Vote Now: Polls Open in Eastern USA

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jtbell
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Usa
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
236 replies · 24K views
Moonbear said:
Ben & Jerry's is giving away ice cream?! :frown: I'm so deprived! We don't have a Ben & Jerry's store around here. I want my free ice cream too! :cry:
I'll mail you a bowl!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
HallsofIvy said:
I'll mail you a bowl!

Thanks...it would make a nice consolation prize. :rolleyes: :frown: Oh well, maybe in 4 years we'll finally open the doors for a viable third party candidate.
 
So apparently there were 160 million registered voters in the US (from a wiki, so I don't know how credible it is).

With the CNN poll showing that approximately 118 million voted, we had a turnout of 73.75%. Not bad, but not as high as some people were predicting.
 
Moonbear said:
Oh well, maybe in 4 years we'll finally open the doors for a viable third party candidate.
The only difference between a viable candidate and a non-viable one is votes. Did you vote for a third party candidate?
 
I had pegged Obama at 350 - 400 EV. 349 is pretty darned close, but they still haven't called NC nor MO from what I can see.
 
MO for McCain according to msnbc. But it have changed in the last 30 minutes or even less.
 
turbo-1 said:
I had pegged Obama at 350 - 400 EV. 349 is pretty darned close, but they still haven't called NC nor MO from what I can see.
MSN gives MO to McCain. The margin is very thin so there might be a recount. However, it won't affect the outcome so it may not go to the Supreme Court. I wonder if it is worth the cost. NC has not been declared, but unless the numbers that they report change (now it's 2,101,986 Obama, 2,089,826 McCain) this will go to Obama. Ditto on the possibility of a recount.
www.msn.com
 
A quick glance at the election map shows a strong correlation between miles of coastline (Ocean, Gulf, or Great Lake) and political orientation.
www.msn.com/
 
It looks like Obama will pick up NC and IN, but probably lose MO.

That would give him 364 EV. Not too shabby.
 
lisab said:
I'm so happy, my President is giving his acceptance speech now. My president - President Obama!

And a fine speech it was.

He understands the need for grace in victory. And I rather think that he will be as I have sensed all along an able leader that will build a consensus that he is uniquely qualified to build. Rather than be a nation divided, I think he will be the 21st Century's Lincoln building a Nation United.

Lincoln for his part at least lived to see the moment that the Nation was again United at least in name, as he toured the streets of Richmond shortly after its fall, the night they tore old Dixie down, but sadly days before he was shot. Weeks and months and decades of course short of healing the Nation divided. Perhaps it is now finally healed and we can move on and leave behind this notion that there are real Americans, and those that are not, living among us.
 
LightbulbSun said:
Two words: Universal Healthcare.
Doesn't exist, anywhere.
 
Interesting comment from the bbc (John Simpson?)
When JFK won he became the first Catholic president - which 10years earlier would have been unthinkable, now nobody (except for a few fundies) would even know it was ever an issue. The legacy of an Obama victory might be that in 20-30years nobody remembers why a black president was such a big deal.
 
I keep seeing these clips of Jesse Jackson with tears streaming down and I have to say I think he is really really sorry he said he wanted to separate Obama from his seed bearing organs. I think he is also thinking "Why can't that be me?"

All that time with Martin Luther King, and I don't think he really got it, because I don't think he ever truly could see it outside of what he got out of it.

Looks to me like Obama understands, and seeks this power as an instrument for change, a change that he alone maybe is qualified to affect and not so much as an end to itself.
 
siddharth said:
Umm... most of Europe? Or did I misunderstand something?
Nothing Universal about Health Care there. In all OECD cases I am aware of a) the country has a large (and usually growing) segment private/market health providers mixed in with the government plans (as in the US), or b) the government service severely rations care so that many services are flatly denied or the queue is 6-9 months. There's nothing universal about either of those approaches IMO.
 
mheslep said:
Nothing Universal about Health Care there. In all OECD cases I am aware of a) the country has a large (and usually growing) segment private/market health providers mixed in with the government plans (as in the US), or b) the government service severely rations care so that many services are flatly denied or the queue is 6-9 months. There's nothing universal about either of those approaches IMO.

a) Well, if you take Germany for example, the large part (~80%) is actually government funded. In India, there are government hospitals which are fully funded by the government, and also provide treatment free of cost.

See here for the statistics on % of healthcare spending supported by the government
http://www.who.int/whosis/database/core/core_select_process.cfm

b) Do you have a source for this claim? Is this problem long-lasting and widespread, or only isolated to a small number of cases or specific treatment types, and for a short-period? AFAIK, in India, services in government hospitals aren't denied, and the treatment time is usually reasonable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
siddharth said:
b) Do you have a source for this claim? Is this problem long-lasting and widespread, or only isolated to a small number of cases or specific treatment types, and for a short-period?
In universal healthcare there is always an element of rationing - there will be drugs or treatments that are too expensive for the limited benefit that they give.
Usually there is a central body that licences new drugs and treatments and decides which ones will be adopted - in the UK-NHS this is NICE (National Institute of Clinical Excellence).
There are occasional rows when a new treatment isn't offered - especially one which might postpone the onset of some disease (like Alzheimer's ) but isn't a cure.
 
mheslep said:
Nothing Universal about Health Care there.

It depends on your definition of "universal healthcare." I would define it to mean that one can obtain the same level of healthcare from the hospitals, regardless of the amount of money you have, or position in society you hold. With the NHS, for example, this is the case. That there is a private healthcare for those that choose not to take up the NHS healthcare is regardless.

Sorry: you're wrong!
 
siddharth said:
...b) Do you have a source for this claim? Is this problem long-lasting and widespread, or only isolated to a small number of cases or specific treatment types, and for a short-period? AFAIK, in India, services in government hospitals aren't denied, and the treatment time is usually reasonable.
We're OT so moving off this thread over to here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1944707&postcount=85
 
Congratulations all around to President-elect Barack Obama.
 
So it seems the PF Presidential Election 2008 poll questions, were off by a factor of 10..
The questions could have been rewritten, with following adjustments: where you see 15, make it 150.. (Obama win by over 150 electoral votes, Obama win by less than 150 electoral votes, etc.. How many guessed the spread would be that large?
 
Cyrus said:
Bet you a PF gold membership your wrong. (That's 14 bucks USD).

john16O said:
DEAL..I am not joking either..PF gold membership...

Cyrus said:
You're on. Dead serious.

Greg, notarize this bet please.

Greg Bernhardt said:
witnessed and stamped! :biggrin:
Ok john160, you need to get your information to Greg so he can charge you for Cyrus' Gold membership.
 
NC to BO according to AP. AP
 
Last edited: