BU Today

Campus Life

YouSpeak: The Presidential Election

Who will you vote for?


Push comes to shove tomorrow in the presidential race between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. When Election Day is over, its estimated price tag of $2.5 billion will make it the most expensive White House race in history,, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Recent polls have the two candidates in a dead heat. A Washington Post/ABC News poll taken last week reports that 49 percent of likely voters plan to vote for Obama and 48 percent for Romney. Pundits say that while a split verdict between the national vote and the Electoral College vote is unlikely, with a race this close they’re not ruling it out.

We wanted to know who you’re going to vote for tomorrow—and why. So this week’s “YouSpeak” asks, “Who do you plan to vote for in tomorrow’s election?”

YouSpeak” typically appears each Monday.

If you have a suggestion for a question you’d like us to ask, post it in the comments section below.

Devin Hahn, Producer/Editor, BU Today, Bostonia, Boston University
Devin Hahn

Devin Hahn can be reached at dhahn@bu.edu.

81 Comments on YouSpeak: The Presidential Election

  • Anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 7:33 am

    Romney all the way! Where my vote will actually count. The Granite State! One merely needs to look at the numbers and decide: unemployment, deficit, gas prices. How are any of these better today than 4 yrs ago? Just look at the state of the economy. When will BHO take any responsibility? He keeps mentioning the previous administration, it’s all their fault. He has had 4 yrs!! At one point, sole control of house, senate and executive branch. What has he actually done? The empty promises of “slashing the deficit in half.” I didn’t make those promises. He: BHO did. Somehow the media continues to sugar coat this and cover it up, it’s all good and dandy.

    • Sigh on 11.05.2012 at 9:47 am

      All credibility lost by calling him BHO.

      • Kitty on 11.05.2012 at 10:12 am

        Really? LBJ JFK “W” …… Honestly?

      • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 11:13 am

        I have to disagree. It is perfectly acceptable to use someone’s initials as a shortcut to writing out that person’s name. Initials are acceptable in contracts, so why not on a post related to an article?

        • SigChi on 11.05.2012 at 8:05 pm

          You’re just saying that because your name is initials

    • k on 11.05.2012 at 10:22 am

      You must be rich, because Romney is going to give the rich a tax break and tax the middle class to death. He also double the interest rate on student loans!

      • ME on 11.05.2012 at 1:10 pm

        What?!? That is not true; no one is getting a tax increase under Romney, and no President can’t “double the interest rates on student loans.” Middle class taxes have increased by over $3000 per household under the current President.

        • K on 11.05.2012 at 1:45 pm

          Taxes will increase more under Romey he is only for the rich. Bush made a mess of the economy when he was in office. The congress refused to work with Obama! One person can not fix the mess that Bush put the economy in, in the first place!!!!!!

      • seriously on 11.05.2012 at 5:11 pm

        saying “you must be rich” to someone who votes for Romney is the equivalent to saying “you must be poor if you’re voting for Obama”. That’s just an ignorant statement.

  • Ron Paul on 11.05.2012 at 7:39 am

    Both men are shills for the military industrial industrial complex. When Ron Paul was running in the primary people said I would vote for him but he cannot win or even if he wins he will never get congress to push through any of his ideas.

    Well guess what, now you all get to choose between one phony or the other and neither one of them will get any of their ideas through congress either. Because the truth be told it is real congress that is broken and the president is just a puppet put in place to entertain the simpletons.

  • anon on 11.05.2012 at 7:58 am

    Haha, why does BU Today promote so many things that are not true?

    People who support government-funded healthcare are NOT “radical”. Literally every other developed country (and some developing countries) has government-funded healthcare in one way or another. It’s “radical” to think that a public good such as health should be provided on the private market, thus guaranteeing suboptimal provision due to market failure (EC 101, anyone?).
    It is depressing that that girl feels like she is “too radical” for having views that are the bedrock of the rest of the industrialized world.

