good. I'm going to vote before I go to work.

Since I'm pretty much on a first-name basis with my polling peoples, I don't expect a challenge. if Mr. Talent's folks accost me on my way in, I'm going to give them a piece of my mind. I think he's a lying asshole and deserves to be voted out.

and I have my social security card and passport as well as my current driver's license in my purse. Plus I've been voting at the same place since fall 2001.

Talent's ads are crap and infuriate me, his ads are all attack and no substance until this last two days, where it appears he has realized that acting like a mad dog might be offending people.

Bastard deserves to lose.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:56 AM by Paula Helm Murray

Oregon's mail-in voting takes a bit of the tension out of things. I voted . . . last week? The week before?

Posted November 7, 2006 12:57 AM by Stefan Jones

I'm gonna crib this, too, if you don't mind.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:01 AM by Kevin

...and just remember, the Republican Party hires spammers. That's really bringin' it home, guys.

(If we can spread that framing fast enough, it might actually make a difference.)

Posted November 7, 2006 1:02 AM by Randolph Fritz

Well said.

Me Too.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:14 AM by Scott Taylor

I have before never voted for a straight party ticket. I'm doing it today.

Republican Party, I'm done with you.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:51 AM by Janine

I voted (absentee) last week.

I'm afraid I couldn't do straight-ticket Democrat, though. I am lucky enough to live in a town where Green candidates running for local office actually have a chance (and sometimes they even win), so thankfully I was able to vote my conscience where I could.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:58 AM by meredith

Thank you.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:41 AM by Leslie in CA

I know Republicans who don't stand for torture, for corruption, for cronyism, and so on and so forth. I know Democrats who do.

Yes, the Republican party leadership is evil. So is the current leadership of the United States of America. Is a vote for an American a vote for torture?

Go out and vote today. Vote with your mind, not with the casual moral laziness of the unthinking party ticket. And avoid the easy trap of blind vilification, because every citizen of this country lives today in a house of glass. I'll no more condemn an honorable Republican for striving to reform his party than I'll condemn myself for failing to flee to Canada.

Posted November 7, 2006 3:10 AM by Damien Neil

I did vote for one Republican... Susan Combs, for Comptroller of Texas. Her Democratic opponent was featured here recently -- the asshat who tried to make an issue of her "egotism" in having her name printed on every even-numbered page of her romance novel.

So thank you, Making Light, for educating me. Without that post, I would've assumed the Democrat is always the lesser evil.

Posted November 7, 2006 3:41 AM by Brienze

Damien @ 11:
Is a vote for an American a vote for torture?
Go and ask around the globe, and the answer today will predominantly be a sound YES, I'm afraid. Abu Ghraib docet. If you like that image, keep voting Republican candidates; if you are not smart enough to see that the GOP is 100% controlled by the White House cabal, and the likes of Chafee are just useful idiots, then I'm afraid there's little hope for you.

Democrats can be silly and corrupt, but in the last 30 years they certainly never were as corrupt and inept as the current administration.

Posted November 7, 2006 3:51 AM by Giacomo

how many democrats voted for the patroit act, for torture, for budgets that increase the power of the pentagon, against health care?

how many forgave abu gharib, gutted habeous corpus?

how many took payments from oil companies, drug companies, et. al?

i cant see a good option here

Posted November 7, 2006 3:51 AM by Anthony

I already did vote. Last week, actually. And I got to do it on a paper ballot. And it's all thanks to... early voting! (insert cheesy Hanna-Barbera music sting here) Good luck to all of you who have to futz with electronic voting.

Posted November 7, 2006 3:56 AM by sem

Usually I'm against voting straight party ... but this year ... man, I see little choice, at least in my state.

Posted November 7, 2006 4:06 AM by Ty Johnston

i cant see a good option here

Nor can I. But the Dems are far the lesser of two evils, as right wing* and corrupt as they are.

* The Dems are definitely right-wing by European standards even if they are the left wing of the mainstream US parties.

Posted November 7, 2006 4:46 AM by Francis

Jim, I think you could add "A vote for a Republican, any Republican, is a vote against genuine Christian values."

Posted November 7, 2006 5:11 AM by Scraps

Good luck, all of you who want your country to change into something better. I am keeping my fingers crossed for you all.

Posted November 7, 2006 5:17 AM by lalouve

A vote for a Republican, any Republican, is a vote for torture.

What if the Republican in question is running unopposed for State Inspector of Mines?

Posted November 7, 2006 6:16 AM by Jackie M.

What if the Republican in question is running unopposed for State Inspector of Mines?

Don't vote for him/her.

Posted November 7, 2006 6:22 AM by James D. Macdonald

In Massachusetts our incumbent Democratic Secretary of State is pro-Diebold machines. No Republican is running; the only other choice is the Green.

I'd really like to vote against this guy, but after much thought I know there's no way I'm ever going to vote for a Green again. I guess not voting at all in this race is half a vote in his favor but I don't know what else to do.

Posted November 7, 2006 6:23 AM by Jon Meltzer

Because, you know, all people in a party are all absolutely identical.

I must admit this kind of generalisation is something Making Light has been doing more and more often lately, and it's not good. I agree with Damien at #11 - think and vote, don't just vote for someone because of what party they're in.

(That said, I really hope Bush loses what remaining power he has...)

Posted November 7, 2006 7:46 AM by Paul

Tried to post this once and it vanished in the ether...

I voted at 6:05, primarily Dem but a few Greens in races where the Dem is going to win overwhelmingly anyway.

I'm puzzling over whether I've encountered voter suppression, though. Posted all around my polling place are signs informing people that the Ward 2 polling place has moved, purportedly paid for by the Dem gubernatorial campaign. That polling place HAS moved. However, my polling place has NOT moved. So why are these signs outside it?

I stayed after I voted to put up signs and stump a bit for Lamont. Disturbingly, a confused would-be voter came up to me with a question. He'd gotten one of those different-polling-place notices IN THE MAIL. He was confused because he knew this was his polling place. He'd heard on Air America about voter suppression and wasn't sure if he was supposed to vote here or go elsewhere. I know the drill for this one: I got him to go inside and try, and he was on the proper lists and able to vote successfully (for Lamont, hurrah!) He gave me the notice he got in the mail. Another Lamont volunteer turned up so I gave him my cards and a sign and came straight to work to try to figure this out. I called the Lamont campaign and the DeStefano campaign (that being the name on the notices); both phones are now being answered by people who don't sound old enough to vote but promised to look into it.

I'm not sure if this is incompetence (not generally a characteristic of the Dem machine in New Haven) or genuine suppression. I have work responsibilities for the next half hour or so; anyone want to tell me if I should take this any further when I get back to my office?

I carried a Lamont sign walking to work and waved it at drivers. I got thumbs up from a smiling Muslim lady and a few others.

Aux barricades indeed, Serge...

