Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ozbama. The World of Ozbama.

Love it. TY for the vid link.

VOTE! Don’t pussy out… VOTE!!!!

VOTE! Your life, your future and your country depend on it!

You are 100% correct.

I dare say our very “American way of life” is at stake.

Forget the Lame Stream Media slime Machines and vote.

Anchorage Daily News:

New Troopergate report clears Sarah Palin of any wrongdoing. The democrat revenge machine got bitch slapped again.

Been sayin’ all along, the only poll that counts is the one tomorrow. Don’t listen to the talking heads on the MSM, you know how ub-biased they are 🙂 Just get to the voting places!

@Scrapiron – There was no wrong doing to begin with, seems everyone knew that except those trying to take the Gov. down. But always great news!


And if approached by an exit pollster, TALK TO THEM!

The folks who do talk are those who are Voting for the O-man. The exit polls will show a landslide, but the actual count will say something else and the Liberals will cry FOUL, VOTE TAMPERING, and sorts of non-sense.

Let the public know McCain is winning in the actual voting.

Yes, if you haven’t done so already, vote tomorrow. Then, if you’re feeling snarky, lie to an exit poller about who you voted for. I know, it’s not right, but it’s for a good cause. And, while it’s no excuse, the left always thinks that the ends justify the means, no matter how horrifying are the means – well, in this case, it’ll only involve a little white lie. The more ridiculous those polls end up looking, the more they lose credibility. The exit polls and polls in general have been used by the activist leftist base and the MSM to tamp down enthusiasm for Republican candidates, so let’s continue making a mockery of them.

What I see as a major disaster in this election is your screwed-up voting system. This is the greatest threat and it must be change.

Early voting and different voting machines in different States is absolutely unthinkable. What the hell is this country thinking? It should be a unified system all over the country. No machines, plain voting on a ballot paper that ends-up in a box. Counting the votes manually and return the sealed boxes to Washington. Make sure that you have enough voting polls places so people never wait more than half an hour. Do not start to announce the results in the East States, before the polls are closed in the Eastern States. This is only fair and nobody gets influence by the early voting.

Gee! I can’t believe your stupid way of voting. Some people wait in line several hours; you would think you are in indigent country. You should be ashamed of your voting system and I hope that Sarah and McCain will change it.

P.S.: I have to say something good about Canada. Our voting system is almost perfect. Just the way I explained it to you in my post. And in early voting, you have to prove that you will be out of the country or in a hospital or whatever. You do not do early viting just for fun.

Part of that, Craig, is perhaps a misunderstanding of our POTUS voting system.

This is not a national election, as we are a “republic”, and not a “democracy”. Thus the POTUS is elected by 50 individual state elections, and ultimately decided by how those contests are reported to the Electoral College.

Thus, each state has guidelines on how their independent state elections are run. There is not “national standard” because of the same reason… we are a republic of nations, not a group of states under only federal law, but in certain circumstances. Elections are not one of those.

What is most amusing is that the electronic voting is an expense placed upon the states by the 2002 DNC disgruntled. Yet they are the ones suffering from the highest risk of voter fraud and inaccuracy.

Frankly, an old fashioned ballot of pen or pencil and circles seems to be the most universally understood by the mass of the electorate. But it is not a mandate the feds can impose.

Thanks, Scrapiron… haven’t been paying attention to zzzzzzz Trooper’gate, the legal investigation… zzzzzzz :0)

Will do a post to wrap it all up. Thanks for the H/T!


It doesn’t matter that you are a republic. In Canada, each provinces decides how they will vote on provincial’s election. But when we vote for the Prime Minister of our country (like you a President for your country), we accept to use the same form of voting system for all provinces. Just like for the Army… each of your States can not decide for their soldiers. Voting should be unified all over your country, otherwise it is impossible to make it secure and accurate. This is your biggest flaw in USA.

Craig, INRE your comment:

In Canada, each provinces decides how they will vote on provincial’s election. But when we vote for the Prime Minister of our country (like you a President for your country), we accept to use the same form of voting system for all provinces.

