Great election results
Posted By: gt on 2005-11-09
In Reply to:
My best friend from NY of 43 years, who is a republican and grew up in a republican household, called me last night..and we talked politics and she sounded more like a democrat..I was so glad! She talked about war without end, caused by Bush, corruption, by republicans, her two sons who are draft age, on and on..I have seen her growing politically since 9/11..At first she was all for the Iraqi war, then started doubting the information from Bushs WH..Im feeling pretty positive this morning..Arnold (how do you spell his last name, LOL) got defeated in his *special election*, democrats got voted in in NJ and Virginia (Virginia a red state)..The people realize the country is headed in the wrong direction and are showing this through their votes. The one thing I dont like is the Intelligent Design theory being voted in in Kansas. I believe in Darwins theory.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Obama admin. skeptical of Iran's election results.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/13/official-obama-administration-skeptical-irans-election-results/
U.S. officials are casting doubt over the results of Iran's election, in which the government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner Saturday.
U.S. analysts find it "not credible" that challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi would have lost the balloting in his hometown or that a third candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, would have received less than 1 percent of the total vote, a senior U.S. officials told FOX News.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini apparently has released a statement calling the results "final" and hailing the election as a legitimization of the regime and its elections.
Turnout appears to have reached 82 percent, an all-time high. But when asked if the turnout figures should be considered suspect, given the "not credible" counts for Mousavi and Karoubi, the official said: "Oh, it has to be [considered suspect]."
There are already reports of violence outside Mousavi's campaign headquarters, and of huge demonstrations for both sides in central Tehran, with Mousavi trying to make his way to the one in his behalf. Even if widespread violence occurs, analysts see no prospect that this event would lead to a full-scale attempt at revolution or the toppling of the regime.
The dominant view among Obama administration officials, though not uncontested, is that the regime will look so bad as a result of whipping up Iranian hopes for democracy and then squelching them that the regime may feel compelled to show some conciliatory response to President Obama's gestures of engagement.
The results are in....
and the Democrats have the majority. Let's see what they do with it.
New CNN poll results
Not to shabby after his week from he!!.
yes, I am doing this, but I get 'no results'...
not with all posted links, sometimes, especially when the links contains a lot of digits...
Rasmussen poll results:
Sarah Palin has made a good first impression. Before being named as John McCain’s running mate, 67% of voters didn’t know enough about the Alaska governor to have an opinion. After her debut in Dayton and a rush of media coverage, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 53% now have a favorable opinion of Palin while just 26% offer a less flattering assessment.
Palin earns positive reviews from 78% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 63% of unaffiliated voters. Obviously, these numbers will be subject to change as voters learn more about her in the coming weeks. Among all voters, 29% have a Very Favorable opinion of Palin while 9% hold a Very Unfavorable view.
By way of comparison, on the day he was selected as Barack Obama’s running mate, Delaware Senator Joseph Biden was viewed favorably by 43% of voters.
In the new survey, 35% of voters say the selection of Palin makes them more likely to vote for McCain while 33% say they are less likely to do so. Most Republicans say they are more likely to vote for Palin and most Democrats say the opposite. As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 37% are more likely to vote for McCain and 28% less likely to do so. Those numbers are a bit more positive than initial reaction to Biden.
After McCain's announcement, Clinton issued a statement saying, "We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate." Palin is now viewed favorably by 48% of women. That figure includes 80% of Republican women, 23% of Democratic women, and 61% of women not affiliated with either major party.
Polls are what they are and change like people change socks. However, these are good preliminary numbers. Time will tell how it all plays out.
Read these poll results
Obama stretches poll lead as Mickey Mouse enters fray
By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Thursday, 16 October 2008
AP
Barack Obama has a 14 per cent lead over John McCain in a New York Times/CBS poll
enlarge Related Articles
Watch last night's debate, in full
McCain scrapping to change course of election
The surburban nightmare that haunts McCain
Obama's Iraq plans vindicated as US agrees to pull out by 2011
Johann Hari: Scribbled in the margins: the character of the next President
Obama buys first video game campaign ads
US election diary
On The Campaign Trail
Print Email Search
Search
Go
Independent.co.uk Web
Bookmark & Share
Digg It
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
What are these?