Posted November 7, 2006 7:47 AM by Susan

I was going to write that I am torn here about the "straight ticket" concept, especially given that I abhor voting the party line and not the individual, but I realized I'd be saying it just to sound PC. I agree, the stakes are high, too high and there has to be a change and a move away from the current mess. I know that there are indiviudal Republicans who are good people, but the party is not and I can't align myself with their goals, tactics and beliefs.

I am posting and linking on my own blog as well (for the 50 family, friends and knitters who read it (a good number in Australia, Israel and other countries come to think of it)

Posted November 7, 2006 8:00 AM by amysue

Ugh. Just cast my vote in the bluest part of Randy 'shotgun' Khul's soon-to-be-former NY-29 Congressional district. And what to my wondering eyes should appear but a stranger in my poling place, armed with a stack of papers including the word "challenge" in the title. I didn't get a close look, but it seems clear that the shenanigans are already well underway. Please, whoever you'll vote for, get out and vote. Anything else is a gesture of support for the kind of people who think that their world would run better with a little less input from the rest of us.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:12 AM by Red (Chris Holdredge)

Paul wrote -
Because, you know, all people in a party are all absolutely identical.

I must admit this kind of generalisation is something Making Light has been doing more and more often lately, and it's not good. I agree with Damien at #11 - think and vote, don't just vote for someone because of what party they're in.

This isn't about the person, to be honest.

This is about the party.

There are, in fact good Republicans - there may even be good Republican candidates (I wouldn't know - the ones I have to vote for at the Federal level are all pretty rotten, from what I can tell).

But the party as a whole has a disease. It needs to be woken up.

Up above, someone asked "how many Democrats voted for (Patriot act, suspension of Habeas Corpus, etc.)" - and that's a serious problem, because the answer (from both parties) should have been "none".

But the counter to that question is "how many Republicans voted for them - in total numbers, and in percentages of membership in Congress?

The Republican party needs to wake up.

They need to haul out the long knives, and put paid to the worthless, venal, greedy, and frankly fascist fucks who have taken over their party. Those bastards need to be cut out of the body politic - by force, if necessary - and never allowed anywhere near power again. The party needs to reformulate itself based on its original ideas - ideas that the Liberals and Democrats here may, in fact, be repulsed by (in some cases) but the intellectually honest ones will, I hope, admit that they need a counterbalance - or they will go too far, just as the Republicans have this time.

As a nation, we are perilously close to losing the Mandate of Heaven. The Republicans may already have done so. We are closer to open revolt than anytime in the last forty years - we've gone from nutcases shouting about it, to perfectly sane folks wondering about it.

They need a wakeup call, and the only thing they respect is votes against them - those that still respect that. Their influence juggernaut needs to be broken - and the only way to do that is to isolate the White House (which we can't do anything about for two more years), and give control - and solid control - to their opponents. We need to break the never-ending cycle of redistricting and suppression of voters in the States - so we vote Dems into the offices in the States that have influence over voting - Secretary of State, Comptroller, Governor. We need to break their hold on our local schools, so we vote them out of local offices.

Straightline Democratic ticket. Even if you're holding your nose. Not because you agree with them. But because you need to send a message to the Republicans that what they have done and what they have become, is unacceptable.

After this election, if the Republican party puts paid to the jackasses that are in office - send them to the Hague, try and convict them here, dump them on their asses at the curb and throw bottles at their heads, disappear them in the night - in some cases, at this point, I don't fucking care what happens to them, as long as they never darken my TV screen or legislative ballot again - then by all means, vote your conscience, vote by default against incumbents, vote Green - hell, vote purple, for all I care (and I do - old-school members of RASFF may recall I argued against the very position I now am taking, a few years ago - which should suggest how seriously I take this now).

But this year, the message needs to be "shape up, motherfuckers!" to the Republican party - and the only way for them to get that message is to lose - and lose big - throughout this nation.

And that is written as a registered Republican.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:15 AM by Scott Taylor

Because, you know, all people in a party are all absolutely identical.

Unfortunately, electing or reelecting a Republican who is likely to split with the administration on issues doesn't help the issue of a single party controlling all three branches of government.

The only way to create an effective brake on the erosion of our Constitutional freedoms and basic human rights is to put another party, in this case the Democratic Party, in control of Congress. Any vote for any Republican, especially one in Congress, is a vote in support of the current administration. Right now, there are no two ways about that.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:26 AM by Will "scifantasy" Frank

I don't know. I voted Libertarian.

I know that it doesn't particularly matter if or how I vote, but in my imagination voting for a third party is a way of saying to both major parties, "You make me queasy. You embarrass me. Get your shit together."

Not that they'll listen, but what the hell.

And #11 and #23, I'm with you. Voting is irrational, say the economists, but that doesn't mean we can't use our brains and make some actual decisions.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:40 AM by Sarah S

If there's no one opposing a Republican candidate in your precinct, then write in your own name. If enough write in votes appear in your precinct, it just might make the news and put that candidate on notice that there really is opposition and that it just might be organized in the next election.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:51 AM by Dave Kuzminski

Susan... "Enfants de la Patrie, le jour de gloire est arrive..."

Posted November 7, 2006 8:55 AM by Serge

I can only repeat what they say in "The Untouchables:" You're not from Chicago. No matter how bad the Republicans are as a national party -- and I'll be dancing in the streets if they lose Congress -- it's morally impossible to vote a straight Democratic ticket here. A few highlights -- but by no means all: one Democratic candidate for state office has been plausibly accused (by the leadership of his own party) of being connected with the Chicago mob. And you've heard of dead people in Chicago voting? The local Democratic organization fielded a *candidate* for president of Chicago's county board who has not been seen in public since last March and might actually be dead. (If you don't believe me, search news archives, or Wikipedia, for "John Stroger.")
I understand the impulse to "take the country back" from the current administration, but will somebody please explain what the point of that would be, if all it means is turning it over to a crew like this?

Posted November 7, 2006 8:56 AM by Lee Sandlin

I just voted. The polls were busy enough to surprise the election officials. I know they say that Democrats vote early, but I'm still encouraged.

Just wanted to post an update from my little corner of the Front.

Posted November 7, 2006 8:57 AM by Linda Daly

Giacomo wrote: Democrats can be silly and corrupt, but in the last 30 years they certainly never were as corrupt and inept...

Meanwhile, last night, my wife got a call from Patricia Madrid's nearby office to the effect that she'd be watching a different polling station than the one she'd been assigned. She was told to call someone else, who'd give her the details. He had no idea what that was about so he drove to the central office to find out and, when he called back, it turned out that there was no change in Sue's assignment.

I shouldn't be surprised, considering that this was the same outfit that had an reconstructed hippy lady excuse the disorganization by saying that Democrats don't do linear thinking. Really though... I always thought of the Democratic Party as Star Trek's Federation, not as the superduper aliens who inhabit Deep Space Nine's wormhole and who had to be told what linear time is.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:02 AM by Serge

Well, actually, I did vote for one Republican. For City Council. In DC. The Democrat is in the pocket of real-estate developers; the District is 90% Democratic (probably 70% even in my upper-middle-class, mostly white Ward 3). So chances are that my vote won't matter.

