The Election Is Fixed....

[dudalb]

Sad to say, because some of the people involved should really know better, there is a bad outbreak of Conspriacy crap over in the 2008 election section.
Basically, it is that the GOP is plotting to steal the election.
It's the usual crap, every flaw in the system is being pointed at as "Proof" a nefarious plot is underway.
What is sad is some of the people pushing this are very critcial of the Truthers, but they are using the same tactics ie, every analomy or screw up is intrepreted as being part of the plot, the "proof" they provide are to very biased sources,etc.
It is just sad that some intelligent people are allowing paranoia and blind partisanship to overcome their reason.
IMHO, both parties will twist and turn the election laws and manipulate the system when they can, but that does not mean a national election can be "fixed".
And it is scary that one of the posters, somebody who is normally intelligent, is openly saying he want the GOP leadership put in prison when The Democrats win.Although they don't say so, it is scary how many seem to want to destroy the GOP, leaving a huge Democrtic party and a bunch of small parties who really can't do more then bitch...a de facto One Party State.
I have no doubt there are some In the GOP who have the same Fantasy in reverse. Not good for the country.

[Edx]

So you are saying the content of the film Hacking Democracy is a CT?

What about those Princeton students that hacked the diebold systems as documented on both Fox and CNN?

What about that guy that went on record that said he was hired to write a program to hijack the election by a senator? Is he lying as well?

[LightinDarkness]

This is actually excellent proof of the Democrat National Committee's propaganda techniques: they are absolute geniuses in this area. Seriously, if there was an award for propaganda, the DNC should win it every election cycle because the same propaganda goes out EVERY SINGLE time and people believe it.

What they are doing is setting up a "media narrative"/storyline to get the media to sniff and follow down in the event that they don't win the election. Instead of taking any responsibility or just admitting that people didn't want to vote for their candidates, they'll point at the GOP and say "THEY STOLE IT!"

The techniques are simple, as you've pointed out: Go into all 50 states and find isolated areas of what appears to be election fraud. It is not necessary that it be real fraud: ie, intentional tampering with votes, only that is gives the illusion of fraud (they always ignore rational reasons, like FAULTY EQUIPMENT). Send down a few lawyers, file law suits acting like your indignantly outraged, and then call the media up and start screaming about fraud. Do this 2 or 3 times and, through the fallacy of hasty generalization, people and the media believe that all of a sudden election fraud is everywhere.

[dudalb]

And it is not like the Dems are pure themselves when it comes to these kind of shennigans; Just ask anybody who lived in Chicago.

[sleeplessdwarf]

I have to say that in the last few months I have applied the type of thinking that you find here and the BS seems to be all around more than ever. For some reason though I can't shake off the feeling that the only way McCain could win is for it to be rigged. Now I completely believe that Obama is going to win so I am not sitting here think any kind of CT is about to take place. The more I talk to regular people, many who are republicans, it just seems that way more are on the obama bandwagon. I do not personally believe either one will make much difference, but I will have a hard time bringing myself to vote for a ticket that has that stupid(yes stupid, just check her talking crap about fruit fly studies being a wasteful earmark, and that we need to put more into special need children areas) hypocrite Palin on it. I am republican, and Obama repulses me with his view on partial birth abortion, but I have come to think that we will have legal abortion no matter who gets in from now on. So I will hold my nose and vote for whichever makes me less sick to my stomach at the time.

[LightinDarkness]

And it is not like the Dems are pure themselves when it comes to these kind of shennigans; Just ask anybody who lived in Chicago.

Each party has their own special way of manipulating people. For the DNC, its:

1) Using class warfare propaganda to spread populism
2) Strategic use of media to create a storyline to blame the GOP for absolutely everything.

The RNC is different, they specialize in:

1) Over dramatizing DNC positions to give them the illusions of being communists or socialists
2) Making the DNC appear "Un-American"

But the DNC wins the trophy for overall use of propaganda. The minds that run the Democrats in the US are absolute geniuses - they already have people believing that Obama will win the election by a landslide and that if he doesn't win it'll be because McCain stole it. And the vast majority of the population has lapped it up like dogs.

[HereticHulk]

A McCain upset would not even surprise me in the least.

There is this 'Bradley Effect' false narrative being injected into the MSM.

This election (http://www.bradblog.com/) should be fun. :covereyes

[dudalb]

Each party has their own special way of manipulating people. For the DNC, its:

1) Using class warfare propaganda to spread populism
2) Strategic use of media to create a storyline to blame the GOP for absolutely everything.

The RNC is different, they specialize in:

1) Over dramatizing DNC positions to give them the illusions of being communists or socialists
2) Making the DNC appear "Un-American"

But the DNC wins the trophy for overall use of propaganda. The minds that run the Democrats in the US are absolute geniuses - they already have people believing that Obama will win the election by a landslide and that if he doesn't win it'll be because McCain stole it. And the vast majority of the population has lapped it up like dogs.


To be fair, I think the Dems have some legitimate complaints about 2000...that whole thing was a fiasco. But I have not seen much to convince me that the 2004 election was stolen.

[dudalb]

A McCain upset would not even surprise me in the least.

There is this 'Bradley Effect' false narrative being injected into the MSM.

This election (http://www.bradblog.com/) should be fun. :covereyes

Without getting into the Bradley effect is still a valid idea, the idea that is is "False narrative being injected into the MSM" is a bunch of CT BS. The Bradley effect has been talked about for years..since 1982 as a matter of fact.
And what the hell do you care, since McCain and Obama are both tools of the NWO in your world anyway?

[Edx]

hmm no ones answered my questions, interesting.

[INRM]

Well,

The 2004 election was stolen by Bush. It was even demonstrated how the Diebold machines could be hacked.