Change font size: A | A | A
Barack Obama has opened a dramatic 14-point lead over John McCain in a new opinion poll, amid evidence that the McCain camp's character attacks are doing more to harm the Republican senator than his opponent.
A New York Times/CBS poll published yesterday shows that if the election was held now, 53 per cent of voters surveyed would vote for Obama compared to 39 per cent for McCain.
The poll also found that Republican attempts to smear Mr Obama by association with William Ayers, a 1960s radical, have hurt Mr McCain more than his rival. Voters also said they were turned off voting Republican by the choice of Governor Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential running mate.
Six out of 10 voters criticised John McCain for spending more time denouncing his opponent than explaining how he intended to lead the US at a time of unprecedented economic turmoil. The poll showed that anxiety about the economy and deep mistrust of George Bush have created a hostile environment for Mr McCain's campaign. Faced with an avalanche of bad news, the McCain campaign is seeking to capitalise on a voter scandal, which they say is an attempt to rig the 2008 vote. Democrats have a long "vote early, vote often" legacy to live down and the latest scandal has played into the hands of conservatives.
Thousands of fraudulent voter registrations were allegedly collected by a charitable organisation, Acorn, which helps people register for elections. The lists include such names as Batman, Mickey Mouse and the Dallas Cowboys football team.
There are no known examples of illegalities in early voting, but Acorn has become a rallying call for Republicans who are preparing for legal challenges to the election. They have smeared Senator Obama by association, because like Acorn, he was once a community organiser. Sarah Palin used the Acorn scandal to raise funds from Republicans, saying in an email: "We can't allow leftist groups like Acorn to steal the election."
The organisation admitted about3 per cent of the 1.3 million new voters who were enrolled by its 13,000 canvassers may be fraudulent. A spokesman, Steve Kest, said some canvassers had cheated but that the organisation has strict internal controls. "The incidence of voters registering and voting under false names is minimal," he said.
Mr Obama has distanced his campaign from Acorn, saying that fears of voter fraud in the 4 November election are wide of the mark. Canvassers "just went to the phone book or made up names and submitted false registrations to get paid," he told reporters.
Republican commentators were quick to denounce the New York Times/CBS poll yesterday, describing it as a predictably skewed view from two of the country's most liberal news organisations. But another poll, by SurveyUSA in five states where early voting is under way, reveals that Senator Obama leads by an average of 23 points among early voters in Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio, Georgia, and North Carolina.
The five states went to George Bush by an average of 6.5 points in 2004.
Greed may have disasterous results....sm
DC bars are going to stay open 24 hours a day for 4 days during the inauguration. I can see trouble on the way...........
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/05/police-union-fears-inaugural-chaos/
OTOH, maybe they can use the tax dollars to help offset the Big 3 bailout. 
He knows DC, knows how to get results, Congress, Senate,
Yeah. Sounds like a real scary threat. Do qualified, highly skilled and immensely experienced people such as this always intimidate you so?
Don't congratulate THIS democrat ... I'm sickened by these results! (nm)
x
Wow! I read the results, but didn't know the nay sayers were repugs...sm
I mean repubs. Interesting.
Great post, great insight, great analysis, thanks!..nm
nm
Great, great post. Thank you, Marmann! nm
x
Not about the election.
As I have stated before, I am pro-life, but am just appalled at the things that extremists do--on both sides of this issue. I went to my OB/GYN the other day for a prenatal exam and my 2-year-old son found a business card with pictures of bloody pieces of fetuses on it that said that anyone who has an abortion will go to...well, you get the picture. While I am not entirely sure that this is not true, I am disgusted that someone would leave such a thing lying around where small children can find it. Luckily, my son just turned two and really did not realize what it was he was seeing, but just think if an older child had found such a thing. Sometimes I think that people get in their own ways when trying to make their points. I am sure that I am guilty of this, as are many others on this board. I actually just wanted to vent a little. Hope everyone is having a good afternoon!
No way did JFK's dad buy the election
I live in the same town as the Kennedys and they are notorious for not paying for things.