Actually, none of my votes matter, because DC doesn't have a vote in either house of Congress, and Congress can (and routinely does) overturn DC legislation. But I vote out of principle.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:05 AM by theophylact

#34: Meanwhile, last night, my wife got a call from Patricia Madrid's nearby office

Are you sure that was actually her office? There have been reports of phone frauds, claiming to have "important messages" about one side while being on the other (in order to piss the voters off at the first side for calling), and some about just that--changing a polling site.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:06 AM by Will "scifantasy" Frank

I'm so convinced, I'm even going to vote Democratic on our state's ballot initiatives!

Posted November 7, 2006 9:06 AM by Avram

I understand why it's attractive to simply vote for whom you like, to "vote your conscience." I'm not typically a fan of straight ticket voting. (And as it turns out, I made one exeception to voting straight ticket. Sorry, Jim.) However, in a simple plurality wins voting scheme, it pays to think about strategic voting to increase the odds that the winner is someone who supports your views at least in part. As our legislatures behave in more and more a parliamentary fashion, it pays to take the party of the candidate into consideration as he or she may be called upon to make a party line vote.

What's important is that through the process of your legal and accurate vote, the end result is one you are willing to live with. It is possible to vote straight ticket as a deliberate choice, not simply as a matter of laziness. I believe this is what Uncle Jim encourages.

To simply dismiss this tactic as lazy and unthinking with generic platitudes about voting strikes me as being being a bit lazy and unthinking itself. (I considered it and chose to make one justified exception. I didn't simply reject it without thought.) It sidesteps the important question of whether or not this election is a national referendum on the performance (or lack thereof) of our government. A straight line Democratic vote is a conscious choice to take our government to task for what they've done. As voters, it's our only effective mechanism to express this disapproval. (Granted, this would be more effective in a truly parliamentary system where a change in majority would likely result in a change of government. Of course, the timing of the election would also be different.)

Having said that, I did vote for Jill Stein, the Green candidate, over William Galvin, the Democratic candidate, for MA Secretary of State. I thought hard about this. There is no Republican running for the office, so a vote for her is not also a vote for a Republican candidate. I think I'm on relatively safe ground here. I also find her extremely unlikely to win. cf. strategic voting. I wouldn't be upset if she did though. I don't think she will have any problems working with what I hope is the incoming Democratic administration in MA.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:14 AM by JC

Serge #31:

Amour sacré de la Patrie,
Conduis, soutiens nos bras vengeurs !
Liberté, Liberté chérie,
Combats avec tes défenseurs !
Combats avec tes défenseurs !
Sous nos drapeaux, que la victoire
Accoure à tes mâles accents !
Que tes ennemis expirants
Voient ton triomphe et notre gloire !

Posted November 7, 2006 9:18 AM by Fragano Ledgister

Good lord. Before we all start singing La Marseillaise, let's not forget the charming bits about watering the furrows in our fields with the impure blood of foreigners, shall we?

Posted November 7, 2006 9:25 AM by Sarah S

"Amour sacre de la Patrie...Que la victoire accoure a tes males accents"... Thanks, Fragano. For those who are interested, that translates as "Sacred love of the motherland...That Victory will run to your male accents..."

Male accents?

Posted November 7, 2006 9:27 AM by Serge

Under normal circumstances, I'm more of a split-ticket voter. These aren't normal circumstances.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:27 AM by Debra Doyle

Will.. For some reason, the idea that those bastard nazis had made the initial call telling Sue about the change had never occurred to us. If that is indeed what happened, it means that one of the creeps had infiltrated the Madrid organization and made a copy of the volunteer list. Interesting, to say the least.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:30 AM by Serge

I'm not the least bit interested in straight-ticket voting for either of the two big parties, but I'm voting Democrat for congressional candidates this year. As a person, I'd probably prefer one of the Republican candidates, but united Republican government has been a genuine disaster for the country, and I don't want to help it along.

Longer-term, I hope we can turn our country around, but I'm not sure. Will Democrats (probably running the whole Congress and the White House after 2008) give back any of those civil liberties we all gave up after 9/11? Will President Hillary or President Barrack distance himself from the current claimed powers of the President? Or will the next President decide that, well, those powers are in good hands now, so let's keep them around? Democrats didn't fight torture before because they were afraid of taking a hit politically. They're going to become more principled after they're in the majority? Yeah, I can see how well that worked with the Party of Small Government.

The Republicans need to lose power because they're grossly, horribly incompetent, corrupt, and unprincipled. But we don't have competent, honest, principled people waiting in the wings to take over, we just have people who appear to be somewhat less horrible.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:31 AM by albatross

Anybody watched TCM last night? They had the musical 1776 on, for reasons that are obvious. I caught only the end of it, the scene where every member of Congress is called to sign the Declaration of Independence and the whole thing turns into the famous painting, upon which the Document is superimposed. It was pretty scary to then see the words "the end" appear over the whole scene...

Posted November 7, 2006 9:33 AM by Serge

11 and 23: It bothers me, too, voting straight Democratic. But I feel I have to.

Every time a bill comes up that I desperately want to lose... like "Torture is good"... the news comes across as something like this:

"11 Democrats voted for it, as well as EVERY REPUBLICAN. Without exception."

As long as the Republican party votes as one entity, I will treat them as one entity.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:42 AM by Sandy B.

Serge: Oh, I didn't read yours carefully enough. Her assigned watchdog place had changed? Yeah, that sounds like a bad bit of crossed wires, sorry for putting paranoia into your mind.

Then again, you never know.

Posted November 7, 2006 9:58 AM by Will "scifantasy" Frank

While we're mostly agreeing with one another, let's spare a thought for Making Light regulars like Susan, who's been working herself to exhaustion for actual decent Connecticut candidates like Lamont. Most of us don't do a lot more politically than talk. A few of us get out onto the streets and do the hard work, and today, win or lose, they're the heroes.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:00 AM by Patrick Nielsen Hayden

Susan in #24 and others who see or experience questionable tactics today - please do report them! It's important that we get as much information as possible about any shenanigans, so that these can be fought, this election or in the future!

Copied directly from a post at DailyKos:

Several sites will serve as clearinghouses for election issues tomorrow. ProtectOurVotes.org is already on the robocall story. Video The Vote and Veek the Vote are camera-ready. If you have a website, you can add a "Tell Your Voting Story" widget, a tool that makes reporting election shenanigans a snap.

Election incidents can also be reported to several national hotlines. Those reported to 1-866-OUR-VOTE will be catalogued in the Election Incident Reporting System (check out the incident map, which already reflects several incidents across the nation). Problems with voting machines can also be reported by calling 1-888-SAV-VOTE (1-888-728-8683). You can also report incidents through the DNC by calling 1-888-DEM VOTE or by filling out this online form.