In regards to this election, I have no idea. It might be fixed, might not be.

For all I know Obama may just be disqualified after it is "proven" that he wasn't born in this country...

Although, who knows Bush, might stage some sort of disaster and then declare martial law and stay in as long as he can.


Honestly, I'm not 100% sure.

[sleeplessdwarf]

Even if it was "proven" that he was not born on US soil, how would that disqualify him if he was born to a US citizen? Or are we now doubting that his mother is really his mother? Maybe he just made up the "white" lady to give him an edge since some would have a hard time voting for a 100% black man.

:rolleyes:

[Minadin]

And it is not like the Dems are pure themselves when it comes to these kind of shennigans; Just ask anybody who lived in Chicago.


I think this is the first presidential election year in which the democrats have registered more legitimate new voters than fraudulent (and in some cases, dead) ones here in St. Louis.

Go Team!

[moon1969]

No the lection was fixed in Italy when Silvio Berlusconi got elected. John McCain is not Silvio Berlusconi even if McCain probaly supports Silvio Berlusconi and thinks that Silvio Berlusconi supports democracy.

[CurtC]

Has there been any Diebold conspiracy stuff lately? I haven't heard any in years, but I voted last week, and for the first time ever it was using an electronic voting system instead of punch cards. I wish I had noticed the brand name of the voting machine, but I'm not sure it was displayed.

Has the outrage died down? Apparently so from my POV. Is that because the software issues have been addressed, or because there's an auditable paper trail, or what?

[CurtC]

double-post

[dudalb]

Well,

The 2004 election was stolen by Bush. It was even demonstrated how the Diebold machines could be hacked.

In regards to this election, I have no idea. It might be fixed, might not be.

For all I know Obama may just be disqualified after it is "proven" that he wasn't born in this country...

Although, who knows Bush, might stage some sort of disaster and then declare martial law and stay in as long as he can.


Honestly, I'm not 100% sure.


You are 100% paranoid.

[CurtC]

INRM, it's been established that Obama was born in this country, but on the other hand, it's also firmly established that McCain wasn't.

[dudalb]

INRM, it's been established that Obama was born in this country, but on the other hand, it's also firmly established that McCain wasn't.


And it has been firmly established that both are native born American citizens, and therefore eligible for the Presidency, and anybody making an issue out of either case is a fool.

[dudalb]

For all I know Obama may just be disqualified after it is "proven" that he wasn't born in this country...

In which case (assuming Obama wins) we will have President Biden.

[moon1969]

Many people say that the election in Azerbaijan was fixed and that Ilham Aliyev is not a democratic leader. They say the samething about Georgia and Mikheil Saakashvili. George W. Bush supports both Ilham Aliyev and Mikheil Saakashvili then again Vladimir Putin supports Alexander Lukashenko even if majority of the people in Belarus say that Alexander Lukashenko fixed the election. Samething in Chechnya where dictator Ramzan Kadyrov. Many people have also accused Hugo Chavez of fixing elections in Venezuela. It is possible that GOP will fix the election like they did back in 2000. Al Gore won the 2000 election and that is a fact.

[maxpower1227]

The minds that run the Democrats in the US are absolute geniuses

So much so that they have lost 7 of the last 10 presidential elections! What masterminds!

[LightinDarkness]

So much so that they have lost 7 of the last 10 presidential elections! What masterminds!

It is the ignorant person who thinks the executive branch is the target of the DNC. Its state governments first, congress second, and the presidency third.

And that is why the DNC is brilliant - see, they've even got you believing that the Presidency has some sort of ultimate power. Its a powerful office, but not worth spending all your money on if you truly want to control politics in the United States.

[LightinDarkness]

You are 100% paranoid.

I agree.

And whats sad is that...

He probably votes. :eek::eye-poppi:boggled::jaw-dropp:boxedin:

[maxpower1227]

It is the ignorant person who thinks the executive branch is the target of the DNC. Its state governments first, congress second, and the presidency third.

And that is why the DNC is brilliant - see, they've even got you believing that the Presidency has some sort of ultimate power. Its a powerful office, but not worth spending all your money on if you truly want to control politics in the United States.

You're right. I mean, who could possibly want to have any sway in our foreign policy? That's for chumps.

[defaultdotxbe]

Well,

The 2004 election was stolen by Bush. It was even demonstrated how the Diebold machines could be hacked.
could be hacked != were hacked != were hacked by george w bush

[Edx]

No one seems to be addressing the claims actually made by the people that have problems with the election process, just seems to be saying varieties of "you're paranoid". Not that convincing a rebuttle.

[dudalb]

No one is disputing there are problems with the system. What we are disputing is this proves there is some vast conspiracy to fix elections.

could be hacked != were hacked != were hacked by george w bush

Exactly.Edx should try that in a criminal trial and see how far it gets him.

[Edx]

No one is disputing there are problems with the system. What we are disputing is this proves there is some vast conspiracy to fix elections.

Exactly.Edx should try that in a criminal trial and see how far it gets him.

Except you will never find one comment by me that even suggested what you are claiming I am arguing.

What your OP actually says dudalb is that election fraud is not a problem and that its an paranoid CT to say it that it is.

Let me explain something. Just because you see problems with election fraud and the election system in regards to the voting machines does mean you believe that the voting machines were hacked by George Bush through a vast conspiracy. That is of course a strawman, but maybe you guys are just trying to be antagonistic on purpose becuase it amuses you.

Honestly some of you guys see things in such black and white terms its as if Im back arguing with Creationists again.

[moon1969]

Silvio Berlusconi fixed the election so why not John McCain? Because PNAC people say that the USA is perfect?

[gtc]

Let me explain something. Just because you see problems with election fraud and the election system in regards to the voting machines does mean you believe that the voting machines were hacked by George Bush through a vast conspiracy.

