Minnesotans voted against a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Hours after Colorado had legalized marijuana and three other states had approved same-sex marriages, Minnesotans watched as fractions of percentages ticked upward and downward for each county’s vote tally on a constitutional amendment proposed to ban same-sex marriage in the state.

Unlike Maine, Maryland and Washington, which all legalized gay and lesbian marriages by margin of about 4 percent, Minnesotans narrowly rejected the constitutional amendment proposed to ban same-sex marriages in the state. The votes represented the first four positive results for the gay and lesbian communities after 31 defeats in other states. While the amendment did not legalize marriage in Minnesota, it was would have defined marriage as between only one man and one woman, making it virtually impossible for proponents of same-sex marriage to overturn a 1997 law banning it in the state.

Votes favoring the amendment did climb steadily throughout the evening, resting at 49.05 percent around midnight, before steadily dropping as the remaining results of the Twin Cities-Metro area came in. By morning, 51 percent of Minnesotans had voted to reject the proposal.

“We’re very excited with the outcome,” said Joseph (Joe) Reid of St. Paul. “We knew it was close, but honestly I was afraid we would lose.” Reid’s younger brother is gay and has been in a committed relationship for roughly as long as the Reids have been married—40 years.

Reid, 73, and his wife, Sharon, 71, voted against the majority of their age group, which strongly urged passage of the amendment. Minnesota’s vote was evenly split by gender, but age played a role in the amendment’s defeat. Individuals 45 and older comprised 55 percent of voters and generally voted to pass the amendment, but those younger than 45 strongly voted no. In fact, 67 percent of voters age 18-to-29, and 59 percent of voters 30-to-44 years old were in the latter group.

Throughout the campaign, the Reids worked for votes against the amendment. They held a fundraiser in their backyard in September that raised $3,000. They posted two yard signs: “Vote No: Don’t limit the freedom to marry,” and “Another Catholic Voting No.” They used their senior citizen classes at St. Thomas University to challenge their age group and other Catholics. Reid spent hours working the Vote No phone banks, working with Minnesota clergy of varying denominations, and driving voters to the polls. Sharon wore her button proudly, using it to open conversations about the proposed amendment and sway voters one by one.

The couple’s tactics during the Vote No campaign is part of what makes the amendment’s defeat unique. All advertisements posted by Minnesotans United for All Families, which headed the campaign, were positive messages of the different forms families can take. “There was not a negative element to it,” noted Reid, “which was nice considering all the negativity in the other commercials of the campaigns.”

The Reids attribute this positivity and the campaign’s grassroots effort as a possible reason for the amendment’s defeat. Sharon said, “I think people like Joe, who worked hard, people that continued to pound the doors and use the phone might have done it.”

The campaign was one of the state’s most expensive. Minnesotans United for All Families, funding the Vote No campaign, garnered $11.2 million in mostly individual private donations. Actor Brad Pitt donated $250,000, and Minnesota celebrities like Vikings’ punter Chris Kluwe and former Gov. Jesse Ventura have appeared on Vote No television ads.

On the other side, the amendment’s proponents kept a lower profile, spending only $3.6 million. The campaign’s relatively low spending may have indicated its confidence that the amendment would pass. In the past, similar elections have demonstrated that 7 percent of voters have traditionally jumped from supporting same-sex marriage to opposing it when they vote. Minnesota for Marriage leaders reportedly counted on that jump for the amendment’s strength. Wednesday, they were thanking supporters for their efforts during the campaign.

Looking forward for Minnesota, and considering the current stance of the state legislature, Reid says he would support a campaign to overturn the 1997 same-sex marriage ban. Tuesday night, he spent an hour at the St. Paul’s River Centre ballroom, where Minnesotans United for All Families had its headquarters.

“There were a lot of happy people there,” he said.

The post Minnesotans reject amendment to ban same-sex marriage appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

The most expensive campaign in U.S. history ends as President Barack Obama wins re-election.

A divided electorate voted to give President Obama more time to continue the agenda he began four years ago, despite a fragile economy, rancor over his signature health care overhaul, and a partisan Congress continually at odds.

The night also marked victories for those on the left of social issues, as Maine and Maryland became the first states to legalize gay marriage through popular vote, and Colorado and Washington legalized the recreational use of marijuana. Gay marriage was also on the ballot in Washington, where supporters held a thin margin of victory.

President Obama performed a nearly clean sweep of the fiercely contested battleground states, including Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada, with a narrow lead in Florida, pushing him well past the 270 electoral votes needed to win for a current total of 303.

The popular vote, however, showed a much less resounding victory, where President Obama had a 50 percent share over Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s 48 percent—down 3 percent from his win over John McCain in 2008.

President Obama will continue to preside over a divided Congress that has stymied legislation over the past four years, with the Republicans maintaining control of the House and the Democrats retaining the Senate.

In recognition of the difficult road ahead, Obama returned to themes of hope and cooperation in his acceptance speech to a boisterous crowd in Chicago, Ill.

“I believe we can seize this future together because we are not as divided as our politics suggests,” said Obama.

“We’re not as cynical as the pundits believe. We are greater than the sum of our individual ambitions, and we remain more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are and forever will be the United States of America.”

In his concession speech to supporters in Boston, Mass., Mitt Romney also acknowledged the need for both parties to work together.

“At a time like this, we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work,” he said.

Obama also began to lay out a tentative agenda for his second term, with a focus on jobs, immigration reform, and a balanced budget.

“You elected us to focus on your jobs, not ours. And in the coming weeks and months, I am looking forward to reaching out and working with leaders of both parties to meet the challenges we can only solve together. Reducing our deficit. Reforming our tax code. Fixing our immigration system. Freeing ourselves from foreign oil. We’ve got more work to do.”

The crowd gathered reflected the coalition that pushed him to victory. President Obama won with a coalition of the young, female, and non-white voters.

According to the AP, President Obama won 55 percent of the female vote—11 percentage points more than Romney—more than making up for the ground he lost among male voters. Among those ages 18 to 29, he won 60 percent of the vote.

Romney’s support was strongest among male voters at 52 percent and white voters, who supported him by the widest margin: 59 percent to Obama’s 39 percent. The loss raises questions of how the Republican Party will reach out to what will only be a more diverse electorate.