Don't be shy. If you witness something at your polling place that seems off, report it. If your friends or family tell you about dirty tricks or suppression tactics, urge them to report it. Because this time around, we're not going to let them get away with anything.

Be prepared. Be vigilant. And let's do everything we can to ensure that no citizen is denied his or her right to vote.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:03 AM by oliviacw

Yes indeed, Patrick. Three cheers for Susan!

Posted November 7, 2006 10:05 AM by Serge

Go out today. Vote Democratic.

Except, of course, for Fred Head. Don't generalizations suck?

Posted November 7, 2006 10:06 AM by JonathanMoeller

Actually, Will, it turns out that my wife's watch place had NOT changed. Because of that, someone legit within the organization wasted time trying to resolve the situation. Maybe it is paranoia. It's not like there is any reason to lend credence to the possibility of a Republican infiltrating the opponent's organization and then illegally obtaining information used to mess up the opponent's resources.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:10 AM by Serge

Serge @ 45:

Was it the full version?

Posted November 7, 2006 10:13 AM by OG

I agree somewhat with Lee up in #32, as I also live in the Chicago area, which tends to skew one's angellic perception of Democrats. Still I'll vote for the younger Stroger, mostly because a last-minute mailing from Dick Durbin and Barrak Obama changed my mind. But in a hotly contested governor's race, I'll be voting Green, because the Democrat incumbent is a do-little dweeb. Go Rich Whitney in Illinois!

Posted November 7, 2006 10:14 AM by Paul Eisenberg

As far as I know, OG, what TCM showed was the full version of 1776. I've never heard of their cutting anything out. I wound up not watching it because I have the DVD, which is one of my July Fourth traditions (along with James Cagney's Yankee Doodle Dandy). Still, I made sure to sit thru that final scene.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:18 AM by Serge

I am overjoyed to find that my new district uses paper Scantron ballots, of the sort where you fill in the bubble. My old one used rickety, sketchy touchscreen machines.

I bubbled in that straight-party DEM bubble, which let me vote for one representative and a bunch of uncontested races.

Then I bubbled in lots and lots and lots of nonpartisan judges. Luckily I received a brochure in the mail with candidate bios for the judges. It was very handy. I simply voted against whoever used the code words "I will not legislate from the bench." (Honestly, they didn't usually stay in code that long. If a candidate said that, s/he tended to also say "the courts should protect traditional marriage, prayer, and values" and "endorsed by Dole and Burr [our two R senators]".)

I wasn't challenged. Good thing, because unlike last time, I didn't come laden with passport and utility bill as well as voter card and driver's license. (Luckily, the line was not long and the polling place was two minutes from my home, so I could have gone home and fetched those things if necessary. But I am white and middle-class with standard American accent, so I'm not real likely to be challenged. Members of the Latino community who live nearby, on the other hand....)

The only silly thing that happened was the woman campaigning out front, just outside the "no campaigning beyond this point" line, looked me up and down as I approached and said "You don't look old enough to vote, are you old enough?" I said "Yes ma'am, I sure am" and she gave me the campaign literature, but not without a suspicious look.

I guess I can stop worrying about getting old, if at age 24 I am still informed that I don't look 18.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:24 AM by Caroline

I was so distressed this morning - I was listening to the local alt-rock station that is my alarm clock, and the first thing I heard was the jocks laughing about how pointless voting is.

This is in San Francisco. This is a station listened to by a good portion of the city's youth. If there's something that progressives have against us, it's that the right wing thinks voting is the most important thing in the world, next to godliness and cleanliness, and major radio in liberal cities is making a joke of it. Conspiracy would point out that they're corporate owned - but my mind says, there are a lot of people out there who don't understand the process.

Anyway, I voted. Absentee, on paper.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:33 AM by Elizabeth

#54 (Paul Eisenberg) wrote:
...in a hotly contested governor's race, I'll be voting Green, because the Democrat incumbent is a do-little dweeb. Go Rich Whitney in Illinois!

Spouse and I agreed to split on that one--I held my nose and voted for the incumbent, even though Rich Whitney seems to be a mensch (I'm told that his favorite TV show is BSG).

Posted November 7, 2006 10:34 AM by JBWoodford

Uh, read that to be "conservatives have over progressives" in #57. Pre-coffee ire.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:34 AM by Elizabeth

The Partisan Ground

From

http://www.google.com/ig/dell?hl=en&client=dell-usuk-rel&channel=us&ibd=1060922 Dell Start Page

The default opening page that Dell computers ship with,

Top Stories [edit][cancel] [X]
Show 123456789 items
Republicans risk losing Congress as US votes

Notable about the above include,

1. The implicit defining of Republicans as owners and masters of the US Congress, instead of a headline such as "Voters poised to return power to Democrats," which would denote that Democrats in the past have had majorities in US Congress, the headline says that the Republican dominance is risked .

2. It's partisan and very biased, see above. The headline indicates strongly that there is something wrong and/or susceptible to causing badness if the Republicans don't continue to have a majority in Congress.

3. This is typical of the so-called news media, and typical of Corporatism--whatever happened to fairness... yeah, I know, what happened was evil slime such as Karl Rove and the Schmuck and the evangelical bigotry and intolerance spreaders... it's gotten so bad there there are people high up in the Southern Baptist Convention, an entity I usually have enormous dislike and disapproval of (I admire their dedication, I don't admire their goals and the values generally that drive those goals), who are upset about the lack of separation of church and state. I applaud them for that, even though it doesn't change my mind about most other things about them...

Posted November 7, 2006 10:39 AM by Paula Lieberman

Serge, "Cool, Cool, Men" was cut from the original theatrical release. With the mood of recent years, I was wondering if it had been restored.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:43 AM by OG

Jim, thanks for the post. I'm with you all the way. Scott Taylor at 27; well said.

If I absolutely can't vote for a particular Democrat, I won't vote at all for that particular office. I don't think I'm going to run into that problem today. I'll be heading to the polls in about an hour and a half; nine am CA time. There's nothing at stake in my particular district: the Democrat in the House (George Miller) and my Democratic Senator (DiFI) are going to cruise to victory, and Aahnold is going to return to the Governor's mansion whether I vote against him or not.