I think the problem here is that you want to talk about the problems with the machines (which do exist) but the thread is about the theory that these problems are actually a nefarious plot by the GOP.

There are several threads in the politics section which have discussed these problems in the past (including the conspiracy theory). I think you would be better off tracking one of those down and bumping that if you want a serious discussion of the issues.

[Edx]

I think the problem here is that you want to talk about the problems with the machines (which do exist) but the thread is about the theory that these problems are actually a nefarious plot by the GOP.

There are several threads in the politics section which have discussed these problems in the past (including the conspiracy theory). I think you would be better off tracking one of those down and bumping that if you want a serious discussion of the issues.

Frankly I find a lot of people here pseudoskeptics. I get the impression from a large number of people that they dont believe anyone in power is corrupt enough to not act in the best interests of the population. You dont need many people for form a "conspiracy" by definition, but of course as soon as you suggest that a group of powerfull people in government or corporations might have done something corrupt its automatically written of as "CT" and compared to aliens, the Illuminate, NWO, 911 Truth or whatever other nonsence exaggeration people decide to strawman it to be.

ed

[defaultdotxbe]

Frankly I find a lot of people here pseudoskeptics. I get the impression from a large number of people that they dont believe anyone in power is corrupt enough to not act in the best interests of the population. You dont need many people for form a "conspiracy" by definition, but of course as soon as you suggest that a group of powerfull people in government or corporations might have done something corrupt its automatically written of as "CT" and compared to aliens, the Illuminate, NWO, 911 Truth or whatever other nonsence exaggeration people decide to strawman it to be.

ed
thats because your suggestion of corruption comes with as much evidence as aliens, illuminati, nwo, 911 truth, etc, just because something is more plausible than extra terrestrials abducting people doesnt make it any more true, or worthy of less skepticism if its presented without any evidence

[abenja1]

A McCain upset would not even surprise me in the least.

There is this 'Bradley Effect' false narrative being injected into the MSM.

This election (http://www.bradblog.com/) should be fun. :covereyes

The same MSM you love to quote when it suits your CT agenda :rolleyes:
Anyway, with elections, there is always a flaw. There have been since the beginning, there will be in the last. No election is perfect, there are some that are just better run than others.

[Horatius]

Frankly I find a lot of people here pseudoskeptics. I get the impression from a large number of people that they dont believe anyone in power is corrupt enough to not act in the best interests of the population. You dont need many people for form a "conspiracy" by definition, but of course as soon as you suggest that a group of powerfull people in government or corporations might have done something corrupt its automatically written of as "CT" and compared to aliens, the Illuminate, NWO, 911 Truth or whatever other nonsence exaggeration people decide to strawman it to be.

ed


Okay, that's complete BS right there. There's no problem with suggesting that "a group" of powerful people did "something corrupt". None of us have ever suggested otherwise.

The problem is, there's a huge difference between suggesting, say, Ted Stevens took bribes, and suggesting that there is enough widespread vote fraud to significantly affect the outcome of a national election, that has been sanctioned by the national political parties.

No one doubts that individuals and small groups can, and have, engaged in corrupt practices. What we doubt is that these practices are as wide-spread, and as perfectly hidden, as the typical CTist claims they are. And the big difference is, there's actual, take-to-court-and-it-stands-up evidence of the little things like Ted Stevens.

Please stop equivocating.

[BazBear]

....It is possible that GOP will fix the election like they did back in 2000. Al Gore won the 2000 election and that is a fact. As if the GOP could know it would come down to several counties in Florida. If the plan was to put in the fix, they'd be stupid to rely on just a "razor thin edge in one state" strategy. Gore DID win the popular vote, but the electoral college count is all that matters in electing U.S. presidents. Gore may have been robbed in FL, but in my opinion more likely by incompetent and/or confused voters than any grand scheme to steal an election. Both parties did all the legal maneuvering they could after the event, what with the battalions of lawyers from both sides that descended on the areas in FL under dispute. A fiasco on election day, and a fiasco of jockeying of all sorts after the fact, but I've never seen one bit of credible evidence that the election was rigged.

I case you're wondering, the last GOP presidential candidate I voted for was Bush Sr. in 1988 (and I vote in all elections, even odd-year local ones)

[Travis]

I'm not sure how well any of this would work. If the exit polls showed a 10% Obama win in the popular vote but the machines showed a 4% McCain win you'd bet people would be asking questions and I don't just mean paranoid net-detectives I mean big Journalists with clout.

[quarky]

Stealing is ok if you don't get caught. Everyone does it.

Even in a totally legit election, the decision often is determined by bogus sales pitches.
If Obama looses, for instance, it could possibly be attributed to the 'fact' that he is a muslim whom pals around with terrorists.

The diebold matter is disturbing, as was the unique Supreme Court decision in 2000...but the swift-boat propaganda was more significant in the long run. Hanging chads will not be as significant as the 'fact' of Obama being the anti-christ and such. Yet, the flood of that sort of propaganda (which happens on both sides, no doubt) is never equated with election fraud.

[Travis]

Stealing is ok if you don't get caught. Everyone does it.

Even in a totally legit election, the decision often is determined by bogus sales pitches.
If Obama looses, for instance, it could possibly be attributed to the 'fact' that he is a muslim whom pals around with terrorists.

The diebold matter is disturbing, as was the unique Supreme Court decision in 2000...but the swift-boat propaganda was more significant in the long run. Hanging chads will not be as significant as the 'fact' of Obama being the anti-christ and such. Yet, the flood of that sort of propaganda (which happens on both sides, no doubt) is never equated with election fraud.