    One girl said taxes have been raised way too much under Obama. Obama actually cut taxes several times. He didn’t raise income taxes on those earning $250,000/year or less even one time.

    Also, though I can’t stand Romney personally, it is not true that he is “only qualified in being rich”. He is quite intelligent, Harvard-educated, and has served as a governor.

    I realize these are the opinions of the individuals interviewed, but you could find some better informed individuals to poll. Or, in the interest of journalistic integrity and intellectual honesty, you should at least provide a footnote when people say things which are flat-out false.

    • Ron Paul on 11.05.2012 at 10:53 am

      Right and nearly every other country is broke too so there is no reason to look to them as role models for anything. Have you looked at what is going on in Europe lately? The US government cannot even run the Post Office efficiently and yet you want us to trust them with healthcare too? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different result is insane and so it logically follows that letting the federal government which has proven it cannot run anything else right run healthcare is insane.

      That said, if the individual states want to mandate healthcare as MA has done so be it but this should not be something the federal government gets involved in period.

      • anon on 11.05.2012 at 1:57 pm

        Some European countries are in crisis. Others (Germany, Sweden, Finland, UK) are not. Certainly the US has much more in common with the UK, Canada, or Germany than it does with Greece or Spain.
        Also, countries like South Korea and Taiwan have government funded healthcare and stable economies too. It’s not just a Europe thing.

        The relationship between running the Post Office and running healthcare is tenuous at best. That’s like saying “The private sector can’t run Enron efficiently, but you want to trust them with healthcare too?”

        … Except the Post Office in the US isn’t even that bad– rates of mail getting lost is much lower than most countries and the speed of delivery is commendable too.

        • anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 4:48 pm

          Did you miss the double dip recession in the UK? The economy only started growing again in the third quarter with some help from the Olympics, and it does not belong in the same category as Germany, Sweden, and Finland economically at the moment. A lot of British would consider their economy much worse than the US’s economy at the moment.

          • BUgirl on 11.05.2012 at 5:24 pm

            Actually, our healthcare system is the worst out of all of the countries you mention. Fact: we have the shortest life expectancy and highest infant mortality rate of any developed country.

    • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 11:16 am

      I think a lot of the issue is how similar do we want to be to Europe? America has typically done its own thing and had its own identity. I’m of the opinion that following Europe shows a lack of US identity. You may agree or disagree. I also see countries like Spain or Greece in turmoil. The UK is essentially what props up the EU

      • anon on 11.05.2012 at 1:53 pm

        The UK also has government funded healthcare (NHS) so how are they able to “prop up the EU” if government healthcare is devastating?

        • K.O on 11.06.2012 at 1:36 pm

          Identical policies don’t necessarily work for different cultures

    • anon on 11.05.2012 at 11:40 am

      I thought he was intelligent until he wondered aloud why the windows in airplanes don’t open and said it’s a real problem that they don’t.

  • CAS on 11.05.2012 at 8:05 am

    It’s funny how the SMG kids are the ones who are going to vote for Romney. Not everything in this world is about turning a profit!

    Someone who owns millions of dollars cannot relate to and is not going to stand up for the common American people.

    • Kitty on 11.05.2012 at 10:21 am

      In this case, the candidate does not “own millions of dollars,” he EARNED IT. His father was working class, worked on an auto assembly line, educated himself, and succeeded. Isn’t that what we all want to pass on to our own children? The belief that opportunity is for all?

      • WHB on 11.05.2012 at 10:40 am

        We’re not choosing whether to elect Romney’s father to the Presidency. Mitt Romney himself is running, a man who spent his whole life as either a member of an elite political family or amongst the richest of the rich (or both).

        Mitt Romney can claim to be “working class” as much as Barack Obama can claim to be Pacific Islander for being born in Honolulu.

        • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 12:24 pm

          You can’t fault a guy for coming into wealth. The whole point was for your children to not have to struggle as you did to reach ends meet.

