Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Arles

Let me just say this would be an unmitigated disaster for our country if it happened. I would rather have McCain lose than this happen. I just can't see Obama supporters accepting this if it happened:

What exactly do you mean by "not accepting this"? Riots? A coup? Or just a long, drawn out process like we saw in 2000?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Crim

Flere, I agree with your equation, but you cannot discount the role of the "experience" card in campaigns.

Oh, I agree absolutely. Experience, like a great many other traits, can be overblown in importance during campaigns.

Originally Posted by Crim

You have misinterpreted me.

Ah, my bad. Apologies.

Originally Posted by Arles

Let me just say this would be an unmitigated disaster for our country if it happened. I would rather have McCain lose than this happen. I just can't see Obama supporters accepting this if it happened

I think anyone hates to see an election where one candidate gets the popular vote and the other gets the electoral vote. Bush/Gore in 2000 was bad, sure, but I think it was made far worse by the shambolic nature of the interminable recounts in Florida, combined with Katherine Harris' obvious partisan leanings during the recount.

In the end, though, if we end up with the situation you describe, Arles, it'll be far worse than 2000 because I think people cared a lot less in 2000. For most, there didn't seem to be a lot of difference between Bush and Gore. The economy was great, we were in no wars, and the President was seen to probably be a caretaker after Clinton.

I know I personally was annoyed by the result, but I figured that it was unlikely Bush could do a lot of harm to the country. Worst case scenario, I felt, was that we'd lose more seats on the Supreme Court. Boy was I wrong....

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

I'm just pointing out that your equation is somewhat circular.

Well of course - life is somewhat circular.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

can you point to a documented instance of that happening? let alone say...100 documented instances of that happening? or 1000? The simple fact is that you can't (okay maybe one, but what did someone post earlier...52 arrests in the last election?) IT DOES NOT HAPPEN. FRAUDULENT REGISTRATIONS /= VOTES

Of all elections, considering Obama's home state, to try to claim that isn't a long history of shenanigans? C'mon DT, you're smarter than that, surely you aren't going to claim that Richard Daley was clean just because he wasn't charged?

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

What exactly do you mean by "not accepting this"? Riots? A coup? Or just a long, drawn out process like we saw in 2000?

Drawn out process and riots.

[SirFozzie]

Jon: Here's the thing, if there was large scale voter fraud in the last couple elections, don't you think Bush and Gonzales etcetera would have made a huge freaking media circus about it?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

What exactly do you mean by "not accepting this"? Riots? A coup? Or just a long, drawn out process like we saw in 2000?

clearly he's referring to a coup. angry liberals taking to the streets - disenfranchised minorities

shit man...it's the turner diaries!!

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

If true, throw em in jail, throw away the key, but I'm not going to trust internet rumor.

not an internet report, it was on TV with an interview with an eye witness who was ex military and took them on, and footage of one of the black panthers.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Lathum

not an internet report, it was on TV with an interview with an eye witness who was ex military and took them on, and footage of one of the black panthers.

then throw em jail for years.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Arles

In the "irony of the day" contest, we have a first entry:

A report just came that said the reason that Obama was waiting so long outside the polls before he voted, it seems that William Ayers was currently voting in that polling spot and Obama didn't want to give anyone the chance to get a picture of them both together.

Hilarious if true.

[Arles]

Looks like the party of tolerance is already starting to talk about their agenda once they land full power:

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday defended the so-called Fairness Doctrine in an interview on Fox News, saying, “I think we should all be fair and balanced, don’t you?”

Schumer’s comments echo other Democrats’ views on reviving the Fairness Doctrine, which would require radio stations to balance conservative hosts with liberal ones.

Asked if he is a supporter of telling radio stations what content they should have, Schumer used the fair and balanced line, claiming that critics of the Fairness Doctrine are being inconsistent.

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

In 2007, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a close ally of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told The Hill, “It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”

Senate Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) last year said, “I believe very strongly that the airwaves are public and people use these airwaves for profit. But there is a responsibility to see that both sides and not just one side of the big public questions of debate of the day are aired and are aired with some modicum of fairness.”