In stark contrast, President Obama won with 93 percent of African-American, 71 percent of Latino, and 73 percent of Asian-American voters.

To some of the loudest applause of the night, Obama celebrated the diversity of the American populace.

“I believe we can keep the promise of our founders, the idea that if you’re willing to work hard, it doesn’t matter who you are or where you come from or what you look like or where you love. It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or white or Hispanic or Asian or Native American or young or old or rich or poor, able, disabled, gay or straight, you can make it here in America if you’re willing to try,” he said.

Elizabeth Shim contributed to this report. 

The post Divided Electorate Votes to Give Obama More Time appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

Voters wait outside polling place in East Village 

In 2008, more than 20 million milennials voted in the presidential election, helping assure Barack Obama’s victory.  Now four year later, millenial voters number 46 million.  This demographic—also known as GenY—has been deeply troubled by the recession, high unemployment rate and record student debt.  How will that impact their vote?

A recent Harvard University poll of voters age 18 to 29 found that  less than half plan to vote.  In an effort to probe the thinking of millenials who did vote, students from the NYU undergraduate Beat Reporting class “Covering Gen Y” fanned out across the metro area on Election Day.  Here are their reports:

Upper West Side

As Chastity Logan shivered in wait on the two-hour voting line outside PS 75, she regretted not wearing a heavier coat over her thin hoodie.  Logan was one of the younger faces amid the crowd, a swarm full of complaining voices angry at the cold, the line, and the pushy bake sale volunteers.  Yet she had a smile on her face—proud to be exercising her right to vote, and happy to see a handful of younger people spread through the mass.

It’s no secret that millennials rocked the vote back in 2008, but this year there’s been skepticism that the trend will repeat.  Surveys like that of the Harvard Institute of Economics revealed that Obama’s youth vote has dropped a good 11 percent, while the Christian Science Monitor reported a general dip in the youth vote overall.  Yet GenY-ers on the Upper West Side who stood in the painfully long line that extended through three long, mural-clad halls of the elementary school and fully around the whole city block beg to differ.

A young entrepreneur, Logan, 27, believes that people like her and her younger GenY friends will be huge contributing factors to the election this year.  “In the last term a lot of the younger crowd was very motivated,” she said.  “Young people have seen the way things have happened over the past four years and want to contribute again.”

She added that the hot-button issues have hit home for GenY.  “A lot of my younger friends take issue with the workforce, graduating from college and making sure they can get a job, and not only get a job but making sure they can afford the student loans they’ve been able to accrue,” she said.

Despite the GenY characteristic of being less politically motivated, Nick Jenkins, 19, a recent graduate from The Dwight School, is very concerned with the election.  “I care about my country and I care about the planet.  I want to make sure the right person is in office,” he said. –MARIE SOUTHARD

West Village

On Election Day, PS3 Charrette Elementary School served two additional purposes, to aid in electing the next President, and to help those affected by Hurricane Sandy. The bright blue doors of the West Village school stood out from the otherwise drab exterior, with the left door leading to a line, usually extending to the sidewalk, of local residents waiting to vote, and the right opening to a bake sale and hurricane relief drive.

Once inside, those looking to vote had a long wait ahead of them, as the school’s auditorium was filled with twisting lines of different districts. The diverse crowd was all there for one reason: to vote. But they each make their decision differently, especially within Generation Y.

One GenY voter, Jordan Bryan, 25, cares most about diverse political issues. “Right now economy is number one. Things like women’s rights, being a female. I know abortion is kind of a hot topic right now, I do feel like it’s not really one of the frontrunners,” she says, “but I do think it’s important for women to have the right to decide about their own bodies. And other things like foreign affairs, but right now I think economy is kind of the frontrunner on everyone’s minds.”

While Anna Schecter, a 31-year-old photographer, makes her decision based on individual candidates, she tends to side with one party. “I guess I always vote Democratic. Because of not being an asshole to people who don’t have much, and being pro-choice. Those are the two big ones,” she says.

Roman Chimienti, 25, an audio engineer, doesn’t identify with either of the major parties. “My party at heart is independent and I vote by party, because essentially it’s the one that suits me best,” he says. For Chimienti, social issues are the most important, “Anything that has to deal with basically just people in general, not necessarily the economy. If we want to fix those things we have to unify ourselves first.”—SAMANTHA RULLO

Tierney says she watched all the debates, and the social media craze made her even more impassioned about getting out to vote. “Sometimes people were focusing on the wrong things,” she said. “I definitely wanted to get out and make my voice heard. Seeing peoples’ reactions to the debates really freaked me out, so I wanted to make sure I do my part because I want to, not because of some weird, cynical reaction to an out-of-date tradition.” She says that before the debates and the way people reacted to them, she was not positive about whom to vote for.

Johanna Nchekwube, on the other hand, found the social media focus a deterrent. “It seems like everything is focused on the election,” the 21-year-old aspiring actress says. “Like, everything. Facebook is too overwhelming right now. It’s annoying. But I wanted to do my duty.”

Cooper Square

Tuesday’s Election Day turnout at the JASA Community Center in East Village was no lighter than previous years according to residents, even with the devastation from Hurricane Sandy just last week. Gen Y voters especially were rolling in and out of the polling place in a steady stream all afternoon. These first, second, and third time voters made up a key part of the Democratic votes.

“Obama gets a lot of hell from people for how he’s been running the country, but I don’t think he could have done it any differently because he had his hands tied from previous administrative errors,” said 28-year old criminal behavior analyst Sarah. “In my opinion, Obama is a good president who is honorable, humble and loyal to his people.”

The third-time voter, who preferred not to share her last name, said that the individual, not for the party, determines her vote,  and this time around that individual is Barack Obama. She supports his views on the three issues that are most important to her: women’s rights, same-sex marriage, and green energy policies.

Daniel Liu and Martha Ross, business partners at video news-sharing service #Waywire, also expressed similar opinions about the president.  “Obama has done a lot of things he doesn’t get credit for,” 25-year old Minnesota native Ross said. “He does a lot for long-term benefits, but citizens want immediate gratification so they criticize him.”