Well, way back in the day there was an election where one side (I forget which election it was) literally called their opponents mother a whore. Also let us not forget that Lincoln was portrayed as someone who was going to let all the "chaste" white women be raped by "savage" black men. Mudslinging is nothing new it's just gotten more refined.

[Lonewulf]

No attempts at winning the election through deception.

Nosirree (http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/phony-flier-says-virginians-vote-different-days).

[Travis]

No attempts at winning the election through deception.

Nosirree (http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/phony-flier-says-virginians-vote-different-days).

I wouldn't be surprised if that was found to be a prank.

[Edx]

Okay, that's complete BS right there. There's no problem with suggesting that "a group" of powerful people did "something corrupt". None of us have ever suggested otherwise.

The problem is, there's a huge difference between suggesting, say, Ted Stevens took bribes, and suggesting that there is enough widespread vote fraud to significantly affect the outcome of a national election, that has been sanctioned by the national political parties.

No one doubts that individuals and small groups can, and have, engaged in corrupt practices. What we doubt is that these practices are as wide-spread, and as perfectly hidden, as the typical CTist claims they are. And the big difference is, there's actual, take-to-court-and-it-stands-up evidence of the little things like Ted Stevens.

Please stop equivocating.

Im not equivocating, you can speak for youself but take a look at for example defaultdotxbe's reply. No corruption, nothing to worry about, its all just a CT to suggest we should be highly concerned with the election system.

Now you personally may be able to see the sence that Ted Stevens took bribes and that corruption has no doubt occured. The problem is that films like Hacking Democracy along with research by those Princeton chaps shows that you can hack these machines and no one will ever know it happened. The fact is if someone does decide to "hack" the system; whether its some smart high school kid in the basement of his mums house, a corrupt senator or anything more than that no one willl ever find out. And if you watch the film Diebold doesnt seem to care and dismiss' all the problems with their systems. People like defaultdotxbe just bury their head the ground and say "theres no evidence", that its all CT, as if corruption doesnt and would never occur. Its like leaving your keys in your new car in full view and go wandering off, would that be a sensible thing to do? Of course not. Arguing that its unlikely the mob themselves will steal your car doesnt mean no one else will.

Ed

[Elizabeth I]

No attempts at winning the election through deception.

Nosirree (http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/phony-flier-says-virginians-vote-different-days).

I wouldn't be surprised if that was found to be a prank.

Well, it's certainly a very old joke...





ETA: and do you really want anyone who would fall for that Virginia thing to vote, anyway?

[Lonewulf]

Well, it's certainly a very old joke...





ETA: and do you really want anyone who would fall for that Virginia thing to vote, anyway?

Yes yes yes, I know. People that you declare as "stupid" shouldn't be allowed to vote, even though they're registered, and attempts to forge an official document to intentionally get people to not have their vote count is "JUST A JOKE LOL". Lovely sense of humor you people have. Let's see just how much the authorities will find it funny when they catch the perpetrators, as they've stated that they intend to do. (At least you didn't say "Dems have ACORN, so we can do this!" like some pundits have used to defend this action.)

Just want to note that not only do I hope that these people get jail time, but that THEY aren't allowed to vote thanks to their crime.

Anyways, I'm not going to rehash what I've had to say on the other thread on this issue. Look there (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127764) if you want to see why such comments like yours sicken me.

(And I've actually not heard this joke before. Thank goodness, because I certainly don't want to be exposed to such trash.)

[defaultdotxbe]

Im not equivocating, you can speak for youself but take a look at for example defaultdotxbe's reply. No corruption, nothing to worry about, its all just a CT to suggest we should be highly concerned with the election system.

Now you personally may be able to see the sence that Ted Stevens took bribes and that corruption has no doubt occured. The problem is that films like Hacking Democracy along with research by those Princeton chaps shows that you can hack these machines and no one will ever know it happened. The fact is if someone does decide to "hack" the system; whether its some smart high school kid in the basement of his mums house, a corrupt senator or anything more than that no one willl ever find out. And if you watch the film Diebold doesnt seem to care and dismiss' all the problems with their systems. People like defaultdotxbe just bury their head the ground and say "theres no evidence", that its all CT, as if corruption doesnt and would never occur. Its like leaving your keys in your new car in full view and go wandering off, would that be a sensible thing to do? Of course not. Arguing that its unlikely the mob themselves will steal your car doesnt mean no one else will.

Ed
so what do you propose we do? should we investigate everyone who wins and election? or just the republicans who win? or maybe we should skip the investigation and go straight to arrests, that who "innocent until proven guilty" thing always did seem a bit backward


there is a difference between "there are flaws in the system" and "elections are being stolen"

Yes yes yes, I know. People that you declare as "stupid" shouldn't be allowed to vote, even though they're registered, and attempts to forge an official document to intentionally get people to not have their vote count is "JUST A JOKE LOL". Lovely sense of humor you people have. Let's see just how much the authorities will find it funny when they catch the perpetrators, as they've stated that they intend to do. (At least you didn't say "Dems have ACORN, so we can do this!" like some pundits have used to defend this action.)

Just want to note that not only do I hope that these people get jail time, but that THEY aren't allowed to vote thanks to their crime.

Anyways, I'm not going to rehash what I've had to say on the other thread on this issue. Look there (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127764) if you want to see why such comments like yours sicken me.

(And I've actually not heard this joke before. Thank goodness, because I certainly don't want to be exposed to such trash.)
somehow i doubt youd be complaining if it sayd democrats vote the 4th, republicans vote the 5th

[dudalb]

I wouldn't be surprised if that was found to be a prank.

It's probably better that anybody dumb enough to believe that flyer does not vote.
Come on, people, if the GOP was intent on stealing the election, do you think they use a tactic as dumb as this?