I don’t know how your election works, Craig, so I can’t comment on the specifics. Perhaps you look at your provincial elections as “state” elections, and the PM as a “national” election.

That’s not how it is here. THe POTUS election is not considered a “national” election. It is still a state – or provincial, in your neck of the woods – election.

If all of the states individually voted to accept federal standards for any elections, that would be a different story. Even at that, any state could vote to change that law in the future.

Our elections are melded on a ballot. On our state ballots, we have our POTUS choices. But we also have our state representatives, and our ballots also contain our state initiatives/referendums/ballots as well. And each county ballot is catered to include our county/city officials too.

Our “federal” representatives are not separated from our “local/state” representatives. To make the federal balot uniform (assuming we have a “federal” vs “state” election) would entail a blanket acceptance of those voting standards for one ballot, and a separate one for our local elections as well. Two voting standards, two elections, twice the state cost.

Just doesn’t work. A “republic” is a very different structure than “democracy”. I’m not sure if this is a specific you know, or not. But if you don’t, we’ll fill you in on a later post.

Mata, Craig – It seems like our system could be fixed. There is not a single person in the US that doesn’t know that there is a presidental election in 4 years. Why can’t all states have a “no ID, no vote” law. This gives all the people, that for some reason or another, that don’t have some sort of ID to go get one. I think most states suppy an ID for 0$. To stop the fraud and everything else that seems to be going on this time, no reason why EVERYONE can’t have some sort of ID to vote. Have to have ID to write a check, pick up mail, use a credit card, what’s so darn hard about showing it to vote? I do like what Craig said, about not voting absentee if you are physically able and present in state to vote. Unlike Washington, all mail in. If that doesn’t scare you into thinking that greatly increases the chance of fraud, just look what happened here in ’04. Had to watch the WA Dem leader, get on TV and say “we’ll keep counting until it comes out right”. I guess right meant Dem winner (after the 3rd count). Rooting for Dino this time too. Wonder if he holds some kind of record, ran once, won twice and lost once.


We have the same here. Each province decides for their own. Each province has a Prime Minister, deputies and laws of its own. But when we vote for the Prime Minister of Canada we agreed it to be a national uniform system. The only difference is that it is a different date for provincial’s election. We do not do both at the same time. And it works perfectly… you cannot steal an election here like you can in the States.

I think that the States should follow that form of voting for the wellbeing of your entire nation.

@Craig – Most non-Americans (a pretty good number of Americans for that matter) don’t understand that we are electing a “President of the UNITED STATES”. The federal nature of our government is lost on many people, as is the intended sovereignty of our individual states. Unlike most countries, which are nations divided into provinces, America is a nation of independant states that are united to form a country.

When individual territories agreed to enter into statehood, it was with the understanding that they would retain a certain level of self governance, independent of the centralized federal government. While the federal government has systematically chipped away at that independence, it still exists.

As such, the citizens of each state elect representatives (the electoral college) that in turn elect the president. Contrary to the understanding of most non-Americans (and again, a pretty good number of Americans) the president is NOT elected directly by the people. Part of the reason for this is that a very large part of America is made up of states that comprise a large percentage of the nation’s land and natural resources, but a small minority of the population. If they had been subject to simple majority rule in their federal representation, they would never have joined the union in the first place, because they would have then been the easy victims of majority rule from the states that have hgher density populations.

I’d say Wisdom covers our system more than adequately, Craig. The state elections for electoral votes, which decides the election. And how those electoral votes are designated differs from state to state, as per state law.

I understand what you are saying about the “change”. But it’s just not how the US of A was set up as a republic. Our POTUS is not a popular vote election. If it were so, the rural residents would have no say, and only the large urban centers of the US would decide who rules the rest of us. Rather “undemocratic” even for a “democracy”… which we are not.

The way you describe your separate PM elections, your federal officials are a popular vote. I would not wish for the US to change to that here.

