Holy shit. Al Franken just might pulls this thing off. According to my favorite socialist London paper, The Guardian, the former SNL writer is up by 48 whole votes over Republican incumbent Norm Coleman. The recount is still far from over, but in a country where elections are perpetual, that's not surprising. Frankly, we wouldn't have it any other way.
Coleman's peeps are still trying to have the state's supreme court declare the race over in his favor by throwing out some of Franken's votes, claiming they were counted twice (wtf?). I haven't been following the race closely enough, I suppose, but that just sounds like the last gasp of desperation from a lonely, mean Republican. Either that, or this whole shitfight just highlights how insanely fucked up our system still is. Almost exactly eight years after the U.S. Supreme Court coronated George Walker Bush by halting the recount in Florida, it still takes us a month and a half to recount votes that were originally counted over a 12-hour period on Election Day. What. Ever. At least the hanging chads aren't haunting us this time around. Fuck them!
It just amazes me that I can go to Sheetz, a chain of convenience stores here on the East Coast, and get a sandwich by typing my order into computer and get it no problem in five minutes, compete with my beloved mayo and jalapeno peppers. But when it comes to elections, we are not capable of just noting who people voted for and finishing this shit by midnight on November 4th. Recounts! Absentee ballots! Early ballots! Supreme courts! Oh my!
No wonder China's communist. They ain't stupid. :)
7 comments:
is that real
maybe you should go back to the old way of doing things with paper and and a ballot box and leave out the computer.
what gets me abt US elections is the complete willingness of candidates to get courts involved! Mad
Lol i have never really thought of the Gaurdian as Socialist! It is in American terms here its just Left Wing not quite all the way to Socialist.
@ Anonymous: Yeah. Only in America.
@ Haworth: I don't have a problem with the computers. I just have a problem with our complete inability to use said computers to conduct an expedient election. In theory, computers should make the process easier. But this just lives up to the creed of 21st Century America: If it can be fucked up, we shall fuck it up.
The courts are the candidates last resort. And the Republicans have a pretty good track record of twisting the arm of the law to get their illegal way.
And I don't really think The Guardian is socialist but I know a Fox News reporter or two who does. :)
yeah i hear what your saying. It really doesnt look good to the outside world when the worlds most important nation (which i still think it is) cant get its voting done right.
Fox news they only know of 3 none socialist things, themselves, Nazis and the Republicans. I still cant get my head round those who think Obama is Socialist lol
And why in hell is Socialist such a dirty word!!?
Socialism is a dirty word in the U.S. because it's one step away from communism and we did "fight" a 50-year Cold War with the Russians that we haven't forgotten. And socialism really is anathema to personal liberty and growth, which we're all about. I'm not a socialist myself but I'm also no anarcho-capitalist like these asshole Republicans.
People think Obama's socialist because he's being forced to do a "New Deal"-style stimulus package to keep our economy from grinding to a halt. Of course, George Walker Bush IS a socialist because he just threw $700 billion at the banks, $17.4 billion of which is being used to prop up our joke of an auto industry. But don't tell Republicans that. :)
hmmm socialism, i disagree with 'socialism really is anathema to personal liberty and growth', i myself live in a very much socialist country Britain is Socialist, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are Socialist they belong to a socialist party the Labour Party.
And to say sociialism has dented my liberty would be false in my opinion.
there is a strong line between Communism and socialism and i would argue between Marxism and Communism. Communism was really lots of different thoughts put into practice by many different people and had there own idea's about, it turns out they thought the surpression of liberty was one of those things.
Communism never worked, but socialism did because socialism can be tailored to each and every country as far as they want to take it. In Britain we got the NHS, the Welfare State in modern times also the Trade Union which protected the wage labourer etc....
Socialism is a good thing, Communism is not however.
I would disagree that Britain is really straight-up socialist. :) I would say France is much more in line with what I'm talking about.
We have welfare and unions here but no one is calling the U.S. socialist. And I guess I should have clarified: In the U.S., we're raised on hard work, competition, and self-reliance, so the idea of having to take care of everyone in society IS anathema to our beliefs. And it's sooooo French. We hate them. :)
But I stand by saying socialism hampers personal growth and liberty, in terms of levying heavy taxes on the wealthiest and most productive citizens. Socialism is utterly incapable of creating wealth, which is why I use France as an example. They routinely have an unemployment rate of, like, 15-20%. Our unemployment here right now is 6.7% and that's really high for us. So it's no wonder the French have all sorts of social safety nets. They need them more than we do.
OK, and the absurdity of defending free market capitalism in this day and age just hit me in a wave. :) We'll be undergoing some socialist changes under Obama (for example, his health care plan is the closest thing to universal health care we've ever seriously considered). And not to mention the massive public works programs he's going to sign into existence on his first day. So you're correct in saying socialism can be tailored to fit each country's needs but the second our economy recovers, we'll want the government to back off. At least in the U.S.
Post a Comment