1. The most obvious reason is that Barack Obama is the first black presidential candidate. The fact America has had some harsh racial issues in its past is enough to prove that this election is anything but predictable, despite the polls, or political issues that “should” put a Democrat in office.

2. America did vote George Bush into office for a second term. The woes and worries that we are experiencing now were predicted four years ago, but despite the rather obvious future this president would bring upon us, he had a very strong supporting cast.

3. There really isn’t any control at the polls. Our votes are extremely important, but how many of our votes really count. We saw what effect poll stations have on our votes in Florida, during Gore’s stunt for president.

But, despite it all, I will trek to my poll station and cast my vote anyway. So should everyone. It is the system that I believe in and am apart of. Regardless, our country will get what it deserves, whether good or bad.

Caleb
http://www.mefinanciallyfree.blogspot.com

7000 bottom

As far as alternate energy, the stocks will see a significant rise in value during Obama’s presidency (i.m.o. inevitable). I am planning on increasing my position in pbw within the next weeks while it is trading very low. I would say increasing your positions in alternate energy could be one of the safest plays when Obama takes office.

After saying all this, I do not support Obama, and I am not a democrat. I am just agreeing with the post that I would also be shocked to see the election turn any other way.

Nice post, lots of good stuff here.

My site – David Carlson Politics

http://justsaynodeal.com/index2.html

1) People become rich because they are competitive, disciplined, and motivated (and a bit of luck here and there). They do not simply become couch-potato jag-offs because their tax rates go up. The wealthy do phenomenally well under both Democratic and Replublican administrations. It is the middle and lower classes that get screwed by Republicans. Just take this example – overall, which will create more goods and services?:

- a CEO who’s taxes are cut by $700,000
- 100 lower/middle-class families who’s taxes are cut by $7,000

The incentives to spend (and thus earn) are *much* higher for the lower/middle-class families. The families would most likely buy a car, add on to their homes, buy nicer clothes, get dental surgery, etc, etc, etc. The CEO would likely invest most of the money – certainly not spend every cent in 100 different ways throughout the sectors of our economy. How many gold-plated clocks can your yacht have?

Also, were money/capital flows that much worse under Clinton than Bush, adjusting for sub-prime derivatives and CDOs? Just asking, again, facts matter.

2) “[Democrats] tendency is to spend more” This is simply untrue. http://www.libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_11/bradford-spending.html and 100s of other fact-based studies contradict the myth of Democratic spending at the federal AND state levels (best for low spending is Democrat in executive, Republicans in legislative). Democrats tax more because they actually think deficits and debt matter. I don’t want to leave my children with a huge debt, I don’t want my government to either. Evidently, Republicans do (remember Cheney said “Deficits don’t matter”?)

Anyway, I just hate to see these right-wing memes spread in otherwise thoughtful circles. Keep up the good work!