Election Day
A large group of my neighbors will be walking down the street together at 7:00 a.m. Tuesday morning to cast our votes for Barack Obama. It will probably end up being like a little block party in celebration of Obama.
No matter who wins this election, it will be a thrilling race and a shocking result!
LOL! Maybe next election!
*
One day before the election. This is so sad.n/m
x
election
If you mean McCain and Palin and "best man and best woman", I don't think so. Not unless you are super rich or, if middle class, you would care to get stomped on again, like we have been for the last eight years?!
Another example....if the election had gone the other way....
would you just have dropped all your concerns about McCain and started supporting him on this board? Of course you wouldn't. Don't act like you would. Geez. LOL.
What are you saying here? Before and after the election and
x
LOL...the dow has been going down since before the end of the election (nm)
x
When they come up for re-election
we will be provided the usual substandard party-approved (both parties) candidates to choose from - if it is an actual contested election. How often does a rogue candidate even get past the primaries in this country? And how effective could this hypothetical nonpartisan candidate be if elected, when the other kids in the House and Senate won't let him play?
Most candidates don't stand much chance against any incumbent. Seems that we vote based on 'name recognition' and don't much care in what context we recognize the name. Has to be the explanation for how some of these guys (and gals) stay in office term after term despite the fact that we despise them. Nobody can unseat them without party approval. And if you spend enough advertising bucks in the several weeks before election we'd vote for Genghis Khan.
Same theory as they use in product advertising. Say the name and slogan enough times on TV and when we get to the stores we'll recognize it on the shelf and figure it must be okay. See? All the hard decision-making has been done for us!
Obama was anointed by the democrats; McCain was anointed by the republicans, and I did not see a whole lot of difference between them. Both promised to take us in the same direction at slightly different speeds. So I voted for the lesser of two evils (lot of good it did me). And when you do that, it's easy to forget you still voted for evil.
Sad to say, we seem to get the candidates and products we deserve. We vote for whoever the party runs, buy the products that spend most on advertising, and that's pretty much that.
I am at a complete loss as to how to change any of this because it all seems to be one big interconnected system. Throwing the bums out is a great idea, but replace them with what? More party clones? I don't think a true populist candidate stands much chance against the two party machines we have.
the election is
Unless you own an oil well, I would not get too worked up about it.
So will the next election when we
xx
Were you like on Mars during the election? SM
Here's a clue, no one really listens to hatred. You need to cozy it up a bit, put a little whipped cream on it, disguise it a little. All the personal attacks and name-calling, while typical of you libbies, isn't very palatable. KnowwhatImeanVern?
2000 election
Yes, Bush did win only one election. The first election was handed to him by the Supreme Court Five. If it had been handled properly and fairly, Gore would have won as he had the popular vote.
Election my foot.
You still believe the last 2 elections were legit? Oh of course you do. You still can't get it through your thick head that Saddam had nothing to do with 911. Go back to your board. You people cannot stay off ours - why is that? Scared?
Kerry would win if election was now
Poll: Kerry Would Top Bush Today
NEW YORK, Nov. 5, 2005
 President Bush delivers his speech after being sworn into office for a second term, as Sen. John Kerry looks on, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 22, 2005. (AP) |
|
(CBS) If last year’s presidential election were being held today, the results might well be different than the results of a year ago. 41% of registered voters say that if the 2004 election were being held today, they would cast their ballot for Democratic candidate John Kerry, while 36% say they would vote for President George W. Bush. 13% say they would vote for someone else, and 6% wouldn’t vote at all. IF 2004 ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY…
(Registered Voters) John Kerry  41% George W. Bush 36% Someone else 13% Not vote 6% In this poll, 12% of registered voters said they didn’t vote in 2004. Among those who did vote, 45% said they voted for Kerry last year, and 46% said they voted for President Bush. 2% reported voting for Nader, and 7% won’t say for whom they voted. If the election were held this year, both candidates would retain more than eight in ten of the voters who supported them last year, according to this poll. But President Bush would lose about 3% of those who said they voted for him last year to his Democratic opponent. And although none of those who supported Kerry last year would now vote for Bush, 13% say they would support another candidate. But among voters who either didn’t vote in 2004 or voted for another candidate, or refused to say for whom they voted, Kerry leads Bush by 34% to 11%. IF 2004 ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY…
(Registered Voters) In 2004, voted for: Kerry John Kerry 81% George W. Bush - Someone else 13% Not vote 4% In 2004, voted for: Bush John Kerry 3% George W. Bush 84% Someone else 7% Not vote 3% In 2004, voted for: Other/didn't vote John Kerry 34% George W. Bush 11% Someone else 23% Not vote 16%
For detailed information on how CBS News conducts public opinion surveys, click here.This poll was conducted among a nationwide random sample of 936 adults, including 828 registered voters, interviewed by telephone October 30-November 1, 2005. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample and the sample of registered voters could be plus or minus three percentage points.