Twenty-year old New York University student Rigel Sarjoo was excited to take part in the election for her first time, though she was still undecided as to which candidate she would vote for as she neared the front of the line. “All I know is that I’m not voting for Romney,” she said. Sarjoo became interested in politics during college, particularly because of how much the Occupy movement was covered on social media.

“In my opinion, the government needs to work more for us than for special interests,” Sarjoo said. “They should start working more on issues like student debt, equality for women, the way food is labeled and handled, and basic human rights.”—ANNIE PARK

In the last moments of a very close race for the presidency, every vote counts. A large weight has been put on the shoulders of GenY voters, which was the demographic that determined the 2008 election. On Election Day, many young millennials took their lunch and class breaks to go vote at JASA Community Center in Cooper Square. While retired people mostly inhabit the neighborhood and married couples over 30, the polling place still managed to draw a younger crowd.

Chelsea Xu, 18-year old NYU student, was voting for the first time and decided to cast her ballot for Barack Obama. For her, the discrepancies between both candidates helped make her decision. She felt that she couldn’t trust Romney because “he kept changing his positions throughout the race.” She also took recent events such as Hurricane Sandy into consideration. “Obama did a good job in helping out victims, but Romney only helped out victims in swing states,” she said. For her, the candidates’ actions during the race helped decide her mind.

Another first-time voter Rachel, 19, was “waiting for this day” for a while. This NYU sophomore also voted for Obama; she based her decision on prospects for the future. “Especially in this election, people are arguing about which candidate’s plan would be best for the country,” she said. She acknowledged that other young voters might go for the candidate that would show immediate results, but she felt that “Obama is looking out for the greater good in the bigger picture.” –RACHEL PARK

 East Village

While most of America feels that fixing the economy was the top priority for the 2012 presidential election, many young East Villagers stressed the importance of social issues as well. At a polling site on East Fifth Street, GenY voters seemed particularly passionate about women’s rights, gay marriage, and public education.

Shauna Mei, a 30-year-old entrepreneur, is worried about the economy but feels like social issues take precedence. “Neither candidate can promise to fix the economy alone,” said Mei, “so I chose a candidate who promised to support civil rights: Barack Obama.” Mei said that this was also the first time she’d voted Democrat down the party line. “Obviously New York City is already very liberal but there really wasn’t any viable alternative in my opinion.”

Partisanship with respect to social issues also proved important to Gen-Y voters. “It’s really sad how divided the country is concerning social issues,” said Erica Anderman, 24. “Gay marriage and women’s health issues shouldn’t be ignored.” Anderman also expressed distaste for campaigns against abortion and birth control led by the G.O.P. in recent years. “It’s just crazy that in the year 2012 some politicians can get away with completely disenfranchising women and the LGBT.”

Older voters tend to separate social issues from economic issues but many Gen-Y voters see social issues and the economy as intrinsically linked. “Between student debt and the rising cost of healthcare, young people need to be considered in this economy,” said Kay Davis, 31. “Public education is becoming too costly, women aren’t given enough access to healthcare, and the socioeconomic divide is growing,” said Davis. “A strong economy depends on a well-educated and well-cared-for population.” –RYAN HUGHES

Sandy didn’t stop Downtown Brooklyn’s millennials from letting their vote count today at Borough Hall. From bloggers to chefs to musicians to students, the majority of Metrotech’s 20-somethings checked off President Obama as their choice to lead the country for the next four years. Along with social issues and the economy, education served as one of the greatest issues impacting GenYers. BK’s millennial generation weighed in on why they came out to vote and why education was important to them this election.
“I was unable to vote in the last election because I was not of age. When given the opportunity to exercise my right to vote, I took it,” sais 22-year-old Joseph Ramirez.

Ramirez is a first-year student at Brooklyn Law. If it weren’t for the Pell Grant he received to go to college as an undergrad, the road to law school would have been much more difficult financially.

“It’s people like me who need government assistance to make their dreams come true,” the Clinton Hill resident said. “I think [Governor] Romney forgets not everyone’s wealthy.”

Brooklyn college student Winston Blake, 21, agrees that President Obama is offering people of all classes a shot at education. “I agree with Obama that every American has a right to receive an education,” the Fort Greene resident said.

Danielle Jamison, 24, is a recent college grad and hopeful musician. Jamison expressed gratitude for Obama’s post-college-friendly healthcare plan. “I wouldn’t be able to do what I love as a musician if I couldn’t be on my parents’ insurance plan. Thank you Obama,” the Clinton Hill resident said.

Jamison didn’t pass up the opportunity to thank Obama by voting for him this election. “Obama made history in 2008. I wanted to help him do it again,” she said. —NATALIE ADEEYO

Midtown

New York City GenY voters went to the polls today commencing their voting process by skipping through the streets screaming candidates’ names, whipping out their iPhones to take pictures of the “Vote Here” signs taped to the walls, and walking through the wooden doors of the Graduate Center at CUNY polling site near Herald Square to take part in this historic event.

These 20-somethings believed it was their duty to take part in the election process.  “I came out because I was worried that there would be a low voter turn out because of the hurricane,” said 29-year-old Rachel Boufford outside of the polling station.

The two-hour wait did not dissuade 22-year-old Rachel Jespersen.  “My mom was probably the one who motivated me the most to vote,” Jespersen says. “My parents drilled it in me that this is a civic duty, even if you believe your vote doesn’t count.”

Other GenY voters believed that simply exercising the right to vote and going to the polling sites was necessary during these elections, despite the fact that New York is primarily a Democratic state already.  “I came out for the symbolism of it,” said 24-year-old Fordham University graduate student Michael Pegun. “Since New York isn’t a swing state, it’s about being part of the process.” –NITASHA MAINDIRATTA

Greenwich Village

Despite New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s executive order stating that New York voters could vote at any polling site, lines were long and the still resonating effects of Hurricane Sandy on election day.  The outcome of the announcement meant that not all sites were prepared for an onslaught of voters.

Lucky for the spirit of democracy though, the voting difficulties didn’t matter to some Gen-Y voters, who were standing outside a polling place on Fifth Avenue and 12^th Street in full force on the brisk November day, just hoping to make a difference? The issues that matter and the reasons behind their votes are many, but a common theme seems to be how personal the issue of voting and choosing the right candidate has become to the generation.