Conservatives fear that forcing stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio would cut into profits so significantly that radio executives would opt to scale back on conservative radio programming to avoid escalating costs and interference from the FCC.

They also note that conservative radio shows has been far more successful than liberal ones.

In his Fox interview, Schumer, who heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, also weighed in on the election, predicting that Democrats will end up with between 56 and 58 seats in the Senate.

He also defended “card check” legislation, claiming there is a strong need to allow workers a private ballot to register their votes on whether to organize a union.
Schumer said “there has to be some counter” to the leverage businesses have, claiming “employers have every leg up on people who want to organize and that’s why union workers have gone down from about 25 percent to 6 percent [in the private sector].”

Business groups adamantly oppose the card check bill, which passed the House and fell short of the necessary votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.

TheHill.com - Schumer on Fox: Fairness Doctrine ‘fair and balanced’

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Jon: Here's the thing, if there was large scale voter fraud in the last couple elections, don't you think Bush and Gonzales etcetera would have made a huge freaking media circus about it?

Nope. When you win you don't bitch about turnovers & penalty discrepancy nearly as much.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

C'mon DT, you're smarter than that

Awww...thanks

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by Arles

(using rcp)
9/4: McCain up 51-45 in most polls
9/29: McCain down 43-48 in most polls
11/1: McCain down 41-50 in most polls

so, when McCain was up 51-45, Palin had 25% more/19% less. When McCain was down 43-48, Palin had 25% more/32% less. When McCain dipped to 41-50, Palin had 17% more/46% less.

it seems that the economic issues and the state of the country brought down McCain's support, which (not surprisingly) decreased the amount of support for Palin.

I'm sure that happened as well. My only point of contention is the indifference numbers for Palin versus Biden or any other VP listed.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

What exactly do you mean by "not accepting this"? Riots? A coup? Or just a long, drawn out process like we saw in 2000?

If Obama wins the popular and McCain wins the EV, and this becomes clear relatively quickly (i.e. from overnight returns), I think there will be riots.

If we have a lot of close votes like in 2000, I don't think I see the process dragging out quite as much. For one, it's not going to catch anyone by surprise this time, so the process & precedents for recounting are pretty well understood. For two, both sides are heavily lawyered up and ready to go to battle over it.

Regardless of how things go down (long/short), if Obama wins the popular and McCain wins the EV, I think there might even be a serious effort, for the first time in memory, to do away with the Electoral College.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

can you point to a documented instance of that happening? let alone say...100 documented instances of that happening? or 1000? The simple fact is that you can't (okay maybe one, but what did someone post earlier...52 arrests in the last election?) IT DOES NOT HAPPEN. FRAUDULENT REGISTRATIONS /= VOTES

Now I have to go dig up the examples. There was a pretty big case here in NC back in 2000 I think where an underage kid registered at one of those "Rock the Vote" events, then actually voted (parents decided to "make a point"), and it got caught later in an audit.

I'll see if I can dig up the article. All my searches are being burned by the "Vote" links on everybody's freakin' web page, so I'm getting all these underage drinking/driving/sex articles rather than finding the underage voter...

[fantom1979]

Just because I am bored. Here are the top posters in this thread. I had to go down pretty far to get my name on the list

Flasch186

[Crim]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Maybe the legal definition differs, but it seems pretty point A to point B that a vote cast by someone after fraudulent registration would be ... umm ... fraud.

He clarified it later on, or in a different thread.

Still, though, saying that clear evidence of widespread voter registration fraud exists, but denying possibility of significant voting fraud is contortionism.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Of all elections, considering Obama's home state, to try to claim that isn't a long history of shenanigans? C'mon DT, you're smarter than that, surely you aren't going to claim that Richard Daley was clean just because he wasn't charged?

Yeah, but I think the point is that this hasn't happened in decades, even in Chicago.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Of all elections, considering Obama's home state, to try to claim that isn't a long history of shenanigans? C'mon DT, you're smarter than that, surely you aren't going to claim that Richard Daley was clean just because he wasn't charged?

Vote early & vote often.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Now I have to go dig up the examples. There was a pretty big case here in NC back in 2000 I think where an underage kid registered at one of those "Rock the Vote" events, then actually voted (parents decided to "make a point"), and it got caught later in an audit.