    • Alexander on 11.05.2012 at 10:56 am

      Obama’s net worth: $11.8 million.
      …looks like we’re screwed either way!

    • seriously on 11.05.2012 at 5:17 pm

      its funny how you and so many other Americans ignore how rich Obama is. Obama is a millionaire too. so, by you’re reasoning, he “cannot relate to and is not going to stand up for the common American people.” you just completely contradicted yourself, congratulations “CAS”.

      • seriously on 11.05.2012 at 5:18 pm

        your*** (blackberry problems)

  • Gabriella May on 11.05.2012 at 8:07 am

    As a Obama supporter, I was deeply saddened Pres. Obama letting our forces to die in Benghazi. In my eyes, that is enough to end a presidency. The biggest responsibility that our president has is to keep us safe, which he failed to do.
    Let’s see what comes out of the Senate Investigation slated to occur soon.

    Democrats for Romney-Ryan 2012!!

    • Anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 1:38 pm

      Politicizing tragedy makes you the worst kind of person during election season. Obama didn’t let anyone die in Benghazi. Bush didn’t let anyone die on 9/11. Clinton didn’t let anyone die on the USS Cole.

      Trying to score political points out of something like this is absolutely despicable and beneath contempt.

  • Junto Smith on 11.05.2012 at 8:12 am

    I guess I missed this whole Benghazi debacle- I just read more into it! but what a shame. There goes my vote!

    I honestly don’t see how the next four years are going to be any better. I understand it was a problematic economy to begin with, but I really feel that Pres. Obama did not fully address the issues as he could have. Blaming Bush and the Republican congress is not the right answer for me. As a leader you should be able to work with anyone. Pres Clinton worked alongside guys like Gingrich and did a great job.

    I am afraid the next 4 years are going to be the same. We can’t afford that.
    Love Obama, but I love the US even more.
    I am voting Romney-Ryan, let’s see if they have the solution.

    • SigChi on 11.05.2012 at 8:53 am

      Yick, hopefully you realize yr stupid before you reach the polls!

      • ME on 11.05.2012 at 10:23 am

        This is what turns so many people OFF of Obama: that childish name-calling when something doesn’t fit your way of thinking, or you need to “vote for revenge” because the other candidate dared to question yours.

      • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 11:18 am

        Are you sure you want your posts to reflect on Sigma Chi? You should have picked a different posting alias. Flat out rude comment that you should have saved for the Huffington Post

    • WHB on 11.05.2012 at 10:44 am

      You seem to have rewritten the political history of both President Clinton and President Bush’s terms in office.

      Being President with a hostile Congress isn’t like doing a group project in SMG with teammates you don’t happen to like. It isn’t a matter of doing a few trust falls and hugging it out.

      If you think that leaders can just “be able to work with anyone” and that everything can be sunshine and rainbows, then you don’t understand how politics (any politics, not just American) actually works in the world.

  • anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 8:16 am

    You can vote for the constitutional law scholar who made his own way from a disadvantaged background, or you can go with the bloodless capitalist who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, who advocates what used to be called trickle-down economics, and who wants to dismantle government in favor of corporate (read rich person) power. It seem like an easy choice to me.

    • Rupert Manlove on 11.05.2012 at 10:12 am

      My biggest concern is that Obama has been a figurehead ever since he gave the DNC speech back in 2004 when he hadn’t even completed a year in the Senate. Yes, he’s come from a disadvantaged background, but I don’t see how that has made him any better a choice or empathy when we still run abu ghraib, has worked to sign more covert ops, and had campaigned on a platform in 2008 to bring change and agreement to both parties, only to ram a partisan health care bill based off of Romney’s healthcare bill in MA down the legislative process.

      Even on the healthcare, he had criticized the whole Heritage Foundation research on how healthcare should work, only to use it as a basis for his own.

      It’s a consistent record of he may have been a good president after some experience in the senate with the process, but it was and still is unrealistic to expect him to fight the system. No president has that amount of power, you have to work the system.

