http://wokv.com/..

The Duval County Supervisor of Elections Office has released the list of write-in candidates from the 2008 presidential election.

The list includes 736 votes in all, covering 191 different candidates.

Hillary Clinton topped all write-ins with 234 votes. Ron Paul had 174. The 3rd most votes? Jesus with 23.

Some of the others in the political arena receiving votes included Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Colin Powell, Rudy Giuliani, and Al Gore.

Two people wanted and thought it was possible to get 4 more years out of President George W. Bush. Condoleeza Rice, John Edwards, Fred Thompson, Pat Buchanan, and Charlie Crist also had support.

One person wrote in Ralph Nader, ignoring the circle they could’ve filled in to signify that choice.

Newt Gingrich, Harry Reid, and Theodore Roosevelt also garnered support. One person just wrote Lieberman.

Jay Plotkin lost the race for State Attorney, but his 1 vote beat Angela Corey in the presidential race. And the hyrbid candidate Hilary Bush got a vote!?

In the battle of the Bills - Bill Cosby and Bill Nye both received 2, beating Bills Clinton and Richardson with one apiece.

Morgan Freeman got a vote

Chuck Norris did too.

Mr. Bill - yes, the fictional clay figure - also was chosen by someone to lead the country.

Oprah Winfrey endorsed Obama but one person out there said ‘no, Oprah, I want you!”.

Many names weren’t celebrities. Jacksonville resident Wayne Bryan says he voted for himself because he “didn’t like his choices”. When asked if he was ready to lead on day one if elected, he admitted probably not.

America got a vote. My dog. A bear. Mickey Mouse.

UF beat FSU as Tim Tebow received 2 votes with Seminole coach Bobby Bowden getting just one.

Jon Bon Jovi, someone honest, Tiger Woods, Tommy Chong, and perhaps the greatest write-in candidate of all time: Twice cooked pork $4.95

I think I have to agree with the last statement. Twice cooked pork $4.95 would have been the best president ever. Even better then William Henry Harrison.

http://kotaku.com/…

About seventy-five percent of game industry presidential campaign donations went to democrats, based on a sampling of developers and publisher donations over the past two years obtained from the Federal Election Commission.

Kotaku looked at presidential campaign donations for nine companies from January of 2007 through the end of July, 2008. The companies included were Activision, Blizzard, Electronic Arts, Nintendo, Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Take-Two, THQ, Ubisoft and Valve.

The database showed that the nine companies donated a total of about $97,800 to ten candidates, about $61,000 of which went to democratic candidates, while about $36,700 went to republican candidates.

The company with the largest contributions to campaigns was Electronic Arts, followed by Activision and then Valve. The company with the smallest amount of donations was Take-Two. Hit the jump for an avalanche of colorful pie charts and one, single, lonely bar graph.

The graphs unfortunately are scaled down too much to clearly see the legends on all of them but it is clear that while they lean Democratic party, Ron Paul was the favorite Republican. Being that I’m a gamer and a supporter of Ron Paul I’m glad to see this. Especially the Sony breakdown.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

Campaign season is just getting warmed up, but looking back on the primaries we’ve already seen plenty of the usual fare: candidates shaking hands, hanging out at diners, and scaring voters about foreigners who are taking your jobs.

Sometimes the threat comes from China, Japan, or outsourcing to India. Today, it’s NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement—you know, all those Mexicans taking our jobs.

Senator Barack Obama joins the likes of CNN’s Lou Dobbs in decrying NAFTA. So many free trade foes fret about cheap foreign labor, yet they rarely holler about competitors who will work for far less than any foreigner. Politicians don’t pay much attention to it, but—from Terminator to Ice Pirates—Hollywood films have been warning us about humanity’s inevitable war against the machines.

“Now, think about it,” says Reason.tv host Drew Carey. “How are we supposed to compete against something that doesn’t get paid, doesn’t get health insurance, and never goes on breaks?”

Today, we don’t need human workers to book our travel, do our banking, or file our taxes. From factory workers to symphony conductors, countless workers are locked in battle with soulless job stealers known as computers, websites, and robots.

“No job is safe from the robot threat!” warns Carey. Of course, the warning is more than a little tongue-in-cheek. There’s no need to take a sledgehammer to a robot, because, although technology shakes up the labor market, it ends up giving us higher living standards as well as more and better job opportunities.

Like technology, trade gives us more good stuff than bad—yet Americans are likely to cheer technology and fear trade. No doubt TV talkers and White House wannabes will keep stoking our fears of foreigners until voters and viewers stop buying it—or until robots snag their jobs, too.

I don’t like regulated trade but if the alternative is one sided regulation the argument can be made for government treaties but they should not increase any restrictions or provide special treatment. That, however, is incredibly unlikely not to be included and therefore I think better to be safe then sorry and allow the grey/black market work around the regulations.

Defining Success Down, Massachusetts Style

Health Affairs has just published a new study of the Massachusetts health care plan by Urban Institute scholar Sharon Long. Media coverage has generally been positive, hailing the Massachusetts experiment as a success. But a closer look leads to a far less sanguine conclusion. Among other things, the study shows that:

• Slightly less than half of Massachusetts’ uninsured population actually complied with the mandate. True, the number of people without health insurance was reduced from 13% of the state’s population to 7%, but when the bill was passed, advocates promised that “all Massachusetts citizens will have health insurance.” Perhaps it depends on your definition of “all.”
• Most of those who are signing up are low-income individuals, whose coverage is fully or partially subsidized, proving once again that if you give something away for free people will take it. It certainly appears that it is the expensive and generous Massachusetts subsidies (up to 300% of the poverty level), not the unprecedented individual mandate that is responsible for much of the increased coverage.
• Adverse selection remains a big problem, with the young and healthy failing to comply with the mandate. The state refused to change its community rating laws which drive up the cost of insurance for young, healthy individuals. Not surprisingly, they don’t find this a good deal.
• The program is far exceeding its projected costs, with at least a 33% budget overrun in its first year.
• The program has increased demand for health care services without increasing the supply of providers. As a result, patients are having trouble finding providers and waiting lists (Canada here we come) are beginning to develop.

If this is success, I would hate to see failure.

I agree. I wonder if Romney would be bragging about this if he was still in the lime light?

Montana:

• McCain: 76%
• Paul: 22%
• No Preference: 2%

South Dakota:

• McCain: 70%
• Paul: 17%
• Huckabee: 7%
• Romney: 3%
• Uncommitted: 3%

http://www.cnn.com/…

Former Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney plans to announce Thursday that he is backing Sen. John McCain in his bid for the Oval Office, two sources familiar with the decision said.

A source familiar with the decision said Romney wants to endorse McCain “in the interest of healing.”

The source said Romney also wants to help McCain move faster to “secure the nomination and unite the party for the general election against the Democrats for November.”

Romney will “release” his delegates to McCain, meaning he will encourage them to get behind McCain’s candidacy. the source said.

As far as I understand things Romney can’t “release” his delegates to McCain. He drops out and they go free. They can vote for whoever they choose come September. I wonder whether the delegates belief in Romney’s platform (McCain is a liberal) is stronger than their belief in the man. According to some at CPAC several Romney supporters claimed they would back Paul instead. They even gave up Romney’s table to the Paul people. Given that even after his suspension Romney received a lot of votes I doubt very much his delegates would just start supporting Paul at the convention. Then again they won’t have that option. Regardless the media will start saying McCain has 1,000+ delegates now and that’s simply not true.