I'll see if I can dig up the article. All my searches are being burned by the "Vote" links on everybody's freakin' web page, so I'm getting all these underage drinking/driving/sex articles rather than finding the underage voter...

but it got caught in an audit hmm? so the system works. or did it get caught after everything had been tallied and all.

[DaddyTorgo]

Wow...I'm 5th? Really? Go me.

LOL @ my new signature

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Yeah, but I think the point is that this hasn't happened in decades, even in Chicago.

LOL. If I didn't know better, I'd almost think you believe that.
Increased subtlety (or even decreased frequency) doesn't mean doesn't happen.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Vote early & vote often.

I sent out a message to my boss and the rest of our team last week that stated that due to Wisconsin law giving every worker 3 hours off to vote, I was going to vote 3 times and take the day off.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

This Fairness Doctrine is one of the singularly most stupid ideas that I have heard a legislature seriously discuss. It goes against so much of what this country is about that the mind boggles.

Welcome to the new era, you ain't seen nothing yet.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

This Fairness Doctrine is one of the singularly most stupid ideas that I have heard a legislature seriously discuss. It goes against so much of what this country is about that the mind boggles.

Agreed.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Mustang

I sent out a message to my boss and the rest of our team last week that stated that due to Wisconsin law giving every worker 3 hours off to vote, I was going to vote 3 times and take the day off.

Is your boss a Democrat or a Republican? This could have some influence on whether your offer is accepted.

[larrymcg421]

I am completely against the fairness doctrine and hope it doesn't get reintroduced. At the same time, I would also like all the censor happy groups to shut the fuck up and let me watch what I want on TV.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

I really wish that Obama would win and the Republicans would take back Congress. That would be my ideal. Maybe 2010.

FWIW I've read that Obama doesn't support the thing, but time will tell.

I think an Obama WH, Dem Senate and republican house would be the best recipe for the next 8 years. I don't know if that will be possible in 2010 though.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nope. When you win you don't bitch about turnovers & penalty discrepancy nearly as much.

Jon: Please. with the amount of divisionary stuff the Bush folks have done, they'd have run with it for MONTHS.

[SirFozzie]

And as someone said last page, while I do not wish for any version of the Fairness Doctrine to be imposed, I cordially invite the PTC/censor groups to kindly choke on my fuck, as my friend Chris would say.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Jon: Please. with the amount of divisionary stuff the Bush folks have done, they'd have run with it for MONTHS.

Eh, they've been pretty much a disappointment to me in so many ways in the past severa years, I simply don't have the confidence you do.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Jon: Please. with the amount of divisionary stuff the Bush folks have done, they'd have run with it for MONTHS.

You don't bring that up because you risk bringing up some of your own dirty tactics. If you won, you won and you don't want to look into it

SI

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

but it got caught in an audit hmm? so the system works. or did it get caught after everything had been tallied and all.

Can't find the article to find the exact details. But hey, you asked for one example. I was one of those that used to argue true/false questions with teachers because I could come up with obscure exceptions that would drive them nuts

My concern with voter fraud in this country is that it is too easy to impersonate a registered voter who is not actually intending to vote. Florida used to demand a driver's license, but here in NC I'm lucky if they even ask me to recite my address (which isn't much of a test).

I believe this has far more effect at the local level than it does at a national level. It's easy to find instances of voter counts messed up.

More votes counted than people visited polls: WTIC News/Talk 1080 - Newspaper: More Votes Cast Than Voters in Bridgeport Primary?

Dead registered voters voting:
http://www.texaswatchdog.org/2008/10...harris-county/

Just a few examples. At a national level it all evens out.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

I really wish that Obama would win and the Republicans would take back Congress. That would be my ideal. Maybe 2010.

I think we are better off when the majority in Congress differs from the party in the White House. It's makes it harder for either party to push their agenda and look more towards compromise.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Just because I am bored. Here are the top posters in this thread. I had to go down pretty far to get my name on the list

Hey, isn't it against FOFC law to publish post counts?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I am completely against the fairness doctrine and hope it doesn't get reintroduced. At the same time, I would also like all the censor happy groups to shut the fuck up and let me watch what I want on TV.