[dudalb]

Yes yes yes, I know. People that you declare as "stupid" shouldn't be allowed to vote, even though they're registered, and attempts to forge an official document to intentionally get people to not have their vote count is "JUST A JOKE LOL". Lovely sense of humor you people have. Let's see just how much the authorities will find it funny when they catch the perpetrators, as they've stated that they intend to do. (At least you didn't say "Dems have ACORN, so we can do this!" like some pundits have used to defend this action.)

Just want to note that not only do I hope that these people get jail time, but that THEY aren't allowed to vote thanks to their crime.

Anyways, I'm not going to rehash what I've had to say on the other thread on this issue. Look there (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127764) if you want to see why such comments like yours sicken me.

(And I've actually not heard this joke before. Thank goodness, because I certainly don't want to be exposed to such trash.)


I think your ignorance of American Politics is showing.
There is no freaking way you could not know that Nov.4 is election day. There is no freaking way that the GOP would do something this dumb.
I think you are showing an ""Americans are really stupid and ignorant" attitude all to common among Europeans.

[jhunter1163]

I'd agree that the Dems have a case that the 2000 election was stolen. 2004, not so much. This time, I think Obama will win rather convincingly (350-400 electoral votes). Once that happens, the paranoid rantings will die down, IMO.

[Lonewulf]

I think you are showing an ""Americans are really stupid and ignorant" attitude all to common among Europeans.I'll repeat this, slowly so you can actually understand. I'll use big caps, because they are more legible.

I AM A UNITED STATES CITIZEN.

I have lived for years in the United States.

And yes, there are uneducated people within the U.S. I've run into many of them myself. They exist. Are they a majority? Not necessarily. But are you going to claim that fooling the minority from successfully voting is necessarily good?

Jesus christ, I can't believe that people really are continuing to be ignorant about my status as a United States Citizen.

JUST BECAUSE I AM CURRENTLY IN GERMANY CURRENTLY DOES NOT MEAN I'M NOT A U.S. CITIZEN. GET THAT IN YOUR HEAD.

I WAS TAUGHT IN DODD SCHOOLS.

I WAS IN THE UNITED STATES FOR AT LEAST HALF OF MY NATURAL LIFE.

I HAVE A UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP, I AM CURRENTLY REGISTERED AS A VOTER, I HAVE VOTED, AND I AM ALSO REGISTERED TO POTENTIALLY BE DRAFTED, SHOULD ONE BE PASSED, TO FIGHT FOR THE COUNTRY YOU CLAIM I AM NOT A CITIZEN OF. I WOULD DIE FOR THE COUNTRY YOU CLAIM I AM NOT A CITIZEN OF.

SO KINDLY STOP REPEATING THE SAME FALSEHOOD I CORRECTED YOU ON IN ANOTHER THREAD.

GodDAMN some people.

Nor have I ever claimed that the GOP was responsible for anything. Newsflash, genius: YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A POLITICIAN TO BE REGISTERED AS A REPUBLICAN.

You show your own ignorance of the system.

[Lonewulf]

somehow i doubt youd be complaining if it sayd democrats vote the 4th, republicans vote the 5th

Yes, I know. Because I happen to have leanings towards Obama, I must fit every stereotype and buy into everything that's anti-this and pro-that.

Get this straight: I'm not like that. And I don't care for how you make assumptions, based on your prejudiced bigotry of the other side, based on that. If someone commits a crime, NO MATTER THEIR POLITICAL STANDINGS, then I think of it as a crime. I do find it funny how some people are willing to point the finger at others without looking in on themselves, no matter which side of politics they stand on.

Kindly take your flash judgments of people you don't know and obviously have never read the posts of elsewhere, please. Because I am tired of this kind of thing.

It's prejudice like yours that causes half of the goddamn problems in the world.

But if you want to keep up with this line of thought, I would kindly ask you for evidence on this thing you "somehow" believe about my character.

Yes, that's right. I demand evidence for your claim. Give up or shut up.

[Lonewulf]

It's probably better that anybody dumb enough to believe that flyer does not vote.

The same dishonest garbage.

"If some people would be fooled by it, well, they deserve to be! If you're that stupid, you don't deserve to be able to vote!"

I wish you'd be thrown in jail just as much as the people who committed this crime. If they're registered to vote, they have the right to. And according to the law passed in 2007, any attempt to dissuade people from voting by intimidation or dishonesty is illegal.

They clearly kept in mind "harmless pranks" like this.

[Elizabeth I]

Yes yes yes, I know. People that you declare as "stupid" shouldn't be allowed to vote, even though they're registered, and attempts to forge an official document to intentionally get people to not have their vote count is "JUST A JOKE LOL". Lovely sense of humor you people have. Let's see just how much the authorities will find it funny when they catch the perpetrators, as they've stated that they intend to do. (At least you didn't say "Dems have ACORN, so we can do this!" like some pundits have used to defend this action.)

Just want to note that not only do I hope that these people get jail time, but that THEY aren't allowed to vote thanks to their crime.

Anyways, I'm not going to rehash what I've had to say on the other thread on this issue. Look there (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127764) if you want to see why such comments like yours sicken me.

(And I've actually not heard this joke before. Thank goodness, because I certainly don't want to be exposed to such trash.)

My, my, my, my, my...a little humor-impaired, are we? Sorry, it is a joke I have heard several times in the past, and just because I pointed that out, I am suddenly an anti-democratic oppressor of...well, of the oppressed?

Additionally, I meant my statement about, "Would you want...to vote?" as a joke, but now that I think about it...if someone were so clueless as to buy into a scam like this, would I want them to vote? I wouldn't deny them their right to vote, and if they somehow managed to stumble upon the polling place, get in line, and pull the lever or fill in the dots on the Scantron form, I wouldn't stop them for the world. But if they chose to stay home because Jerry Springer was re-running "Sisters Who Marry Their Own Brothers" instead of voting it wouldn't break my heart.

