desh | (no subject)

(no subject)

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with this. If Webb (D-VA) and Tester (D-MT) hold their leads, then the senate will consist of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, an independent who will definitely vote with the Democrats on basically everything (Sanders, I-VT), and Joe Lieberman. Therefore, Joe Lieberman will essentially be the second most powerful person in America. Lots of bills, leadership of committees, and so on will depend entirely on his swing vote.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

tester is D-MT (montana, not minnesota). you knew that, and just mistyped, i figure, but just in case.

yeah. sucks to have lieberman in that position. he does so not deserve that.

but still - democratic senate so much better than republican senate.

anyway; i am not at all certain that tester will hold onto that lead. it's down to 3113 or 1743 votes (state site vs CNN). CNN has more up-to-date numbers. yellowstone and gallatin cty are only 1/3 counted, and they went burns last election, and meagher is small, but also red. (i suddenly know quite a bit about which montana counties vote which way, *snrk*).

i am crossing all my fingers and toes. and thanks for doing your part to get santorum, uh, ruptured. :)

Bleh, I shouldn't post so early in the morning. Thanks for the correction and the info.

looking good now -- only meagher county outstanding, which can't deliver more than 500 votes to burns, and tester is ahead by 1815 (CNN).

They did the Yellowstone recount already? I thought it would be all day.

these are not hand recounts, which explains why they go fairly fast. that county uses ES&S 150 central count scanners (can see down the page here: http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/pictures/#optical). basically you just feed stacks of ballots back through them. and the ballots are all already in one location, so there's not much logistics involved either.

Just a comment on the whole red/blue thing. Does anyone else get the image of Joe McCarthy thrashing in his grave at the fact that the Republican party is referred to as "red"? What an absurd misnomer!

i've been much amused by that for a while. but hey, i didn't pick the red/blue colours as current representation for the repubs/dems. who did, i wonder, and what were they thinking? naw, it probably grew organically out of something silly. but "absurd misnomer"? what's absurd is the idea that tagging an ideology with a colour would be anything but a fleeting gimmick in time. especially red, which is a colour co-opted for so many things because of its vibrancy.

but whatever makes mccarthy rotate faster in his grave is alright by me.

I assume that the colors were assigned sometime after 1848, and am guessing post WWII. Given the historical context, I stand by my claim.

They've only been around since 2000. And, in fact, I'm amused that the origin of the system has already started to become a lost-to-history sort of thing.

Hah, didn't realize that the official nature of it was that recent. Although, to be honest, it's not surprising that I didn't pay close attention to which colors were used beforehand, since that was the first election I could vote in.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

(no subject)

better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red

Re: better lieberman than red