Tuesday, November 07, 2006

So I voted . . .

My polling place was practically deserted, which surprised me, given all the interest in this election. There was a light rain, and we all know how even a minor impediment can turn people away from the polls.

My jurisdiction gave voters the option of voting electronically or casting a paper ballot (an electronic scanner form). Despite the ease of electronic voting, I opted for the paper ballot after I saw a report on how easy it was to reprogram an electronic voting machine. I looked over my ballot once, twice and a third time to ensure I didn’t make any errant marks, and put it in the machine. In a technological age, there simply needs to be a better means of lodging one’s vote and confirming its proper execution.

So there you have it. I have exercised my franchise. We'll see how it all ends tonight . . .

Update: I went back to the polls to stand outside for a few hours with a "Yes to Equal Protection, No the Marriage Amendment" sign that I printed up with Illustrator. It was an illuminating experience, for it yet again underscored just how much the right is animated by mystical faith. While chatting with the other activists standing outside the polls who supported the amendment, I put the question to them: "Why do you take your stand?" I got a very quick answer: "The Bible."

"The Bible?," I asked. "Oh yes," they said, all of them nodding vociferously in agreement. "We believe in what the Bible says, and the Bible says homosexuality is immoral."

I simply replied in answer that as much as they had a right to their own private mystical beliefs, they had absolutely no right to negate the judgment of others who disagree with their faith and seek to avail themselves of the law's protection, and that I stood for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" instead. Privately, I looked forward to the fact that their view would no longer control the majority in Congress.


American Individualist said...

Here in New York, I voted mostly for Democrats, including Hillary. I could not have imagined doing that just a few shorts years ago, not to mention throughout the second half of the 1990s. But such is the state of the Republicans, who are dreadful. Early indications are that the Dems will pick up some seats in the Senate, but not enough for a majority, and may take a majority in the House. So, looks like we’ll get exactly what I hoped for: gridlock, so that neither party can do anything drastic. In the meantime, we can continue to spread Objectivism for a better tomorrow.

I did vote for one Republican, the forgettable Fasso, who ran against Evil Spitzer. I simply could not cast my vote for so disgusting a candidate who, in all likelihood, will be this state’s next governor.

Mike said...

...aaaaand gridlock it is! Voting a mostly libertarian ticket made a difference here as well... the losing candidates in many parts of Arizona would have made up a great deal of ground with the third-party vote added to their own. Alas that the time has not yet come for the breaking of the binary lock on national politics.

Marnee said...

Umm, call me crazy but who the hell cares about Gay Marriage when we are in a position to see great damage done now that we will be ruled over by the go-gooder moderates of both parties?

Gridlock is an illusion anyway. The moderate Republicans are just dying for an excuse to patronize their constituency (grannies) and embrace their do-gooder sides, too. Now the moderates can do it while riding on the wave of the other moderates' popularity.

We should be voting for relative wingnuts like Randy Graf and crazed Libertarian pot smokers. That is the only way to true gridlock -- throw in some actually opposing viewpoints. Alas, mixed premises rule the roost now. Its a gaint fuzy logic DIM system.

Its mob rule via the moderates. Its the patronizing moderates versus the other patronizing moderates. Compassionate Conservativism versus The Do-Gooders. Is there a difference?

Gridlock? Where? By what means? Not even any friction. Free flowing mob rule. Its a sad day for America.

Jim said...

Jack Crawford would be proud of the intellectual activism you exhibited at the polling place.

In Broadlands, anti-growth advocates were collecting demographic information at the polling place from voters after they cast their ballot. Interesting idea for building a local base around an idea, but in their case an evil idea advocating facsist regulation of property.