I will ask the poll workers if turnout is up. If the answer is yes I will be very happy. The more folks who vote, the the more secure is the health of democracy in this country.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:45 AM by Lizzy L

It's interesting to note that here in Illinois, the Republicans are more afraid of the Green candidate for Governor than the Democrats. After blaming Nader for Gore's loss in 2000, I figured the Dems would be out to get the Green candidate, but in line with the general evil ways of Republicans, the party of Bush is the one that dug up the "dirt" that Green candidate Rich Whitney (who is, btw, a science fiction fan) was once a socialist. Democrats have generally ignored him. Of course, the current Democrat ignores just about everything.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:47 AM by Paul Eisenberg

Patrick @ #48 reminds me: for those of you wanting to do more, MoveOn.org is still running "Call for Change," their get-out-the-vote effort. Got a cell phone and even twenty minutes? Spend it calling and reminding people to vote.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:51 AM by Stephen G

"Cool, cool, men"... Which one is that, OG? I know that my DVD contains a number excised from the theatrical release of 1776, where Rutledge and others of his ilk sing about always dancing to the right...

Posted November 7, 2006 10:55 AM by Serge

#61: OG, "Cool, Considerate Men" is in the Restored Director's Cut DVD released in 2002. I didn't watch it on TCM, but it's certainly possible that they aired the restored version.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:56 AM by JC

I'm not Serge and didn't see TCM's broadcast of 1776, but "Cool Considerate Men" has been fully restored onto the present DVD release, even remastered enough for its appearance to blend smoothly into the surrounding footage. As a previous intermediate step, the footage for that song had been placed on the laserdisc release, but still looked extremely scratchy and non-photogenic.

I seem to recall hearing that "CCM" was cut from the theatrical release because of objections from Nixon...? Not quite as bad as the curse of Sondheim's Assassins, though--iirc every time it's about to open on Broadway, President Bush invades Iraq.

Posted November 7, 2006 10:58 AM by Julie L.

I don't feel like a hero, actually. I feel like I haven't done nearly enough. It's one of life's little ironies that I've spent the last several years creatively semiemployed and could easily have taken time off to work for a campaign, but this year, when there's one I'd really like to work, I'm tied to a demanding day job (which I really need the income from). Among other things, this means Tuesday is the one day of the week I can never take off between October and February. I feel like my priorities are badly out of whack; I'm trying to earn a living and develop an artistic career while democracy goes down the tubes. I feel guilty for not having done more, or done it before. If we don't win tonight I'm going to crash badly, and I hope I can pull out of it enough to remember that this is only the first step in a long process and we have to keep working like this over and over again to fix things.

Anyways, don't discount the talking. The reality-based people here and at places like DailyKos have really helped give me the impetus to get out and finally act on my convictions. Keep talking, please; I'll be online until around 2:45 when I can finally leave the office to go poll-stand.

I think this may be the polling place I'm going to stand at this afternoon. It's a school in the same town, at any rate.

And, um, if any NYC people are free, Ned and House candidate Diane Farrell need more people in Fairfield County today. Easy hop from Grand Central on Metro-North.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:00 AM by Susan

Belatedly...

Paul, Scott Taylor already covered most of what I was thinking. (What a surprise. Hey, Scott.) But I'd like to add a little.

Bloc voting is a reasonable response to a party that has, for the moment, an extremely strong centralized discipline. And this is what the modern Republican Party has - they can't govern for sour owl stools (hat tip to Avram Davidson), but they sure can manage a permanent campaign. Republicans of good will inevitably face that good will thwarted right now, because the party bosses are very, very, very good at whipping outlyers into line.

The only people who can change that, until and unless the racketeering and other charges come in, are Republican party activists. Candidates themselves have very little influence over the process, as nearly as I can understand. The current crew of bosses worked two decades and change to get their control; it may well take others that long or longer to topple them. But in the meantime, the rest of us have to deny them the raw material of more of their celebrated whisker-thin majorities, and that does mean cutting off good men and women who are in the party doesn't care about them.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:01 AM by Bruce Baugh

#67: Not quite as bad as the curse of Sondheim's Assassins, though--iirc every time it's about to open on Broadway, President Bush invades Iraq.

It was a different President Bush each time, of course. The word is that the first war in Iraq was a factor in Assassin's initial off-B'way production not transferring onto B'way. Its second attempt to reach Broadway was delayed by 9/11. When it finally opened on B'way, the US had invaded Iraq. (For the record, I thought it was a terrific production. Extremely chilling.)

Posted November 7, 2006 11:10 AM by JC

Paula (#60), that's a customized Google start page with a small news feed showing Reuters's top two stories.

And headlines about a party-in-power "losing" Congress are pretty common.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:11 AM by Avram

I was just chatting with one of our residents who is still registered in Ohio (where she voted straight-ticket Dems absentee a week or two ago on a throw-the-corrupt-bums-out tear.) Joe attends her synagogue; she said he and his wife were very, very nervous about the election on Friday. I guess that's good news.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:18 AM by Susan

Serge, JC -- TCM aired the complete 1776 last night. Even though I have the 2002 edition of the movie, I still watched the whole thing.

We, too, play the DVD on the Fourth of July.

Serge, the musical number "Cool Considerate Men" occurs just after Franklin, Chase and Adams leave the Congress to inspect George Washington's troops.

The song contains the chorus "We go right, ever to the right, never to the left, always to the right -- we sing Hosanna, Hosanna..." and there are instrumental references to the National Anthem in the song.

Both "Cool Considerate Men" and "He Plays the Violin" were chopped from the film. "Cool" was eliminated before theatrical release, and "Violin" was chopped when the film went to videotape. The former song was cut at President Nixon's request...

In case you don't know, the current release of 1776 -still- isn't complete. They dropped a verse from "Piddle, Twiddle and Resolve" at the beginning of the film. You can here that verse on the original Broadway score.

I've been told that Nixon wanted "Mama Look Sharp" cut as well, but don't know if that's true.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:25 AM by Lori Coulson

#38: I'm with you, JC. William Galvin needs a swift kick in the pants for way too many reasons, so I'm also going with the Green/Rainbow candidate, Stein. Democratic for everyone else, down to the Registrar of Deeds. I can see Jon's point in #22, but leaving the Secretary of State line blank -- as if I didn't know who the candidates were and what they stood for -- is more than I can contemplate.

If the Green/Rainbow here was like Greens in PA and AZ in that they had accepted Republican backing, I wouldn't be doing this, but as far as I know, the MA party is legit.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:25 AM by Andrew

A nervous Joe? Sounds like music to my ears, Susan. About not feeling like a And if things don't work out this time, there is still 2008.

On a possibly more cheerful note, a buddette of mine who currently lives in England says that, over there, it's not unusual for polling stations to be set up in... pubs.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:27 AM by Serge

Oops. Something fell off my post. It should have said: About not feeling like a hero, do real heroes ever feel like heroes? And if things don't work out this time, there is still 2008.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:31 AM by Serge

#32, Lee: I agree. This Chicago election marks the first time in almost two decades of voting that I've ever voted Republican. Four years ago, the Democratic party swept Illinois, taking the Governorship, the state House, the state Senate, and every statewide office except the Treasurer. Since then, they've generally acted as if all they have to do is recite a few platitudes and do a little light fearmongering about Republican corruption, and no one will ever notice the blatant influence-peddling.