i'm so sorry to hear that. Maybe after this election
you will be an INSURED American :)
Well, I try. I did it all through the election process
and I still have many questions on his election, his "pals", etc., but until I find (or should I say the news media finds) some really stick-to-his-rib issues, I'm still willing to give it a try. I also don't think he's really on the up and up, but.....I try keep an open mind, and let me tell you, it's been very hard.
Yep...happens every election cycle...
but seems worse this time.
Still time before election
to migrate to alaska. Ms. Palin will be returning there in Nov permanently. They have been expecting a massive Rapture-induced influx of people, so they probably won't shoot you unless you are wearing a fur coat. You might as well go, coz you are gonna be totally miserable for the next 4 years as Barack begins the long journey of righting the sinking ship called U.S.
Has the election already been held?
And the answer is - Most definitely NOT. You and your pompous dems that say Obama WILL be the next president. You don't know. Me, I don't care. Whoever gets in gets in. If its Obama fine, if its McCain fine. But the truth of the matter is the election has not been held, we still have a few weeks and nobody knows. This election is very very close. Are you planning to do something personally that is illegal that will throw the election to Obama? Even the guy who is in charge of polls (Mr. Rasmussen) said because the polls are so close that goes to show you that anything can happen. So with that said - No election yet, no winner yet!
You may say your going to write in Lou Dobbs, but I believe that is just a smoke screen to make people think you are not for Obama, but your message shows strongly who you want to win.
It's the Obama supporters who are saying he WILL be the next president, he has WON already. Then you bash McCain while in the same breathing saying McCain supporters are picking on you.
So once again let me repeat myself....no election yet, no winner yet.
What if they gave an election and nobody came?
Do you think this will be a high voter turn-out year? Voter registrations are waaaay up this year. (Barring, of course, the fraudulent registrations which will hopefully have been resoved by election day.)
It's certainly been the most hotly contested campaign season I can recall - and I've been voting since the late 70s. There's so much bravado and blustering coming from both camps, and the media clearly chose their darling many moons ago, it seems like people will either be so sick of it, or apathetic about the outcome, that a lot of folks simply won't bother to show up.
I know there's been a massive push to register young voters. Our college campus has been crawling with people trying to stir up support for a certain candidate. My daughter and her friends are apporached every time they attend an event, from football games to local band open mic nights. But do you think everyone will actually turn up on election day?
And this may be totally UN-PC, but I'm not so sure everybody SHOULD vote. I mean, if you're too lazy to register, are you really going to be doing your due diligence and educating yourself about each candidate's policies and proposals?
What do you all think about it?
In your mind - the election is not over - sm
Well everyone can definite tell you are a democrat. I'm sure before the debate even began you had decided that Obama had won.
I think McCain did quite well. If you believe the slick lawyer talk of Obama then so be it but a lot of us are not fooled. McCain was strong. He finally listened to the people who told him to be strong, stand up for us, point out what is wrong with Obama's policies - you know that little tidbit Obama talks about called "redistribution of wealth". It also did not help Obama that he told the plumber guy that he needs to pay more in taxes so that the person who doesn't have anything will have something. Socialism at its finest!
Well, you're right about the election almost being over...sm
but the hatefest will continue, regardless of who gets in the White House. I mean, doesn't it always? If Obama wins, Republicans will be going on for four years about what he's doing wrong or not doing at all and if McCain wins, Democrats will go on for four years about how nothing has changed and it's Bush's third term, so on and so on. It's sad, but it's true - this board will just see more of the same.