      Not to say that Romney has had a better experience in office when he was in MA as governor, but at the tail end of his career here you can see how he worked with Kennedy and the MA state legislature to sign health care bill into reality. He’s had success in the private sector and although people criticize him for loss of jobs overseas, his job then was to the company and to improve profits.

      Now he’ll be a management consultant with the task of improving our nation. Even though people complain that the nation is run by companies and special interest anyhow, wouldn’t you want to at least TRY someone who knows how that system works, and has had success in that arena?

      • WHB on 11.05.2012 at 10:48 am

        People don’t view the Presidency like you do. Four years in the Oval Office is not how we “try someone” out. We don’t elect people with the same indifference that we test drive a car or switch to a different brand of shampoo.

        You admit that Romney didn’t see greater success at office and that he pursued profits over human interests. You can’t be surprised that people are unwilling to give him the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania so that we can “try someone out” who knows how to ship jobs overseas.

    • Mike G. on 11.05.2012 at 10:18 am

      Did you mean deciding between the Senior Lecturers who has never had a job outside of academia or government, or a man who’s businesses generated billions of dolars (which in turn was taxed for use as government revenue)? You are right, an incredibly easy choice…

      • ME on 11.05.2012 at 10:25 am

        And this is the guy who also earned a law degree (with honors, no less) from Havard AND a business degree from Harvard, too? And doesn’t mind showing us his transcripts.

    • Ron Paul on 11.05.2012 at 10:54 am

      You mean the constitutional law scholar with no respect for the 10th amendment don’t you?

  • OldFatty on 11.05.2012 at 8:29 am

    Why do people always say “This is the most important election.” They say this about every presidential election and none of them really are that important.

    • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 11:21 am

      Everyone enjoys a little hyperbole. Every election is important and every election could be considered more important than the last because of its short term potential to affect the individual’s way of life.

  • Well... on 11.05.2012 at 8:49 am

    I just lost respect for some of these students. Obama 2012. You already know.

  • John on 11.05.2012 at 9:45 am

    I voted for Gary Johnson.

    • John S on 11.05.2012 at 1:47 pm

      Me too! He’s the only one who can cut the deficit and end the wars while still championing civil liberties.

    • David Keefe on 11.06.2012 at 9:28 am


  • k on 11.05.2012 at 10:56 am

    If Romney wins the rich will get richer and the poorer will get poor. People in the middle class won’t be able to afford to retire. Anybody who votes for Romney is being brain washed by Fox news.

  • K.O on 11.05.2012 at 11:11 am

    I’m voting for Romney. I hope everyone can be civil about other people’s voting decisions.

  • LoveofCountry on 11.05.2012 at 11:28 am

    Romney. Because I love my children.

    • k on 11.05.2012 at 11:47 am

      What does loving your children have to do with Romney?

      • LoveofCountry on 11.05.2012 at 12:24 pm

        Because Obama’s policies are leaving unprecedented debt to our children. Everything he has done has been detrimental. From Obamacare, which will destroy quality healthcare and add a huge new tax burden on the middle class in January to his failed foreign policy, that has the middle east on fire and the world less stable than when he entered office, which is pretty sad.

        But hey the kids get free pills! That is what is really important with rising inflation, 23 million out of work and the quality of life for everyone going down. Small business closes in huge numbers as well.

        Obama has made the future bleak. He has the same failed worldview that lead the the demise of Greece and has never been successful anywhere. Four more years would be a disaster we are not likely to recover from.

        Romney, unlike Obama, understands basic economics and embraces proven pro-growth policies. So yes – I am voting for Romney because I love my children and want them to grow up in a great America, the land of opportunity, that my father fled tyranny for.