For some, social issues such as LGBT and women’s rights are high on their list of priorities and for that reason, they’re voting for Barack Obama. Amy Mellman, a 22-year-old law student at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, cited such concerns, adding that she “doesn’t like Romney’s stance on women’s issues.”

However, others believe that Romney would help the country get out of the recession. “I like the direction Mitt would put the economy,” said Steve, a 24-year-old working in the foreign exchange market. “I like that he has business experience, because that’s important in terms of our economy and that’s important to me as a young, working professional.”

Other millenials still look to their families for guidance. Lindsay Egan, a 22-year-old Cardozo law student feels that because she is not yet independent of her parents, so she should follow her parents’ guidance. 
“I’m going to vote for Romney, because my whole family is Republican and my parents kind of want me to vote for him,” she said. “They’re supporting me right now, so I’m going to go with what they want.”
–MARGARET COHN

Social issues held a significant importance for Generation Y in the 2012 presidential election, according to voter surveys conducted Tuesday. An informal poll of Gen Y voters found that the majority based their presidential vote on a variety of social views, like same-sex marriage and women’s rights such as abortion and birth control.

Cardozo Law School student Kevin Ruiz, 24, is concerned with “a protection to a lot of the gains we’ve made over the last 75 to 80 years. You see a lot of challenges to women’s issues and rights, social services, and welfare.”

Hunter Chancellor, 21, a senior at New York University, agrees that Gen Y will consider social issues at the polls. “Equality is a major issue that’s being brought up. Issues like abortion, immigration – things that are affecting our society,” he said.

The economy was a close second, with many Millennial expressing fear and concern over financial issues. A 22-year-old Cardozo Law student who wished to remain anonymous said, “I think the economy is really scary. I think the fact that we’ve got a lot of baby boomers aging and we have to pay into the system to finance them is just a little worrisome.”

Finances are considered a primary concern of older generations, he said. “I’m a student. I don’t have an income tax. I’m not a property owner. I think that taxes are a much bigger concern for those who have to pay them consistently, whereas I don’t really worry about that.”

As America becomes progressively more accepting and tolerant of different racial, gender, and sexual beliefs, younger generations cannot imagine reversing the trend. “We just have a different way of looking at things,” said Caroline Cunningham, a 20-year-old student at NYU. “Like, having same-sex marriage would not have even been in the question 50 years ago for our grandparents and such. So, that that is on the table means a lot as far as the differences between what our parents or grandparents faced as opposed to us.”—CARRIE COUROGEN

Long Island

In Asharoken, Long Island, the village still remains on the brink of disaster after megastorm Sandy and extensive flood damages in the village hall forced local officials combine its polling place with Eatons Neck residents at the local fire department.

Despite the upheaval, residents still made the trip down dilapidated Asharoken Avenue, the village’s main road and the only road into Eatons Neck, to vote and to donate. “I was here at 6 a.m. and more people than ever were here,” said Pam Vogt, a local resident.

With so many Long Island residents still scouring the streets in search of an open gas station, many residents feared there would be some tonight who go without voting. “A lot of people are trying to carpool,” said Lynn Hall, a 19-year-old working as a poll-watcher. “I think around dinner time we might see a surge of people,” she said.

Despite the difficult of getting to the polls, GenY was out there, and they were eager to vote and express their opinions. Lynn Hall, the 19-year-old poll worker in Asharoken, voted for Obama, simply stating, “I feel like he didn’t f… up.”

In Centerport, Francesca Ramos, 23, also remained faithful to Obama. She said she still felt as passionate about him as she did four years ago when he spoke at her college. “I think he did a lot of things he promised,” she said.

Ben Iorio, however, age 21 and first-time voter, stood waiting his turn to fill out his ballot and held firm in his convictions that he would be voting for Mitt Romney, simply because he “is a conservative.” –MACKENZIE GAVEL

The post How GenY Voted appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

The post North Carolina: Amendment One and the Black Vote appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

As the 2012 Presidential election looms, college students straddling New York and their hotly contested swing states such as Ohio and Wisconsin are grappling with where to cast their ballot. They have the option of either registering to vote in New York, or sending their vote home with an absentee ballot in the hopes of making their state swing a little more their way.

This choice brings to mind something a politically charged Dr. Seuss would say, “One state, two state, red state, blue state.” This (slightly altered) mantra is a full on rumba for those students hailing from the swing states.

In interviews with seven New York University undergraduates through Facebook and email, five out of the seven responded that they were sending absentee ballots home in support of President Obama. The other two were planning on sending absentee ballots home, but were still undecided about which candidate they were going to check off.

In their responses, they noted that Mitt Romney and President Obama are campaigning relentlessly in their schools, offices, and airwaves. They understood the election will be decided by the slimmest of margins their home states and their votes are the ones that will potentially decide the next President of the United States. And they’re not taking it lightly.

Sundus Arain, a 20 year-old NYU student from Germantown, Wisconsin, who sent for an absentee ballot from Abu Dhabi where she is studying abroad, said, “The sad truth is, my vote does count more than others, especially in Wisconsin. It’s a tight race there.”

Jonathon Kopnick, a 19-year-old NYU student from Wyoming, Ohio echoes the sentiments. No Republican candidate since Abraham Lincoln has won the Presidency without winning Ohio’s 18 electoral votes.

“As the politics of Ohio have a way greater sway on the national level then those of New York, it makes more sense to vote where I grew up,” Kopnick said. Absentee ballots made up about 30 percent of the vote in Ohio — numbers that definitely hold some weight according to United States Election Project, but that’s referring to current residents not absentee ballots

With regard to how students prefer to vote, a study by Circle for the 2008 election found that college students from swing states chose absentee voting in their home states by an 8:1 ratio over voting in their college state. Michael Peshkin, a Northwestern professor who conducted the study, stated that he predicts those numbers will increase for the 2012 election, “Overall in the U.S., absentee and early voting have been strongly on the rise.  I’d expect students to be ahead of the curve.”

While it seems most students from swing states choose absentee to optimize their vote, a few specified kinship to their home state. In addition to her vote “counting more,” Carolyn Boyce, NYU student from Cincinnati, Ohio, said, “I still feel like I live in Ohio, not the state where I’m going to college.”