Yes, I know. Because I happen to have leanings towards Obama, I must fit every stereotype and buy into everything that's anti-this and pro-that.

After your ranting screed at me, I find this truly funny, especially since the only person I have called stupid on this subforum is the Republican candidate for Vice-President. Want to know how I voted? It wasn't for McCain. You might want to check your own stereotype hot-button there yourself, sport.

[Lonewulf]

You might want to check my post to see where I claimed who you voted for, or what you're registered as, m'kay?

It is possible to be sick at what people defend without claiming that they have a political affiliation. In fact, I'm sick of anyone that defends this, no matter what. As far as I'm concerned, legitimate attempts to get people to not vote should not go unpunished or unnoticed, no matter what -- and as far as I'm concerned, the effort made into making such a document was a legitimate attempt.

I'm serious about this man deserving to go to jail for making an official-looking document, and I further say that I hope he doesn't get allowed to vote as a result. Because what he did was a crime. Period.

I further state that people that laugh at such a joke should get their own sense of humor checked. It's the exact same sense of humor owned by internet trolls... only while also breaking the law. Period.

I stick to such an opinion, regardless of party affiliation.

As Boo says in the other thread on this subject:

Mead,

The attempt to deprive someone of a basic right is never funny. It doesn't matter if the person is ignorant through their own fault, a lack of education or because they are gullible. This is not a "joke" being perpetrated on a presumably educated populace in a "gotcha" fashion. This is a deliberate attempt, targeted specifically at people who are unfamiliar with the election and voting process, to deny them their right to vote.


It is morally and ethically wrong and it is illegal.


It needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and has no place in any society that believes in the fundamental right of an individuals ability to participate in the process of democracy. Many Republicans in the US scream loud and long about the rights of people all over the world to be able to participate in freely held open elections. Yet they will tolerate this type of activity in the US and label it has humor.

If you want to laugh at the overwhelming stupidity of human beings go watch "Jack***".




Boo

I support him 100%

Also, one more thing.

From here (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6138925&page=1):

She said these types of misleading flyers appear each election year in an effort to suppress votes. But Weiser, who directs the center's work on voting rights and elections, explained that other tactics are being deployed too, including messages that falsely tell voters that law enforcement or prosecutors will be monitoring polling places.

I GET IT! Police will be monitoring the polls! HAHAHAHAH! SO FUNNY!

[Elizabeth I]

You might want to check my post to see where I claimed who you voted for, or what you're registered as, m'kay?


Ahem:

At least you didn't say "Dems have ACORN, so we can do this!" like some pundits have used to defend this action.

I think my inference that you were implying that I was coming at the question from at least a little right of center was entirely justified.

[Lonewulf]

I think my inference that you were implying that I was coming at the question from at least a little right of center was entirely justified.

Or I was actually quoting something I saw. That was a paraphrased quote of what someone actually said. People have defended this with one of two defenses:

1) "HAHAHAH, it's a joke!"

2) "You stupid Dems were responsible for ACORN, so it's okay, whatever we do!"

Number 2 necessarily must be "Dems vs. us" because it doesn't work any other way. Independents probably wouldn't say such a thing.

Both defenses don't fly.

Believe whatever you wish, though. :)

I still believe that this was a crime, and I believe that the law is behind me on this. A class 1 misdemeanor, according to the law passed in 2007.

[Elizabeth I]

Or I was actually quoting something I saw. That was a paraphrased quote of what someone actually said.

...which, in context, certainly sounded as if you were accusing me of agreeing with it.

However, you can take it back if you want. I don't mind.

[Lonewulf]

...which, in context, certainly sounded as if you were accusing me of agreeing with it.

However, you can take it back if you want. I don't mind.

I can state that I did not mean to suggest that it was your actual opinion, nor was it meant to demonstrate who you did or did not vote for.

Back to the subject at hand, please? Or do you want to keep up this dance all night long? I really can dance this, I just don't like the steps.

[dudalb]

I'd agree that the Dems have a case that the 2000 election was stolen. 2004, not so much. This time, I think Obama will win rather convincingly (350-400 electoral votes). Once that happens, the paranoid rantings will die down, IMO.


How anybody can get paranoid about a stupid thing like these leaflets is beyond me.
If it is an attempt to steal the elections, it is just about the lamest tactic I have seen in a long time.
I agree that the Dems have a strong case that something was not right in 2000, but even that, given a worse case scenario, was more a case of GOP officials in Florida taking advantage of a fluke situation then any carefully planed conspiracy.
The 2004 stuff is paranoid crap, IMHO.

[dudalb]

THe point Lonewolf which you seem blind to is how ineffecive a tactic this is.

[dudalb]

I wish you'd be thrown in jail just as much as the people who committed this crime.

Why? Because I make a joke about dumb somebody would have to be to fall for a stupid tactic like this?
I think the word obssesion is pretty good for how you are reacting to these dumbass leaflets.

[Lonewulf]

Why? Because I make a joke about dumb somebody would have to be to fall for a stupid tactic like this?Because you're obviously quick to defend a criminal action that makes a mockery of the election process you supposedly support. Or perhaps you don't -- I don't really care at this point.

I'm surprised at what people will defend, though. As long as you make fun of those uneducated people, ur-hur.

What occurred, and will remain, a crime. It doesn't matter what "tactic" I employ, that will always remain true. Maybe some of you will come to realize that someday.

[Tumblehome]

INRM, it's been established that Obama was born in this country, but on the other hand, it's also firmly established that McCain wasn't.


Don't forget that McCain, for five whole years, lived in a communist country while it was fighting a war with the U.S.!! It's scary because...