If anyone is trying to steal this election, it's O's
nm
Tell me the last election that a person who is not
a natural born citizen ran for president. I was born in 1960 so maybe there were some before my time, but I thought every election the candidate was a natural born citizen.
Election 2008
This is a great post. The facts speak for themselves. These are the facts. Sarah Palin is out for herself and her family. Does anyone really think she cares about the country when she is busy charging the state for her trips to ritzy hotels with her children. How many of us can do that? Some of these were $200.00 per night hotels. There are kids in this country going to bed hungry. Here the majority of us are cutting coupons to make ends meet. John McCain owns over 7 expensive homes. Cindy McCain wore a $300,000 dollar outfit to the convention. Do you really think the McCain/Palin ticket has empathy for struggling American families?
I'm so old I just hope I'm around next election. LOL
x
If you think all that's gonna end after the election,
.
Election's over. You lost.
Get over yourself. This is dead-end rhetoric.
Don't they know the election is over and OBAMA WON?
HOW FUNNY!
Are we far enough removed from the election
I wish this was original (I'm not this smart) and I'm sorry if you've all already received it in your email but I thought it was great (you KNOW I'm a republican--you may not know that I love Condoleeza Rice and would have taken to the streets to support her in a bid for the presidency).
It has been suggested that if we really wanted to tick-off the dems, the party should get GWB to step down, now, as president, leaving Chaney as president. Chaney could then could ask for Condoleeza Rice to serve as his vice president (certainly not out of the question, given her position). Then CHeny could step down, thus producing the first Black Female president---and she'd be a republican!!!!
What a stitch!
We WILL have an election in 2012 - that is what most go by
The audacity to automatically assume Obama will serve until 2017 is what is going to get you in trouble.
Since you don't understand the simple concept let me explain it for you. Please read slowly so you can grasp reality.
Since America has had it's first president we have had elections every four years. Therefore, seeing as we have just had an election in 2008 and Obama takes office in 2009, our next election will be in 2012.
Your antics and rhetoric of just assuming that Obama will be in there for a second term I would say is a bit premature. Let's let him at least get sworn in and see what kind of a job he does as president. A lot can happen in four years. If he survives then in four years he can think of running again. If Bill Clinton had done half the stuff he did in his second term when he was in his first term he might have not had a second term. We don't know yet if Obama will be keeping his campaign promises or what kind of President he will be.
Here's some reality for you. Obama may turn out to be an absolutely fantastic president. We can all hope for that. So...he could turn out to be a good president and then again he may not be a good president. We won't know until after he has served in the role. Also, you are assuming that because GW was not a good president that every single other living republican would not be a good president and that is just not true. If you believe that then you have a very distorted viewpoint of politics. There are some very good republicans and there are some very good democrats. Just like there are some very bad republicans and there are some very bad democrats. Obama is too new and we don't know what category he falls into yet.
The truth of the matter is that we WILL have another election in four years. Which means the republican party has got four years to really get it together and pick someone that is decent to run against whoever the next democratic nominee will be, whether it is Obama or if he doesn't last whoever else they are going to put in there.
Also we have the congress/senate/house to think of - you know all those people who vote on issues and who have gotten our country in the trouble it is in now (I'm not blaming either side alone - there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides). No, sorry to burst your bubble but GW didn't crap on this country all by his little ol self. The people in the senate who vote on issues did that. So...if for the next four years we see a continuation of the decline of our country, America will probably say, enough with the democrats, we need to bring back a republican president. Not very many people are keen on the idea that every single thing is now being run by one political side. We do need a balance to our government.
One other factor to think about is all the people that Obama is appointing to his cabinet. I'm seeing on this board by a lot of posts that there are a lot of people who, while they are enthusiastic and excited that Obama was elected, they are way not excited that he keeps bringing the old Clinton people back and people who have no experience. Those were the same people who made a mess of things back then and now he's bringing them back in. What he owes them I have no idea but for him to campaign that he is the ONLY candidate who can unite the two parties and he will hire both sides to evenly balance things, that is the first campaign promise he has broken.