The County story is almost worse. The deeply entrenched John Stroger faced a reform challenger in the primary, and had a stroke one week before the election. All information about his condition has been held up since. All we know is that although he is too sick to vote in this election, he was apparently well enough to nominate his son Todd to take his place. Stroger's family may be shameless, but they're not dumb: although John named the new county hospital after himself, he was smart enough not to go there.

The contempt of the local Democratic party at city, county and state level for the voters is an elegant fractal recursion of the Republican attitude nationally.

And Jim, if that makes you angry, note that our fine Democratic mayor Richard M. Daley came out in defense of Dennis Hastert's handling of the Foley scandal.

So as much as I hate nuanced political argument, and as much as I mostly agree with the sentiment, all local politics is local. I can't in good conscience vote for a candidate I believe to be corrupt, no matter what message I may be sending nationally.

For federal offices, though, I'm right with you. Go team!

Posted November 7, 2006 11:31 AM by Jeremy Hornik

Serge: good things ours aren't in pubs. I'd be tempted to take to drink, and it only takes one drink to make me tipsy. I need to be sharp today.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:31 AM by Susan

#74: I wrote in Bonifaz, the Democratic primary runner-up. I hope that action was the best of three bad alternatives.

If there had been a Republican in the race I would have voted for Galvin without any qualms.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:36 AM by Jon Meltzer

OG and Serge:
Great movie! Didn't know it was on, but when they've shown it in the past (as they seem to twice and thrice a year) they have included "Cool, Cool Men."

Paula Lieberman:
I think you're over-reading here. As far back as I can recall (late 80s-ish) the phrase "losing Congress" (or variants thereof) has been applied by media outlets to either party when it has lost, or been in danger of losing, control of Congress. I know I remember hearing it back in 94 when the Dems lost control.

"Risk", as opposed to "in danger", is biased, yes, but IMO it's biased more in favor of dems than the GOP: "risk" implies they are at fault, as opposed to "in danger" which would simply imply circumstances beyond their control. And, yes, the headline implies that for the republicans there would be something wrong and/or susceptible to causing badness if they don't keep their majority. And, there is: US, the American people. If the Republicans lose we want our country back, and that would be very, very likely to cause "badness" for them.

I don't think it's over-biased; there is a likelihood of the GOP losing control. Reporting it that way is fact. Turning it about: "Dems stand to gain (or re-gain) control of Congress" or somesuch would be as much -- and possibly far more -- biased, as it is only speculation and would look like wishful thinking.

And yes, thank you Jim

It's all very well to smile and say,
"I won't vote the ticket, I'll go my own way."

But when the people in power grab with both hands
And look to their party to follow commands
And expect the rest to all follow, with flags and brass bands
Then it no longer matters where a "good man" stands
For there is no room for alternate plans
And there's only one thing corrupt power understands

So go to the polls, this is not time for doubt
Take a breath, take a stand, and vote all of them out

Posted November 7, 2006 11:41 AM by Pedantic Peasant

Patrick #48: That is very true.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:47 AM by Fragano Ledgister

There's still 2008? Think martial law, suspended Constitution, canceled elections and rule by decree for the duration of The Emergency. And that's not even a worst case scenario. Have a nice day, citizen.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:49 AM by Earl Cooley III

I think tonight I'm going to reread Alex Ross's graphic novel "U.S." I's about a man who believes he is Uncle Sam and how he must fight for the soul of America.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:49 AM by Serge

Serge @ 83

Yes, great!

I know we've previously posted on four color heroes in sequential art novels [God I miss Mike Ford!], but can't remember your position on them ...
If pro, Watchmen is also a good Machiavellian corruption made right scenario.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:53 AM by Pedantic Peasant

Voted today, but not straight ticket for the Dems. My Congresswomen time after time have returned letters and calls to them about issues like, oh the Patriot Act, civil liberties, silly things like that, with "thank you but we won't be listening to you, Mr. Constituent." I know it won't be a popular sentiment here, but I cannot in good conscience support someone who has told me that civil liberties are passe to my face (actual or virtual). So, Mickey Mouse got some votes today. Then there were the three pages of propositions and local elections.

I have modified my whiteboard, in a high traffic zone at work, to read "Get out and VOTE". The number of people who have stopped and said, "Oh, is that today?" is truly disheartening. Still, a couple people at least said they would skip lunch and make sure they got home to vote (many have less than 15 min travel time to/from work).

Hurrah for Susan and others who are keeping a keen eye out for potential fraud. Black Box Voting got another donation last night, along with Open Secrets and the EFF.

Posted November 7, 2006 11:55 AM by Dru

Definitely a big fan of sequential art novels, Pedantic. Every once in a while, I dig up Ross & Busiek's Marvels to remind myself of how good the men-in-tights stuff can be. (My apologies to everybody else for going off topic.)

Posted November 7, 2006 12:01 PM by Serge

I voted early (last week). Trying to vote today would fall into the category of "often".

The local straight-ticket electronic gives you the chance to review. So I plowed through all nine screens. They all looked fine to me, unlike reports of events elseplace in Texas. (Of course, what the review shows and what actually gets counted may be two totally else different things, but that's beyond my low-rent powers.)

Posted November 7, 2006 12:07 PM by joann

There's one Dem I'm voting against today. Otherwise, straight party line, and no Gops.

Paul @23: Because, you know, all people in a party are all absolutely identical.

I must admit this kind of generalisation is something Making Light has been doing more and more often lately, and it's not good. I agree with Damien at #11 - think and vote, don't just vote for someone because of what party they're in.

(That said, I really hope Bush loses what remaining power he has...)

And how is that supposed to happen if we vote his people back in? Haven't you seen what they do? Even the ones who stand up in front of the cameras and, with furrowed brow, express their deep misgivings -- even those fall in line and vote for whatever Bush wants to do.

They're his bricks and mortar. They're his legs. The only way to keep him from doing even more damage in the next two years is to vote those legs off of him and take away his rubber-stamp army.

ps: I linked to this post on my LJ today. Very inspiring.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:11 PM by Kip W

#77 -- Jeremy's fuller description of the situation here in Illinois is exactly on target. Lenny Bruce said, fifty years ago, "Chicago is so corrupt, it's thrilling." Absolutely nothing has changed since then. Today I had to vote Republican (in the election for county board) for the first time in my life, and I'm not at all happy about it. But I don't care how desperate the political situation is, we're doing absolutely no good for our side, or for the country, when we vote for people we know are dishonest.

(And I hope that Barack Obama's contemptible endorsement of Todd Stroger was just a momentary lapse rather than a sign that he's really a typical Illinois politician after all.)

Posted November 7, 2006 12:14 PM by Lee Sandlin

Vote straight-ticket Democrat.

Done.

That was fun.

Sometimes just for fun I vote for all the D's separately. In 2000 I had so much fun pushing all the levers on the old machine - click, click, click, click, click -- that it wasn't until I got out of the booth that I remembered that I'd meant to vote for a 3rd-party candidate for governor!