No student seemed deterred by the voter registration process in New York, which requires a filing a completed form 25 days before the election. In fact, it seemed none of them even considered voting in New York in the first place. New York’s hue is too steadfastly blue to be of any excitement. Leah Shultheis, a 19 year-old NYU student from Westerville, Ohio, said that because New York is guaranteed to go blue, ”My vote in New York would have been almost a waste. As for who I’ll be voting for, one thing is certain,” she continues, “it won’t be Romney on my ballot.”

Time to rumba.

The post Swing state students debate: absentee ballot or register at school? appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

Obama Eats at Manny’s.

The Gateway Breakfast House in Portland has a wide range of belly-busting and classic American offerings, among them the cheesy ham and egg burger, the chili-cheese fries and the tuna melt. A little after noon on July 24^th, 2012, the President of the United States paid the restaurant a surprise lunch visit. As the pictures snapped and the film rolled, Mr. Obama rolled up his crisp sleeves and ordered the cheese sandwich, some split pea soup and an iced tea.

Word of Obama’s simple selection eventually floated onto the Internet and became easily accessible through a Google search. Local news sources managed to unearth the most gripping information they could muster from the routine diner stop on a cross-country campaign trail: Obama left a portion of his soup unfinished.

Decades of detailed media coverage of such stops, as well as both standing and presidential hopefuls’ personal food cravings, continue to feed the detail-hungry public of such split-pea-and-cheese-sandwich leanings as Mr. Obama’s. And on the 2012 campaign trail, this tradition of closely tracking the candidates’ taste buds takes on more colorful form, thanks to young media platforms like the blog.

The Huffington Post told us the contents of Romney’s Chipotle burrito bowl at a Denver visit last month: black beans, pork, guacamole and pico de gallo. The New York Times let us know that Obama holds the mayo and isn’t too fond of salt and vinegar potato chips, while its magazine recently dedicated a large chunk of its Food & Drink issue to presidential cravings and food habits. Why the level of detail, and perhaps more importantly, who cares if Mr. Romney chose not to fill up on sour cream, or cheese, or hundreds of tasty calories in carb-packed tortilla form?

Presidents’ favorite meals have been closely followed since Washington took office. For instance, the nation’s third president, Thomas Jefferson, loved the French and finer things, preferring vegetables to meats and dining on olives, figs, crabs, oysters, pineapple and light wines. Abe Lincoln looked to his upbringing, eating just about anything on his plate (particularly bacon) and favoring meals fresh from the farm. Based on each man’s beloved public image, these cuisine choices seem to make perfect sense. Jefferson, the sophisticated and worldly president, picks figs with Madeira wine. Honest Abe, the no-frills, hardy president, picks apples and coffee.

Lynne Olver is the curator of Food Timeline, a comprehensive online database that meticulously breaks down the history of man and food’s relationship, with its own detailed section for each of the 44 U.S. presidents’ tastes. Olver’s Food Timeline has now joined the Twitter world and has received over 28.3 million visitors. The site has become a popular food and culture resource, providing food facts for major media like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Cooks Illustrated and Saveur. Olver believes that the American public’s curiosity in the food details come from a basic desire to know and relate to the candidates.

“Presidential candidates run on party platforms and grand promises but they, like us, are human beings fueled by food,” said Olver. “What they eat, how they eat it, and with whom, provide alternative perspectives to the public personae.”

Such discovery occurred for Olver stumbling upon reports of Nixon’s choice dish. “Watergate was the most important political event in my youth,” Olver said. “I knew that Nixon. Reading this account made me see him in a different light. A man who liked meatloaf. I made meatloaf last night.”

If the presidential candidate is what he eats, what are presidential candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney according to the food coverage of the 2012 campaign trail? New media in blog form allows public conversation to delve deeper into candidates’ choices, often with a little more sass into candidates’ choices—Buzzfeed dedicated a post to Obama’s decision to put a big bowl of fresh apples in his office with “40 Photos of the Oval Office Apple Bowl.” Magazines’ online blogs like Esquire’s “Eat Like a Man” and New York Magazine’s “Grub Street” post that Obama has a wide range of both healthy and indulgent favorites, with a particular fondness for cooking and eating chili. The President also remains faithful to choosing “man” food on the road, like ribs, pizza, burgers, and more burgers. Perhaps in his noticeably more sinful picks, Obama hopes to do what Mormon candidate Romney cannot: grab a cheeseburger and a beer and get chummy with the locals.

Consequently, Romney is known more for what he chooses not to eat, as he is restricted in his visits to small-town dives and in his overall diet by the moderation that his Mormon faith requires. While both men eat lighter and organic fare in their day-to-day routines, Romney’s favorites are, at their most exotic, narrowed to an almost kiddie level of simple: chocolate milk and peanut butter and honey sandwiches, considered bland by foodie blogs like Grub Street’s standards.

With foodie brains like Olver at viewers’ fingertips and gastronomically influenced roles like “The Healthy, Organic President” or the “Backyard BBQ Chili-Cookin’ President” to pick, the candidates have to think more deeply than ever about the food they put in their mouths. So to contenders of present and future campaigns: as you make your last stops in Haverford or Tuscaloosa, take a minute before biting into the sweet tomato and mozzarella of that margherita pizza, and consider the pro’s and con’s of meat-lover’s.  We’re watching you.

The post What’ll it Be, Mr. President? appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

Ann Romney shares a love note from Mitt.

From Eleanor Roosevelt to Hilary Clinton, candidates’ wives have played important roles in presidential campaigns, appearing alongside their husbands, giving speeches, interviews, and taking on their own causes as well as their spouses’.

From the stages at the National Conventions to the covers of magazines, Michelle Obama and Ann Romney have been campaigning tirelessly for their husbands during the past months. The women have put their time and effort into showing America a softer, more real side to the candidates. The question is: what effect do they have on voters?

Michelle Obama and Ann Romney have used every possible medium, from their parties’ conventions to Pinterest, to convince America to vote for the men they married.