I think PETA would have a problem with some of the things you want to see done to donkeys by female midgets

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

I think we are better off when the majority in Congress differs from the party in the White House. It's makes it harder for either party to push their agenda and look more towards compromise.

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

I agree, and for me I think I prefer a blue executive and red legislative. It seems set up to do the least damage. Maybe I just have fond memories of the 90s.

yes please. although i like to see balance within the legislature - i don't want to see one side with a fillibuster-proof majority either, because i want there to have to be compromise to get things done. One said narrowly ahead is okay though.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LOL. If I didn't know better, I'd almost think you believe that.
Increased subtlety (or even decreased frequency) doesn't mean doesn't happen.

It just doesn't make sense to commit fraud through registration tricks. In Indiana, based on 2004 turnout, 23000 voters would have to vote through fraudulent registrations to add just 1% to the tally. Do you really think there are 23000 people willing to risk felony arrest for such a small change in the outcome? All the while these 23000 people never talk about their plan?

Voter fraud is much easier and more likely at the ballot box/voting machine level. At least there a single person could conceivably change hundreds of votes at a time.

The real fights that make a difference are over access questions, voter ID, polling hours, absentee requirements, etc. Trying to rig a national election through individual votes in our current media environment is unlikely in the extreme.

[SirFozzie]

Phony Virginia Flier Culprit Found

The Virginia Flier telling R's to vote today and D's to vote tommorrow was a "joke that got out of hand" and no charges will be filed.

[BrianD]

I still don't like the "stealing elections" arguments, but news out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (one of the few blue areas in the state - big enough to shift the whole state) is that the special police task force put in place to deal with potential fraud has been mostly replaced at the last minute by a bunch of rookies. At least one 30-year veteran of the force just retired "in disgust"...so the report goes.

[lungs]

hey guys, i just got a text message that said due to all the long lines, people planning to vote for obama should vote tomorrow.

just thought i'd let everybody know. guess i'll just go sit in the tavern.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Phony Virginia Flier Culprit Found

The Virginia Flier telling R's to vote today and D's to vote tommorrow was a "joke that got out of hand" and no charges will be filed.

These things have been going around every election day since I was a kid, so I dunno why all of a sudden now they're getting all sensitive about it. If someone this year doesn't know when election day is, they probably shouldn't be voting.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Arles

Let me just say this would be an unmitigated disaster for our country if it happened. I would rather have McCain lose than this happen. I just can't see Obama supporters accepting this if it happened:

Why? They better accept it if it happens.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

These things have been going around every election day since I was a kid, so I dunno why all of a sudden now they're getting all sensitive about it. If someone this year doesn't know when election day is, they probably shouldn't be voting.

It's like the guy on halloween that puts his head in a cut out box and writes on it....Free Mammograms. Then women getting pissed because they were duped.

[SirFozzie]

FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right: Today's Polls and Final Election Projection: Obama 349, McCain 189

Final predictions and polls up.

The statisical model gives McCain a 1.1% chance of winning.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

These things have been going around every election day since I was a kid, so I dunno why all of a sudden now they're getting all sensitive about it. If someone this year doesn't know when election day is, they probably shouldn't be voting.

I don't think it's that people are getting sensitive about it all of a sudden. I think they are getting more news coverage now. I've heard about this for at least the past 2 presidential elections when I don't remember hearing much on the news about it before.

I will agree that if you don't know that today is the last day to vote in this election, especially with all of the media coverage that this election is getting, you've got issues.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right: Today's Polls and Final Election Projection: Obama 349, McCain 189

Final predictions and polls up.

The statisical model gives McCain a 1.1% chance of winning.

"So you're saying there's a chance!!!!"

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

These things have been going around every election day since I was a kid, so I dunno why all of a sudden now they're getting all sensitive about it. If someone this year doesn't know when election day is, they probably shouldn't be voting.

It's also been brought up every election day, DC, so I don't see that there's anything "all of a sudden" about the sensitivity...

[Crim]

Originally Posted by stevew

Why? They better accept it if it happens.

But will they accept a banning?

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Crim

But will they accept a banning?

I'm not sure. I wonder if Obama will come back bigger and stronger than evar!