But today I just tapped the "Straight Democratic" box on the touch-screen, and then the one for the library levy (which is a large part of our budget), and that was it.

On the side of the screen, on the machine we use in our county, there's a tape -- like a cash-register tape -- that lists all your votes, so you can see and so there's a paper record. Then when you hit the final "button" to finish voting, that scrolls up so the next person can't see.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:20 PM by Lois Fundis

To Jim's post: Amen.

A few of us get out onto the streets and do the hard work, and today, win or lose, they're the heroes.

Amen to that too.

I'm consumed with fear and worry about voter fraud... Kevin Drum linked to this piece about voter fraud by Greg Palast talking about the votes that have been, as it were, pre-stolen; and a post just put up on TAPPED indicates that the Republican's robo-call-harrassment scheme is working...

It goes without saying that this makes it more important to vote rather than less. We need to win by enough that they can't steal it this time.

But I'm worried.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:23 PM by Stephen Frug

#79: It works for you; that's what matters. And it's an elegant solution for the conundrum of having two candidates for whom even "the lesser of two evils" is too tainted for you, when you know which one of them will be running away with the election.

It's too bad Bonifaz couldn't have made more headway against Galvin in the primary. It's one of the things that makes Patrick's ascendance so remarkable and gives me hope for the political system in Massachusetts.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:24 PM by Andrew

Good luck to all of you. What sites will you people be using to track the results of the vote, or does it really not matter?

Posted November 7, 2006 12:25 PM by Daniel

I just voted. I was number 46. It took no time at all. We use paper ballots with an optical scanner. There are about 1200 names on the roll at my polling place, but about 1/2 of those are inactive, i.e. they don't vote, or they vote absentee. The county sent the polling place 650 ballots, and the usual number of folks voting at my polling place is 450. And yes, the pollworkers told me, turnout is UP!

Go Democrats! Take our country back!

Posted November 7, 2006 12:31 PM by Lizzy L

#85 (Dru) quoth:
So, Mickey Mouse got some votes today.

I don't do things like that any more, after finding out from pollworkers that frivolous write-ins add buckets of time to their already-long election days.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:48 PM by JBWoodford

I'm sorry, but how about no. No to the unthinking party ticket.

In at least one case, the Democratic candidate on my ticket is a bottomfeeding, corrupt scumbag and the Republican alternative is actually not so bad.

I'll vote according to what I think is right. I don't believe that to be limited by party lines.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:48 PM by Rainy

Still fretting in the office, wanting to be out on the street.

Called in to one of the hotlines about the funny poll-place-changing notices; they are filing an incident report.

Posted November 7, 2006 12:52 PM by Susan

I voted on a machine. I'm glad I figured out that I really was supposed to vote for the same guy twice for House—once for the unexpired term, and once for the 2007 seating.

One of my gym acquaintances said he was voting for the GOPper for Senate, because the Dem was "about to be indicted." Sounded like a GOP rumor to me, but also, I told him "If he gets elected and then indicted and resigns from the House, [our Dem Governor] gets to appoint his replacement. That's better than having [the asshole GOPper who filed a complaint against the Dem] in the Senate for six years!" He said he'd think about it.

Another one said "what's the difference? They're all crooks anyway." "OK," I responded, "but if you have two groups of crooks who hate each other, and one's already in the White House, put the other one in Congress. If nothing else, it will slow them down." "But then they'll do nothing," he said. "That's better than destroying the country," I replied. He agreed.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:02 PM by Xopher

Serge @ 34: I always thought of the Democratic Party as Star Trek's Federation, not as the superduper aliens who inhabit Deep Space Nine's wormhole and who had to be told what linear time is.

I'm unfortunately not surprised. The DNC/Kerry campaign sent me (from MA) to canvass in FL for the 2004 election...and, among other fck-ups, our promised housing went from a hotel to a homestay that suddenly disappeared out from under us. I don't mind homestays; I do mind homestays that are promised and not delivered, leaving us with nowhere to sleep the night before an Election Day where we will be on our feet 18+ hours. It soured me somewhat on activism within the DNC.

However, all that being said...I just got back from voting the straight Dem ticket in Mass (I don't know enough about Galvin to feel that I can make an informed decision to withhold my vote), and the polls seemed to be well run, with adequate support for handicapped/elderly/non-English speaking voters. I moved this year so I had to sort out which polling place I was going to, and the poll-workers were knowledgeable and helpful. Plus, I feel a lot more secure about Scantron voting than about the electronic kind.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:06 PM by Annie G.

Rainy #96, see my post. Under current conditions, a bottomfeeding slimeball Democrat is better than the most noble, upstanding Republican.

EVERY Republican will vote to rubberstamp the Bush Administration's horrific crimes. EVERY ONE OF THEM. No matter what they say now, or even believe now, the GOP leadership has ways of twisting them until they do as the leadership requires.

Local elections, OK. But if you vote for a GOPper for House or Senate, you really are voting for torture and indefinite detainment without trial.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:06 PM by Xopher

If you look at the way Congress works, you'll see that Jim is exactly right.

The very first vote that any member of Congress casts is for majority leader (for House or Senate, respectively). The majority leader controls the flow of legislative activity. They have immense power over what bills get considered at what time, who gets to head what committee, and so on. This vote is the most important vote any member of Congress casts during their time in office. It determines the power structure for the whole legislative session.

Even Chaffee votes for a Republican as majority leader. That means no matter how "independent" a Republican is, they're still empowering the Republican majority to do exactly what they want.

If you vote for a Republican for Congress because you think they are the better candidate, you still empower the corrupt ones and the whole neocon machinery, and you hamstring the ability of Democrats to get anything seriously considered that could move this country in a better direction.

So vote Democratic. Please.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:07 PM by Christian Griffen

I voted last week (absentee), against corrupt one-party rule. Which this year, meant voting yellow dog Democrat ("i.e. I'd vote for the D even if they ran a yellow dog") in all the national offices, and giving presumptive preference to Democrats at the state level (since they draw the district lines), and giving presumptive preference *against* Democrats at the city level. We're not quite Chicago, but our city has its own share of entrenched D corruption.

Our local D rep. is someone I consider corrupt (she voted for a clearly unconstitutional pay raise for herself and her co-legislators, and never gave the money back even after the raise was overturned by the courts). I'd have voted for a principled, reasonable R if one were running, but since there wasn't, I wrote in the name of a neighborhood community activist who I admire. It won't make a difference in the outcome, but it will at some level register my no-confidence vote for the incumbent.

As it turned out, I didn't end up voting for any R's this time, but I easily could have at the local level.