Mom-in-Chief

Michelle Obama, an outspoken and active First Lady,  has toured alongside the president and made appearances on her own, especially in swing states during the last weeks. As the race comes to an end, a TV spot has been released in which she appears with Latin talk show host Cristina Saralegui, speaking of how major issues like immigration reform and health care are at stake and urging Latin voters to support her husband.

Mrs. Obama’s role is described as “presidential surrogate” by MaryAnne Borrelli, chair of the Government and International Relations Department at Connecticut College. Ms. Borrelli states that presidential wives can be either “satellite wives“ or “presidential surrogates,” explaining that “satellite wives reflect and amplify their husbands’ messages, while presidential surrogates perform a more interpretive and mediatory role.”

A perfect example of Mrs. Obama’s role was her speech at the Democratic National Convention. “She is delivering a message through her gender role modeling that reinforces her husband’s gender, partisan, and political messaging,” says Ms. Borrelli. The First Lady made it a point not to attack Republicans. “There’s no such thing as us and them,” she said.

In her convention speech, Mrs. Obama emphasized main messages she has carried throughout the campaign, like the fact that she and her husband were raised by families who made sacrifices so they could have an education and a future. And by often mentioning her two daughters, the self-described “Mom-in-Chief” stressed the point that children are the reason to work for the country.

Not only has Mrs. Obama been an advocate for her husband’s policies, but also softens his image . At her recent interview on “Extra,” she gave host Mario Lopez marriage advice, saying, “As my husband would say, just make her happy, and continue to be friends.” Sometimes she pokes fun at the President, too. “He’s very loving, he’s very giving. He’s very open. He’s funny; I’m funnier,” she said when she and her husband were guests on “The View”.

Despite her quasi-celebrity status, Mrs. Obama still faces challenges. “I remember Laura Bush saying in 2008, that Michelle Obama would get used to the publicity, both negative and positive, but I don’t think she has,” says Betty Boyd Caroli, author of “First Ladies: Martha Washington to Michelle Obama.” “She has been more visible these campaign months, but for the first three years of her husband’s term, reporters told me she was unavailable except for two or three days of the week, and she turned down most interviews,” says Ms. Caroli. “While it is understandable that she wants to concentrate on being Mom-in-Chief, her reticence indicates that she does not relish a public role.”

High School Sweetheart

Ann Romney has dealt with being a public figure for a long time. Back in 1994, when Mitt Romney was campaigning for US Senate in Massachusetts, she was ridiculed after a Boston Globe interview in which she said that she and her husband had struggled financially at the beginning of their marriage and that they never fought. Afterwards, she claimed she would never be involved in future campaigns, but she eventually went back to the trenches, keeping a lower profile. Today, she is a key player in Mitt Romney’s run for presidency, holding her own events and interviews.

“She’s serving as a satellite wife,” says Ms. Borelli. “In her speech at the Republican National Convention, she discussed their life, presenting it as evidence in support of her husband’s campaign commitments and policy promises.”  When Mrs. Romney took the stage, she explained she was not there to speak about politics but about love. She shared her experiences as a wife, mother and grandmother, and called out to the men and women, especially the women, who worry about making it through another day. “I love you, women!” she exclaimed enthusiastically.

Throughout the campaign, Mrs. Romney has fended off criticism for the Romney family’s wealth, saying her husband was not handed success, but actually built it. And when she speaks of him, she portrays a generous, caring man, who helps his family, church and community. She never fails to mention the support he has given her with her serious health problems. Diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1997 and with breast cancer in 2008, Mrs. Romney credits her husband for carrying her through her lowest moments. “@MittRomney has lifted me up in my toughest hours & tonight America will see that he will lift our country up when we need it the most,” reads her tweet from the last night of the Convention. Her Twitter account has less than 60 tweets, but her Pinterest account is more illustrative of the approach she has taken during this campaign.

On Pinterest, Mrs. Romney’s boards cover everything from recipes to the campaign, where she pinned a love note from Mitt that would make any lovelorn teenager jealous. She has also stepped onto the talk show arena, appearing on the “Tonight Show” with Jay Leno, where she joked about her husband’s dancing skills. Mrs. Romney even impressed Barbara Walters when she was on “The View.” “You’re a wonderful advocate for your husband,” said Ms. Walters. “Whatever your point of view — this is a terrific lady.” 

Making an impression

While it is hard to actually measure the influence that candidates’ wives have on voters, it’s clear that Mrs. Romney and Mrs. Obama have been powerful advocates to their husband’s policies as well as to their characters. These women know the candidates better than anybody else. They make trustworthy surrogates, and voters know it.

Bianca Carrasco, 28, who lives in Miami and will vote for President Obama, says his “policies and ideas are the most important” when it comes to her decision. However, she says “it’s good to hear the wives because they know the candidate best.

As for 26-year-old Cleo Penley from Pensacola, her vote for Mitt Romney is also based on his career and proposals. Yet as a young mother, Ms. Penley believes that “many women, especially moms, relate to Ann and appreciate the recognition of the importance of the role as wife and mother.”

By attesting to the candidates’ best traits as husbands, fathers and friends, Ann Romney and Michelle Obama have helped their campaigns in a way that nobody else can: assuring voters that they are men who care, and who will work hard to move the country forward. These women have put their all their time and effort into getting America to know the men they love, and hopefully, make voters fall in love with them as well.

The post Stand By Your Man appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

From right to left: Richard Gottfried, Karen Young, Ron Moore, Ben Becker, Scott Spiegel. Surrogates for presidential candidates in the third party debate held at Hudson Guild community center on October 24, 2012. Photo by Joanna Marshall.

When voters head to the polls on Tuesday, they will discover a few people on the ballot who are not exactly household names, such as Jill Stein or Peta Lindsay. Who are they and how do you not know about them if they are running for president of the United States?

Every election year, third party candidates run even though their chances of winning are next to impossible. The presidential candidates who will appear on the New York state ballot this year are: Jill Stein of the Green Party, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, Peta Lindsay of the Party for Socialism and Liberation and Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.

In stark contrast to the huge crowds that have greeted Barack Obama and Mitt Romney or surrogate speakers such as Bill Clinton in the final weeks of the campaign, only thirty people showed up at the Hudson Guild community center in Chelsea for the third party surrogates debate on October 24^th. The crowd was predominately white and over 60-years-old with a smattering of young people from a mix of racial backgrounds. Six place cards were laid out on a folding table at the front of the room, but only five surrogates were seated. (Apparently the Constitution Party didn’t RSVP for the event.)

