Page 1 of 1

Obama won Super Tuesday!

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:44 pm
by linne
Just want to tell that Obama got about 2/3 of the Democrat voices.

Ok, perhaps it's not enough for him. There were only 139 of them, so I'm not sure little Denmark will have any influence.

Linne

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:34 pm
by RickG
Ha! I laughed when I first read this. He got 2/3 of the Dansk vote!? Overseas Americans... I hope.

Skål! Bunden i vejret eller resten i håret.

Cheers, RickG

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:37 pm
by DELETED
DELETED

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:19 am
by linne
RickG!
I must say that your Danish is perfect, when it has something to do with drinking!!
Perhaps you have met a lot of alcoholic Danes?

No it wasn’t any “danske stemmer”. It was, as you say, the Overseas American.
I didn’t hear the result of the Republicans, so I can’t tell that.

SJ!
Yes, many European are interested in the American election including myself. It’s a global world
and the economy in Europe are among other things under the influence of the situation in USA.
But I have to confess that I’m not able to make your election rules out. They are nearly so difficult to understand as the rules in American football. But as far I can see the election rules in Denmark seems more democratic. If it has been in Denmark, Al Gore would have been the president instead of Bush because Al Gore had the majority of votes.

Linne

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:48 am
by JT
Wow! The candidate with the most votes wins? What an interesting concept.

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:00 am
by linne
JT
Yes, I think it's a fair election if the candidate with most votes is the winner. :D :D But as far as I remember it was so, that Al Gore had most votes totally seen for USA, but because of the complicated rules about delegates from the different states Bush became the winner. Great Britain has also a special election system, which means that some votes in one way are lost because "the winner takes it all" as Abba sings. Our rules give a more representative parliament.

Linne

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:01 am
by DELETED
DELETED

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:17 am
by California Girl
SJfromNJ wrote:What is frustrating to me is that more people in the US vote for Ameriacn Idol than to electct the president.
1. If the choice of candidates were as good as the choice of contestants on American Idol it would be refreshing.

2. If you could phone in your vote multiple times for your favorite candidate, then maybe your choice of candidate would win.

But since the number of votes doesn't really count, what's the point?

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:33 am
by linne
SJ
I think we have written at the same time and I'm chocked about what you write:

"that more people in the US vote for Ameriacn Idol than to electct the president."

Can it really be true? How many percent of the people vote?

Thank you for the explanation about the rules. I only remember that I after the last election read in a newspaper that Al Gore would have won if it was the Danish Rules - allthoug we don't have a president!

Linne

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:39 am
by linne
OK now I see CG's post, which gives an explanation about that with votes for American Idol. I didn't either know the rules about that competition.

Linne

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:15 am
by DELETED
DELETED

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:41 pm
by linne
Thank you SJ. I understand a little more now.
Exiting to see how it ends up this year!

Linne

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:11 pm
by JT
Linne, I was making a sarcastic joke when I said that the majority vote getter being the winner was an interesting concept. I actually always thought that was the American way.

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:46 pm
by linne
JT
As you perhaps can see from my answer, I was not quite sure if you were sarcastic, thinking I was foolish, or it was a joke. But thank you for telling me, why you answered as you did :).

Linne