Voting D *all* the way down, regardless of circumstance, smacks uncomfortably of the principle "whatever you do, vote for the person who has these particular values, regardless of whether or not they can or will do much with those values in office." And I think that principle recently has mainly served to shore up the *Republican's* base and give that party much more power than it should have. (That seems particularly true with the religious segment of their base, where R politicians have been much more willing at least say they share the values of religiously conservative voters, even while in practice the politicians mostly concern themselves with a different agenda, that of those who are hungry for money and power.)

Posted November 7, 2006 1:12 PM by John Mark Ockerbloom

a bottomfeeding slimeball Democrat is better than the most noble, upstanding Republican

I'd like having the guts to make a bumper sticker out of that, Xopher.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:31 PM by Serge

#92: In Massachusetts the only suspense tonight will be how large Patrick's victory is. Kerry Healey forgot that you just don't have explicitly racist ads here; it isn't polite.

However, the current situation: two opposing Democratic camps, the Reformers and the Machine, and a virtually powerless Republican party, is untenable. I expect various conservative Machine pols to drift over to the Republican side in the next few years. (That is, of course, if we still have a democracy then.)

Posted November 7, 2006 1:34 PM by Jon Meltzer

I usually vote for the Green party or some other smaller party, but it's just gotten too bad this year. I have to vote Democrat. I hate that I have to vote AGAINST the Republicans instead of voting for candidates I actually like.

But I have to point out: Isn't a vote for any politician a vote for cronyism? Isn't that the name of the game?

Posted November 7, 2006 1:37 PM by Crossbow

Crossbow, there's a certain amount of cronyism in politics no matter who's in charge. But Bush cronyism involves appointing wholly incompetent people to important jobs, on the strength solely of their loyalty to Bush.

Different kind of cronyism. Very bad.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:41 PM by Xopher

Done, and done.

Of course, it's pretty easy to vote straight-ticket deomocrat in Seattle; ours are fairly inoffensive. For those of you with dems who are worse than the GOP - wow, I'm sorry.

We're all absentee ballots here (yes, I ought to have sent it last week, but I've been waylaid by a nasty flu), so I just need to head out to the post office for a stamp today, and I'll be all set.

I feel hopeful about this election, but that could be the cold meds speaking.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:42 PM by Sarah

"Risk", as opposed to "in danger", is biased

I think all that's actually going on in that headline is the typical headline-writer's tendency to use the shortest possible word that fits, especially if it's an active verb.

#104 (re: Massachusetts) I expect various conservative Machine pols to drift over to the Republican side in the next few years.

I find that extremely unlikely. What we'll have after today is a return to the MA status quo: all Democrats, all the time. The risk to any Democrat of switching to the GOP is that when the next palace revolution comes there is no chance of being on the winning side.

Posted November 7, 2006 1:51 PM by DaveL

My mail-in ballot left the house this morning- my son and I were going to drop our ballots at the fire station on our way to run errands, but the F-250 hates the rain, and refuses to start.

We live in the Washington 9th, where the Republicans cared so little about winning that they ran an unknown with an unspellable, unpronouncable name against Adam Smith, the D incumbant. Our legislative district had Rs running opposed for Senate and one of the two house positions; I did not vote for any unopposed candidates, reguardless of party.

I voted straight-ticket D. I've never done that before; there's always been one or two progressive Republicans on the Washington ballot, but not this year.

It felt weird.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:01 PM by JESR

As I said in another thread, I voted DEM where available, but there were almost as many races where there was no option to oppose the Republican candidate but Libertarian. If I voted straight ticket DEM, then all those Republican candidates would have, in terms of my voting power, run unopposed (as did many other candidates in actuality, all REP that I saw).

I realize this particular constellation of options is probably not terribly common in the rest of the country, but there are places where voting straight-party Democrat is less effective as a vote against Republicans than voting mixed ticket.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:02 PM by Skwid

@#95 (JBWoodford):

Until I can vote no-confidence on the ballot, instead of a write-in, I'll vote the fictional character. Depending on the reader machine and software mechanics, a blank vote gets the entire sheet(s) rejected. The crew at my station were more than happy to take the write-in, I even asked them afterwards. YMMV.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:05 PM by Dru

Done. Plus, I broke the optical scanner! Seriously. My ballot was so left-weighted, it made the poor thing shiver and die. As Oleander and I vote in a thumper church, my theory is that my ballot caused blue flames to erupt from the rollers and foul up the machine. Now my precinct gets to hand-count them all, oopsy.

Here in MN we have a fantastic Dem Senate candidate, Amy Klobuchar. It does my old sick heart good to be able to vote for such a good woman. No nose-holding here in DFL country.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:10 PM by Melody

BTW, yes, I voted for Fred Head. As was pointed out in the comment thread, he may simply be mentally ill. There's treatments for that. Hard-line Conservatives are harder to cure.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:18 PM by Skwid

A thumper church, Melody? Dare I ask what that is?

Posted November 7, 2006 2:29 PM by Serge

Lived here in Chicago all but a few years of my life, so far. In one of the most liberal districts in the country; Jan Schakowsky is filling Sid Yates' shoes, and if you follow this sort of stuff, I don't need to introduce Illinois' Senators.

The local Dems (i.e., Junior's machine) pushed a guy for President of the County Board (hot Dem-city vs Repub-suburbs action) in the primary who was in a coma from a stroke, and may be a vegetable or less; no one's seen him since March.
And then they handed the nomination to his worthless son. Not evil, just utterly worthless. But the Republican nominee is a Brown Shirt.

We have a Democratic governor who isn't good for much except ingratitude. (He was sure no help to his father-in-law, the big alderman who gave him his in.) And a Republican challenger who is at the worst, an interesting, respectable candidate. But to give a Republican governorship to the Rumsfeld-Cheney Administration would be unconscionable.

Anyway, I already voted, first thing this morning, and was careful to vote against retaining the worst judges, no matter how worthless an effort it might be.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:34 PM by Neil in Chicago

Xopher--

Oh yes, that's the kind of cronyism that's unique to Republicans. Democrats wouldn't know anything about that, nosir.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:36 PM by Sarah S

I'd be willing to bet "thumper" is short for Bible thumper, aka "Hellfire and brimstone" preaching...

In other words, funnymentalist christian.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:37 PM by Lori Coulson

I should say, by the way, that I voted straight Democrat this morning, but it was remarkably easy....Alexandria had only two sets of names--local Congressman and the Webb/Allen fight--and three ballot propositions. No non-national elections at all.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:41 PM by Will "scifantasy" Frank

Robert Byrd was a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Can't vote for any party that has him as a member.

But I DID vote straight ticket.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:46 PM by Randy Chapman

Lori, exactly. When I was a bit younger, Serge, and voted there for the first time, I noticed that they had what looked an awful lot like Christian (AKA Republican, here in the 'burbs) voting guides right there at the welcome table(!!!). Being, then, young and completely, utterly stupid I burned in silence and said nothing. What a freaking idiot I was. How in blazes they have continued to keep their designation as a voting place is beyond me.

Posted November 7, 2006 2:48 PM by Melody