        • k on 11.05.2012 at 1:06 pm

          Canada and Europe which has healthcare for everybody it has not destoried the quality have their healhcare. So you must be rich, because Romney is going to give the rich a tax break and tax the middle class to death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU HAVE BLINDERS ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • LoveofCountry on 11.05.2012 at 2:31 pm

            They have far inferior healthcare to ours. People come here from there to get treatment so they do not have to die while waiting in line.

            Watch a loved one die in England waiting for months for a basic heart procedure that even the poor have access to here without a wait and and preach about how great it is over there.

            No I am not rich. But I am not envious of those who work hard to and achieve and create jobs. Class warfare is useless and divides the country.

            You must not listen or read. Romney is not giving the rich a tax break. He is giving the middle class a much needed on. However, he should give the rich and everyone a tax break because it is a simple economic fact that lower tax put more money in the economy which in turn creates more tax revenues for the government because people have more earning and spending power.

  • k on 11.05.2012 at 11:48 am

    Also I not decided if I am voting for Obama. Just giving my opinion on Romney. I probably won’t vote for either.

  • Olivera Vragovic on 11.05.2012 at 1:22 pm

    I can understand why 1% of Americans would vote for Romney but will never understand why would additional 48% vote for someone who is working against their interests. By the way, if history is a teacher of life, business has always been doing much better when Democrats are in the White House. Obama’s achievements are numerous, measurable and admirable but it takes objectivity to analyze them. We got so lucky that he has been elected 4 years ago and if he is re-elected we will be fine, otherwise it is scary to think about what could happen. We have relatively recently witnessed what happened when election had been stolen. 10 out of 11 pools indicate Obama’s victory and 1 get them tied. There is 90% confidence that Obama will win. This is the battle of honesty and integrity against dishonesty and fraudulence, David vs Goliath, never easy but definitely plausible.

    • Ron Paul on 11.05.2012 at 2:54 pm

      I” can understand why 1% of Americans would vote for Romney but will never understand why would additional 48%”

      Because I have never seem an unsuccessful person create a private sector job for anyone else but I have seen the unsuccessful become a burden on society. At the end of the day a rising tide floats all boats.

      That said, I fully understand why the other 47% will be voting for Obama and that is because they have no problem trading their vote and their liberties for more bread and circuses.

    • CAS on 11.05.2012 at 3:26 pm

      I’m glad someone finally said this. I also have a hard time understanding how the other 48% vote for Romney.

  • Anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 2:45 pm

    It’s really disgusting when some people allow their beliefs (political, economic, religious, etc.) to cloud their vision insofar that they hate or lose respect for others. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If you choose to lose respect for another, your friend, your boss, your professor, or whoever, that’s your choice. Good for you and being closed to other walks of life. It’s just sad that people are willing to go so far. Conviction is respectable, but ignorance and hate isn’t.

    I’m voting for Romney. If you’re voting for Obama, good for you. Arguing over it and trying to force your opinion on others won’t make people change their stance. I’m a Republican, and pretty much all of my friends are Democrats, but I don’t let that difference bother me. I’m not going to lose respect for them just because they have different values. I didn’t decide to befriend them because of their political interests. If one small difference such as political interest makes you lose respect for people, then your relationship with them wasn’t worth much to you to begin with.

  • No Thanks on 11.05.2012 at 3:49 pm

    No thanks.


    And give me a break already. Trickle Down/Reaganomics + increased military spending has NEVER WORKED. How people think this policy, with increased tax breaks for the wealthy and even higher military spending, will work now is beyond me.

    • LoveofCountry on 11.05.2012 at 5:01 pm

      Actually it worked remarkably well.

    • James Smith on 11.05.2012 at 7:33 pm

      Oh yea… so you think we should give all the money to poor people? Of course they’ll invest that money and in turn increase our GDP…

  • K on 11.05.2012 at 4:25 pm

    I quess I won’t be voting tomorrow

    • David Keefe on 11.05.2012 at 5:49 pm

      Why not vote for a third party candidate then, K?