It's true. :)

[Whiplash]

Wow, I am suprised to see there is so much hysteria about a possible election "theft". Even the polls most friendly to McCain show him down. It's pretty obvious that Obama is going to win, either in a squeaker (at worst) or a fairly large win (at best). Yet I'm seeing people here (and other forums) just ranting about this as if they are in the know about something nefarious going on.

Is it just paranoia? Or is this an attempt to stir people up in the fairly unlikely event that McCain actually did win? I haven't been able to shake the feeling this entire month that the left is going out of it's way to portray this as a landslide, and keep bringing up these ideas of voter fraud from the right (hysterical irony there) in an attempt to put the idea into peoples minds that this election is over and certain, and all for the purpose of giving people a reason to go ballistic and even riot if he should lose. After all, he had it all sewn up.. in the bank.. he could only have lost (therefore) if there was FRAUD!

If that sounds silly or crazy, I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing any evidence (or even remotely specific info) about how this theft is going to take place. I'm seeing people who are being paranoid. It's hard to not question why people would give such credibility to rumors and theories that are not even remotely based in reality.

[gtc]

I think it is just hysteria. I don't think they are laying the ground work to suggest that a hypothetical McCain victory was tainted by fraud.

[Horatius]

Im not equivocating, you can speak for youself but take a look at for example defaultdotxbe's reply. No corruption, nothing to worry about, its all just a CT to suggest we should be highly concerned with the election system.

Ed

That would be defaultdotxbe's replies here?



could be hacked != were hacked != were hacked by george w bush

thats because your suggestion of corruption comes with as much evidence as aliens, illuminati, nwo, 911 truth, etc, just because something is more plausible than extra terrestrials abducting people doesnt make it any more true, or worthy of less skepticism if its presented without any evidence


Where does he "bury their head the ground"? He's pointing out that you have no evidence for corruption in this area, which even you admit to. If you had some evidence, defaultdotxbe would be listening. That's pretty much the exact opposite of burying your head the ground.

Showing that corruption is possible simply isn't enough, because corruption is always possible. There is no system that could be used for voting that could not be corrupted by someone, somewhere.

That's why we ask for evidence that such corruption has actually happened before we get all atwitter about it.

[Lonewulf]

I think it is just hysteria.Mostly a burst of anger that I somewhat regret, after a lot of pent-up frustration of people defending almost anything that can be hurled at "those liberals lul". I still do believe that it makes a mockery of the voting system, especially when people start forging documents using the official logos of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Not to mention I was getting a bit angry in other threads for unrelated reasons, and it somewhat spilled into here.

I do have anger problems, and I admit it. The longer it seems I'm pent up inside (I was sick for a week thanks to bronchitis mixed with bacterial infection of the throat), the more likely I am to snap at people. I apologize.

I don't think they are laying the ground work to suggest that a hypothetical McCain victory was tainted by fraud. Actually, "we" are.

We of the Secret Liberal Conspiracy actually conspired to organize this as a good excuse. See, it's beautiful, isn't it? We win if we win, and if we lose, well, we can point fingers and claim that spreading forged fliers is actually wrong. Because no one would believe so otherwise; forgery is so common, who cares about it? :D

We're not part of the Illuminati Conspiracy, though, I hear they're rather right-wing.

The Secret Liberal Conspiracy DOES have ties to Ayers and commies, though.

[Edx]

That would be defaultdotxbe's replies here?

Where does he "bury their head the ground"? He's pointing out that you have no evidence for corruption in this area, which even you admit to. If you had some evidence, defaultdotxbe would be listening. That's pretty much the exact opposite of burying your head the ground.

Where did I do that? And I have talked with Defaultdotxbe before and that is someone that wont listen no matter what because they have already made up their minds. I dont expect him to change on another topic.

You mentioned Ted Stevens and I referenced the computer programmer Clinton Curtis who implicated Tom Feeney. I also refereced the Hacking Democracy film, can you tell me why that apparently doesnt count? And you still have not responded to the logic that we should be highly concerned. I told you it seems like a lot of you guys seem to believe no one will do anything like this, you told me that isnt true but this the exact same line of reasoning you are going with here. Dont you understand that someone can alter the election and remain undetected? Even if we can implicate a few people, what about all the other potentials we dont even know about? If its so damn easy to do it isnt this something you should be concerned about? It could be a collective group in Washington, it could be a corrupt senator, or it could be some guy playing a prank in his mums basement.

Showing that corruption is possible simply isn't enough, because corruption is always possible. There is no system that could be used for voting that could not be corrupted by someone, somewhere.

Once again, that is not what is being claimed.

But btw, we could both go out and leave our keys in our cars. My car has a state of the art security system with bullet proof windows. Yours has the top down. Your argument seems to be that you should not be concerned about the car in the latter example because they could still technically break into the first car as well.

[defaultdotxbe]

But btw, we could both go out and leave our keys in our cars. My car has a state of the art security system with bullet proof windows. Yours has the top down. Your argument seems to be that you should not be concerned about the car in the latter example because they could still technically break into the first car as well.
seems more liek your claiming someone stole your car and went for a joyride, then filled the gas tank back up, rolled the odometer back, and parked it in the exact same spot as before (thus leaving no evidence) but it MUST have hapened because the top was down and keys were in it, therefore resources must be devoted to investigating it

[technoextreme]

Actually, I came up with a really rational explanation for the vote flipping charges in the 2008 forum. It involves the touch screen. If you touch it and drag your figure down to another area it will register the vote for where you lift your finger up from not where you place it.

[gtc]

Mostly a burst of anger that I somewhat regret, after a lot of pent-up frustration of people defending almost anything that can be hurled at "those liberals lul". I still do believe that it makes a mockery of the voting system, especially when people start forging documents using the official logos of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Not to mention I was getting a bit angry in other threads for unrelated reasons, and it somewhat spilled into here.