I would, however, love to see an ID to vote implemented here. But again, because of the federal vs state laws, that seems to be impossible. The feds cannot infringe on the states’ jurisdiction for election laws. And the states shy away from it as unconstitutional in nature.


I do understand what you are telling me. But I find that a bit insane. Think of it as a house. You have differnet rooms, kitchen, bedrooms, living room, etc. They are all separated rooms with different fonctions, but they are still in the same house on the same mortgage.

To me, it is a nonsense that the President of U.S. is not elected by the people of America. I think I prefer a federation than a republic. Each provinces are free to do what they want, but every Canadians has it says in voting for the Prime Minister of Canada. After all it is the most important position of a country.

Please also read my comment #13. I am always stuck in moderation on this site and it takes a long time for it to get out of it… so finally, nobody reads it.


To me, it is a nonsense that the President of U.S. is not elected by the people of America. I think I prefer a federation than a republic. Each provinces are free to do what they want, but every Canadians has it says in voting for the Prime Minister of Canada. After all it is the most important position of a country.

As I said, if the POTUS were elected by popular national vote, the office would be decided by the population of NYC, LA, Dallas, Atlanta, etal… only the big urban population areas. To have 9 or so states, or cities, decide for all is not what the framers had in mind.

You must understand, the Founding Fathers figured this out with the rural farmers, and those of the heavier populations way back when. Our election process, with the Elecotral College, is laid out in our Constitution… and for good reason. This is also why we have a House of Representatives, with the # of representatives based on state population, but also tempered by the Senate, which has two from every state *regardless* of population. All of this levels the playing field between urban populations, and the more sparse rural populations.

So if you support “popular” vote, you may want to switch to the DNC… as they like to push the same theory…. LOL

Please also read my comment #13. I am always stuck in moderation on this site and it takes a long time for it to get out of it… so finally, nobody reads it.

Change that “always stuck” to “occasionally stuck” please. The majority of your posts go straight thru. But I’ve also found Aye, Stix, RockyB and other regulars that end up occasionally in the moderation filter (not spam, moderation) for who knows why. Hang… I’ve even found myself there on occasion. LOL

No Mata, you did not understand how it works.

Here is how it works:

Canada is divided into 308 electoral districts or ridings. Voters in each riding elect one member of parliament or MP to send to the House of Commons. The Senate in Canada is not an elected body.

The party that wins the most ridings in a general federal election is asked by the Governor General to form the government. The leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister of Canada. If the party wins in more than 154 ridings, it will have a majority government, which makes it much easier to get legislation passed in the House of Commons. If the winning party wins 154 seats or fewer, it will form a minority government. In order to get legislation through the House, a minority government usually has to adjust policies to get enough votes from MPs of other parties. A minority government must constantly work to maintain the confidence of the House of Commons in order to stay in power.

The political party that wins the second highest number of seats in the House of Commons becomes the Official Opposition.

EVERY PROVINCE gets a number of ridings (or electoral districts) depending on its population. Quebec has 75, Ontario 123, etc. It is very similar to yours, but we do it by the same law, not separated laws. That’s all.

So you see Mata, it is very similar to yours, except that we aggreed to do the election on the same laws, the same kind of voting, to make sure that there is no fraud.

@craig – national consistency doesn’t mean there can’t be any fraud. It does mean that one small group of people at a centralized location can commit fraud in your country nationwide. Our system means that any fraud will be localized, rather than nationalized, though. We do have checks and balances, and while no system is perfect, I still think ours is as close as it gets. I don’t want the federal government telling me how I have to do it.

@AF Sarge – I agree with you about requiring ID to vote, but unfortunately, courts have been quick to overturn any requirement to the same, supporting the DNC’s position that it intimidates minority voters (read illegal voters). So, until we can shift the balance of power in the court system and oust the Clinton appointees who insist on legislating from the bench, we will have to rely on partisan poll watchers and crack legal teams to challenge inconsistencies.