      If you don’t know much about the third party field, you can watch the real final presidential debate tonight at 9pm, streaming live online.

      Or this one with 4 candidates from Oct 23: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0vE5CTTSFI

      “Wasting your vote is voting for someone you don’t believe in!” ~ Gary Johnson, 2012 Libertarian presidential candidate

  • Barack Obama on 11.05.2012 at 6:43 pm

    I have been endorsed by Communist Party USA vote for me!

  • James Smith on 11.05.2012 at 7:25 pm

    I’m voting for Romney—all you people who are voting for Obama just want socialism and free government handouts. This country was founded on capitalism – obviously there will be a difference between the rich and the poor. I’m for working hard and dedication and not relying on my government…

    • Olivera Vragovic on 11.06.2012 at 8:28 pm

      Nothing could be farther from the truth nor have you any evidence to support this claim and your belief. This is a serious lack of any basic knowledge on social systems assuming that you are not kidding. Use your time wisely and learn some fundamentals. It is not that hard but does require some analytical abilities vs. memorizing news claims paid by the people who can benefit from your unconditional trust, the 1% whom you probably admire. Check out the play in the ART, Marie Antoinette, just recently staged by Harvard and Yale joined program to get some historical perspective.

      • Vesna de Groot on 11.07.2012 at 12:34 am

        Olivera for President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :))))))

  • Olivera Vragovic on 11.05.2012 at 9:39 pm

    The fact that the business, science and economy are all doing better when democrats are in the White house -matters. Facts do matter a lot. Not to mention a serious disaster waiting to happen if we do not take care of the environment. not surprisingly, some of the people exhibited luck of analytical abilities and inability to see beyond their little bubble where they comfortably live which, off course, is not sustainable on the long run. I am appalled with a low information that some students here have exhibited.

    Respect? where is your respect for this environment and science and progress. Just look at the data in the past century!!

    This is a battle between good and evil, this is beyond any doubt.

    • kisses on 11.05.2012 at 10:58 pm

      How ’bout beyond good and evil, baby? #Nietzsche #ahorseisahorse #OFFcourse #OFcourse

  • paper tiger on 11.05.2012 at 10:43 pm

    Write-in candidate: Bud Cort

    • DL on 11.05.2012 at 10:46 pm

      If only…

    • Anonymous on 11.05.2012 at 10:47 pm

      seems like the kind of guy you could enjoy a meal with

    • Harold on 11.05.2012 at 10:47 pm

      “This is real nice. Makes me want to do somersaults.”

  • purgo on 11.06.2012 at 2:23 am

    You know the liberals have had it when a liberal campus like BU decides to endorse a republican senator( Scott Brown got endorsed by Daily Free Press) and people are deciding to vote for Romney.

    You can like Obama as a guy, but as a President he accomplished little.
    He is FIRED!

    • Anonymous on 11.06.2012 at 12:41 pm

      How can you say that with a straight face (assuming you’re not being sarcastic). He passed comprehensive healthcare and financial reform, ended the war in Iraq, bagged public enemy #1, reinvigorated America’s image abroad, and saved a failing economy despite an obstructionist and hyper-partisan Congress which set a RECORD number of filibusters.

      That is nothing short of amazing. Obama and Warren for me.

  • K.O on 11.06.2012 at 3:04 pm

    I just changed my vote from Mitt Romney to Gary Johnson. I’m done!

    • David Keefe on 11.06.2012 at 3:21 pm

      To each their own, and everybody should vote their conscience, but I like your decision there.

  • Olivera Vragovic on 11.06.2012 at 5:16 pm

    For all those concern about the economy especially business major, the conservative magazine The Economist endorsed Obama four years ago and now again and so did many Noble prize laureate in economy, guess why? Well just think about… hwy are you endorsing Romney when his policies failed not that long ago. You may be young in the early 2000s but it is well documented. All one needs to do is to be open minded and thoughtful, not even compassionate.

Post Your Comment

(never shown)