None of the surrogate speakers appeared to be well-known either. Ron Moore, membership director and former chairman of the Manhattan Libertarians, represented the Gary Johnson campaign. Karen Young, a staff member of the Writers Guild of America, spoke on behalf of Jill Stein and the Green Party. Ben Becker, a U.S. history Ph.D. candidate at CUNY and Occupy Wall Street activist, debated for Peta Lindsay, the 28-year-old Party for Socialism and Liberation candidate.

To ensure a robust debate, Democrat and Republican representatives were invited as well. Richard Gottfried, State Assemblyman for District 75, spoke on behalf of the Democrats. Scott Spiegel, a member of the Log Cabin Republicans, defended the Romney-Ryan ticket.

The first speaker, State Assemblyman Gottfried, unintentionally thrust the American political party duopoly into the forefront of the debate, saying, “This election is about two competing visions of what government and this country ought to be about.” Third parties disagree that there should be only two visions of the country’s future. Libertarian Moore rebutted that position by saying, “I don’t think there are just two visions. I see about thirty people in this room and I think there are thirty visions.”

Occupy Wall street activist Becker, who looks like Clark Kent with tousled black hair and a square jaw, spiritedly replied with his campaign’s “Seize the Banks” slogan. He  argued that  although there may be great philosophical differences between the Republican and Democratic visions, “in practice when it comes to the two parties’ economic programs, they’ve been shown to be quite similar and both ultimately at the service of Wall Street.”

Ralph Nader’s Green Party presidential campaign in 2000 was the most influential third party campaign of the last twenty years. Nader’s success in the swing state of Florida coincided with a minute margin of votes between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore. Since Bush was declared the winner of Florida based on only a few hundred highly contested votes, many Democrats in their frustration at the narrow loss of the presidency blamed Nader for siphoning potentially Democratic voters from Gore’s ticket.

Karen Young, the Green Party representative, skirted mentioning Nader explicitly, but did touch on this controversy in more general terms. “The worst thing that could happen if you and all your friends and family were to vote for Jill Stein is that Obama might win New York State by a few less percentage points than he otherwise would,” said Young. “The latest poll showed that Obama was leading New York with 62 percent of the vote. If Jill even got 10 percent of that—which is unlikely—Obama would still win by 20 points.” In the nine swing states, every single vote is likely to matter, but in reliably Democratic states such as New York or Massachusetts or in historically safe GOP states such as Texas and South Carolina, many people can indeed feel free to vote for third party candidates without seriously endangering a Republican or Democratic candidate that they might ultimately prefer to win.

The third party candidates can play a role by highlighting important issues. As Young put it, “The point is that by having a political party and running candidates we can have our progressive ideas and alternative solutions on the table.” If a third party candidate gains serious support from voters, the primary candidates are forced to address the issues that the third party candidate represents in order to win back those votes.

Ross Perot, who ran as an independent candidate in the 1992 presidential election, emphasized balancing the budget and reducing the deficit, which garnered him nearly 19 percent of the popular vote. One could argue that this impressive turnout showed race-winner Bill Clinton how important these issues were to the nation. “You don’t get innovation in a monopoly situation,” Janet Hopf chimed in during the post-debate audience discussion.

The Libertarian surrogate at the debate also gave another reason that voting for a third party candidates is a meaningful gesture.  Ron Moore mentioned that Gary Johnson is planning to run again in the 2016 presidential election and hopes to gain 5 percent of the popular vote in this year’s election. If political party  reaches the 5 percent threshold, that party will qualify for federal funding from the Federal Election Commission. The Commission passes out millions of dollars each year to major party campaigns and supports the Democratic and Republican National Conventions. The Commission is bound by law to level the playing field by donating to third party campaigns, but only if the party had ample support from the public in the previous election.

What might be a long shot campaign this year could become more of a reality in future elections. A Gallup poll released on September 12^th asked the question, “Do Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people, or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed?” The poll’s result: 46 percent of Americans answered that they believe a third major party is needed to represent them. That percentage is actually down from 2008 and 2010 when 58 percent of Americans wanted a third party. (The drop may be due to the fact that the poll was taken right after the national conventions when major party solidarity is heightened.)

As the debate wound to a close and the audience milled around the cheese plates in the back of the room, voices rose as people chatted boisterously about health care plans, tax cuts and alternative energy sources. There was a buzz of energy. Audience members eventually drifted out of the room as the elderly staff of the community center put away the folding chairs and pushed the podium into a closet. As people walked out the door into the chilly darkness, the question on every mind was the same. Who is going to win? Whose vision of America’s future will guide the nation for the next four years?

The post Third party candidates: A long shot worth taking? appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

Now, decades after the civil rights movement, Ms. Clark, at age 72,  is still striving for change. As the Green Party’s candidate for U.S. Senate from New York, she is seeking to unseat the Democratic incumbent, Kirsten Gillibrand. She is running on what she calls “a freedom agenda for the 21^st century” founded on “educating, organizing, rabble-rousing.”

On a recent Sunday afternoon, Clark sipped coffee and discussed her motivations. She is a short, stout grandmotherly woman with a pleasant air. A smile curled across her face as she thought back on growing up in Mississippi. Like the time her mentor, Medgar Evers, appeared on her doorstep weeping, afraid that the NAACP’s decision to abstain from the Freedom Rides might cost them youth support.  This anecdote, like most, ends punctuated by a bright-eyed laugh. When it comes to her issues, however, that smile fades, her face hardens and her voice narrows to a sincere rasp.

Her platform is extensive, and while some of its main points are rooted in her history of activism – free education, universal healthcare and absolute voting rights – it all boils down to security. “No nation can be secure with an illiterate population, hungry population, unhealthy population,” she said. “The greatest national security is making sure they’re educated, housed, have great healthcare and a living wage.”