Lastly, without any doubt there are some scandals looming about. These are not fabrications. It's just the truth. People he was involved with and are still involved with. Who he owes favors to, the BC thing (whether or not it will get resolved is another story). There is just too much to be ignored. I do understand the loathing that people have for Bush and they would have rather elected a dog rather than another republican, therefore most were saying, so what and tried to bebunk a lot of the issues, however, the issues are real and will not be going away. Not saying that GW doesn't have his share of issues, but I'm not writing a post about GW. Anyway...with the issues that Obama has, one just doesn't know what the next four years will bring for us.
So, taking all that in account, a better approach would be to just say you hope Obama is a good president (as we all do because we want to see our country succeed) and in four years if he turns out to be good then he will be up for re-election. However to just say that its a fact that he will be in for 8 years is a bit arrogant (and nauseating).
Of course there will be an election in 2012
and with the GOP ensconced in this kind of denial and its party still in shambles, the results are a foregone conclusion. Thus, the 2929 count continues. The OP is the only prescription the GOP has to even hope to have a noticeable presence in 2012.
AMEN! You mean the guy who WON the election?
If the election hadn't been stolen, our country wouldn't be in the predicament it is now.
This last election has proven
that the majority of us do not bother to educate ourselves on a candidate or an issue. We just grab at something shiny: Ooh, ooh! That one speaks well and looks good!
In any election, if there are candidates or issues I don't know enough about to vote on (judgeships, etc.) I actually leave that item blank rather than just put just anybody's name in there! Candidates actually fight to have their name placed at the top, because they know that some voters will just select the first one they see. Or they go for name recogition, and vote for the one who'se spent the most on advertising. Horrifying to think this is how some candidates get elected.
In the election before that I was aghast when a friend that I thought was intelligent said of Bush/Kerry. ''We've tried it one way for four years. Time to try give somebody else a chance.'' When asked, she could not name any area in which Kerry was better; he was just ''different.'' Oh, well, if it's somebody else's turn.......
And that's the main problem with our political system. We seldom get a candidate that really inspires us and too often we just end up voting for the one we hate least, or the one whose name is listed first. Or we get bamboozled by flashy packaging with absolutely nothing inside.
So I have no idea how we make people pay attention and vote responsibly in order to change all this.
This is bashing AFTER the election....these are
Being against Obama doesn't mean I was for McCain. As far as I am concerned, if Ron Paul had been given the attention he deserved and TV time, he would have gotten his points across and sounded like the only one with any sense at all...
What Obama is doing now has EVERYTHING to do with what he is doing NOW, not before. The lies are taking place NOW! Sorry you feel we are just to lie down and take the Obama railroading that is happening in our country. Saying NOTHING WILL CHANGE is sad to hear.. with that attitude you darn right it won't change. If something isn't done NOW, heaven help us all the next 4 years..... look at the mess he's gotten us into in just a few weeks... can you just imagine the next 4 years?
Issues? Gourdpainter, his lies ARE the issues. One lie after the other. Surrounding himself with lobbylists after saying he would DO AWAY with them is a MAJOR issue.... that isn't a before the election thing, that is happening NOW!
Getting our troops out is a NOW thing... remember he said he would get them out pronto?! Not happening! His lies are a NOW thing; they happen on an ongoing basis. These are not issues BEFORE his election.... these were promises he made to GET elected and then he screwed us all over BIG TIME!
He yammered on about poor folks with no healthcare but his wife was quietly dumped out of her $317,000 a year job at a hospital that was receiving MILLIONS of dollars to help the POOR PEOPLE.... a program she headed up and seemingly had no sympathy for the poor black folks without healthcare! She was quietly released from her job.... a job that was done away with with no replacement for her.... doesn't that tell you her job wasn't a position that was necessary in the first place other than to dump indigent patients off on other hospitals? You don't think that is an issue NOW? It speaks volumes about these people. After all, Obama is still yammering on about his healthcare program and trying to ram it down my throat.... you think that's not an important NOW issue?
I wonder if they're coming before the election or after. (NT)
;-)
It is hard to believe, isn't it....even in a Presidential election...
only about half of the people vote. I, like you, don't know why anyone would not want to exercise their right to vote.
|