One very conspicuous mark of progress, the election of the first black president, has been bittersweet for Clark. She recalls the jubilation outside her Harlem apartment building in 2008 when news of the Obama victory erupted into celebrations in the street. Four years later, however, her support for Obama has waned into disappointment that he did not fulfill all of his campaign promises. “Your word is all you have to live by, but by your actions you will be known,” her voice growing stern. “If you tell a lie, you’re a liar. If you bomb and kill, you’re a killer. And that is what he has become, unfortunately.”

So Clark has found a home in the Green Party, and knows well that as a third-party candidate she is at a distinct disadvantage. While there are Greens holding several local positions across the country, their runs for major office seem to be largely symbolic. Money factors heavily into that. “We do not take corporate donations, so we are not beholden to anyone, except to our own values,” said Daniella Liebling, a representative of the New York State Green Party. “We don’t think anyone should receive it; we think it corrupts politicians.”

Clark receives very little financial or structural support from the party, generally using Starbucks as a makeshift office. The budget for her first attempt at a U.S. Senate seat, against Charles Schumer, in 2010 was $1400. Clark came in third, with about one percent of the vote.
Education is a life-long cause for Clark.  She grew up in the Jim Crow South, in substandard schools, with torn books discarded by the white schools and labs empty of equipment.  Now, she calls vehemently for free education and the immediate obliteration of all student debt. Universal education and healthcare, she points out, were part of the infrastructure development in Western Europe, where they have some of the best literacy rates. “We refuse to do it for our own, in fact, we scream it’s socialism,” she said. “I’ll be damned if I’ll take that kind of a violent insult.”

Clark’s issue of voting rights is especially germane this year, with several states attempting to impose voter identification laws that could leave millions of registered voters disenfranchised. She wants a constitutional amendment guaranteeing voters equal access. It also hits especially close to home for Clark. She and her husband, Bernard LaFayette Jr. started the Black Belt Alabama Voter Registration Project in Selma, Alabama. “I fought for the right to vote,” she said ardently.

She maintains that to pay for universal healthcare and education measures would be easy – drastically reduce defense spending (without cutting veteran’s support programs) by bringing home all oversees troops and slashing military research and development. She would work to close bases in countries we’ve long since warred with, like Germany and Korea. “If after 59 years [South] Korea can’t take care of itself, let the North have it,” she said.

A month after her assault in Birmingham, Clark got the call that Medgar Evers, her friend and mentor, had been assassinated. She has lived a lifetime since then, from fighting for the right to vote to running for a national senate seat. In the last half century, she has fought for women’s rights, rallied against wars and worked to bring aid to Haiti. She grew up in a time when people fought for change, and she continues to do so. “All of my struggle, I put my life into this,” she says. “This is my legacy.”

The post Colia Clark, Green Party candidate for Senate, Strives for Change appeared first on Pavement Pieces.

In adjacent Putnam and Dutchess counties, the threat comes from the runoff and possible groundwater contamination produced by hydrofracking in upstate communities, mainly north of Albany. After the mixture of water, chemicals and sand fractures the shale and releases the gas, it can seep into and contaminate the aquifer.

Protecting the environment is at the core of Wagner’s campaign. “Everyone needs to pick something they care about and be active in it,” said Wagner, a 31-year-old lawyer who drives a hybrid to cut down on carbon dioxide emissions.

Wagner grew up in the Hudson Valley and the 40th District for which he is running comprises parts of Westchester and Dutchess counties and all of Putnam County.

Running for State Senate was not originally in the plan. “I’ve always been involved in community service and political affairs, but this is not something I’ve been mapping out,” Wagner said. He decided to toss his hat into the ring when he saw that Greg Ball, with the support of the Tea Party, had been elected to represent the 40th District. Wagner believes that Ball’s approach in regards to women’s rights, gun laws, and the environment is too far out of the mainstream ideals of Hudson Valley voters. With the main environmental debate being about hydrofracking, Wagner has drawn a clear line between himself and the incumbent Ball, who is calling for only a moratorium on hydrofracking that would expire in June 2013. Wagner doesn’t think that is sufficient.

A lawyer for Weil, Gotshal, and Manges LLP, Wagner has come under fire from opponents for working for a big law firm, which serves clients such as ESPN Inc. and The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. One campaign bulletin mailed out by the New York Republican State Committee claimed his firm defends “New York’s worst polluters and fracking companies,” even “rushing to the side of BP to defend them” in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

At a recent town-hall style debate in Mahopac, Ball went so far as to accuse Wagner’s firm of defending terrorists. The statement elicited laughter and boos from the crowd of 60 residents, and Wagner quickly interjected. “That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard tonight,” he said, chuckling.

On Sept. 12, when Wagner and Democratic Senator Tony Avella of Queens held a press conference at Riverfront Green Park in Peekskill, Wagner voiced his support for Avella’s S4220 bill, which aims to “prohibit the use of hydraulic fracturing in the process of drilling for natural gas and/or oil,” the key words being, “in the process of.” Wagner supports a ban on hydrofracking, but is not against natural gas exploration in the U.S.

Wagner proposes giving the state Department of Environmental Conservation more power, saying that if hydrofracking were to occur, the DEC needs to be “beefed up” to be able to sufficiently regulate it. “The state is certainly entitled to know what is going into the chemical cocktail that goes into the ground,” he said.

He believes that the state is moving in the right direction by commissioning a new public health study ordered by Gov. Andrew Cuomo. “We should be looking at experiences in bordering states as well, like in Pennsylvania,” he said. “The Marcellus Shale runs right on the border of New York and Pennsylvania. Some of that data is not so positive when it comes to shale.” The Marcellus Shale deposit, where the New York fracking would occur, runs from upstate and western New York, through Pennsylvania and into West Virginia. Pennsylvania has already seen extensive fracking, with more than 350,000 wells drilled.

The Green Party and New York League of Conservation Voters have endorsed Wagner, but he still faces an uphill battle in the race. New York State Board of Elections records show that since 1998, voters in the 40th District have elected Republicans to the State Senate seat, and even if Wagner were to buck that trend, it would not be an automatic guarantee of new environmental legislation. The State Senate is made up of a majority of Republicans. But he remains optimistic. “My race would get us one seat closer to reaching a majority,” he said. “I think if we can get back a majority we can enact legislation to keep New York green.”

The post Hydrofracking Becomes Issue in State Senate Race appeared first on Pavement Pieces.