I do have anger problems, and I admit it. The longer it seems I'm pent up inside (I was sick for a week thanks to bronchitis mixed with bacterial infection of the throat), the more likely I am to snap at people. I apologize.

Honestly, I appreciate your ability to apologise but you have no need to apologise to me. I understand anger and there are some people who rile me up too but I wasn't including you in the people I was calling hysterical. I was thinking of the people who assume that every single issue with voting machines or ballot irregularities is part of a grand conspiracy to steal the election. You never suggested that the letter was anything other than the responsibility of one or two individuals.


Actually, "we" are.

We of the Secret Liberal Conspiracy actually conspired to organize this as a good excuse. See, it's beautiful, isn't it? We win if we win, and if we lose, well, we can point fingers and claim that spreading forged fliers is actually wrong. Because no one would believe so otherwise; forgery is so common, who cares about it? :D

We're not part of the Illuminati Conspiracy, though, I hear they're rather right-wing.

The Secret Liberal Conspiracy DOES have ties to Ayers and commies, though.

Funny. Sadly, there will be people who think that Obama stole the election and they will sound exactly like the people who thought that Bush stole his elections. Maybe they take it in turns.

[Lonewulf]

Honestly, I appreciate your ability to apologise but you have no need to apologise to me. I understand anger and there are some people who rile me up too but I wasn't including you in the people I was calling hysterical. I was thinking of the people who assume that every single issue with voting machines or ballot irregularities is part of a grand conspiracy to steal the election. You never suggested that the letter was anything other than the responsibility of one or two individuals.Okay, just wanted to clear things up. :)

Funny. Sadly, there will be people who think that Obama stole the election and they will sound exactly like the people who thought that Bush stole his elections. Maybe they take it in turns. Heh, probably.

I will say one thing, though. The suspense is killing me; this has certainly been one of the more interesting elections. :)

[Edx]

seems more liek your claiming someone stole your car and went for a joyride, then filled the gas tank back up, rolled the odometer back, and parked it in the exact same spot as before (thus leaving no evidence) but it MUST have hapened because the top was down and keys were in it, therefore resources must be devoted to investigating it

My analogy was all fine and good, you don't have to twist it into meaningless nonsense.

[Nutcase]

Each party has their own special way of manipulating people. For the DNC, its:

1) Using class warfare propaganda to spread populism
2) Strategic use of media to create a storyline to blame the GOP for absolutely everything.

The RNC is different, they specialize in:

1) Over dramatizing DNC positions to give them the illusions of being communists or socialists
2) Making the DNC appear "Un-American"

But the DNC wins the trophy for overall use of propaganda. The minds that run the Democrats in the US are absolute geniuses -they already have people believing that Obama will win the election by a landslide and that if he doesn't win it'll be because McCain stole it. And the vast majority of the population has lapped it up like dogs.

Maybe because all of the polling data points to a landslide victory? i'm no CTist, but it would seem weird if McCain pulled it out when virtually every poll has him losing the election by a wide margin....just sayin'

[LightinDarkness]

Maybe because all of the polling data points to a landslide victory? i'm no CTist, but it would seem weird if McCain pulled it out when virtually every poll has him losing the election by a wide margin....just sayin'

See, this is what you get when you listen to the media. All of the polling data does not point to a landslide victory - that is the media narrative that they want you to believe so they can suppress McCain voter turnout.

A majority of the polls, when you take into account the margin of error, show either a dead heat or Obama winning by 1-3 points. Of course the media is ignoring the margin of error because the polls are going in the direction they want them to go in. Also, for most of the polls the methodology is beyond questionable - some are not even bothering to get a statistically significant sample size, and others are over sampling demographic groups that always CLAIM they will vote liberal but never actually go out to vote (like college students).

Obama is likely to win, but not by a landslide. If McCain does win it certainly wouldn't be weird, but the media is trying to create a narrative that an Obama win is inevitable in order to destroy a McCain presidency by claiming it was fraudulent.

[applecorped]

No attempts at winning the election through deception.

Nosirree (http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/phony-flier-says-virginians-vote-different-days).

:rolleyes::jaw-dropp:cool: sigh....

[Nutcase]

See, this is what you get when you listen to the media. All of the polling data does not point to a landslide victory - that is the media narrative that they want you to believe so they can suppress McCain voter turnout.

A majority of the polls, when you take into account the margin of error, show either a dead heat or Obama winning by 1-3 points. Of course the media is ignoring the margin of error because the polls are going in the direction they want them to go in. Also, for most of the polls the methodology is beyond questionable - some are not even bothering to get a statistically significant sample size, and others are over sampling demographic groups that always CLAIM they will vote liberal but never actually go out to vote (like college students).

Obama is likely to win, but not by a landslide. If McCain does win it certainly wouldn't be weird, but the media is trying to create a narrative that an Obama win is inevitable in order to destroy a McCain presidency by claiming it was fraudulent.

I'm not sure what the definition of a landslide is, but when you look at all the reputable polls, Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup, etc..., they all point to an easy Obama victory. The media can only report on these polls, they can not distort the data.

Poll Date Sample MoE Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread
RCP Average 10/29 - 11/03 -- -- 51.9 44.4 Obama +7.5
Marist 11/03 - 11/03 804 LV 4.0 52 43 Obama +9
Battleground (Lake)* 11/02 - 11/03 800 LV 3.5 52 47 Obama +5
Battleground (Tarrance)* 11/02 - 11/03 800 LV 3.5 50 48 Obama +2
Rasmussen Reports 11/01 - 11/03 3000 LV 2.0 52 46 Obama +6
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby 11/01 - 11/03 1201 LV 2.9 54 43 Obama +11
IBD/TIPP 11/01 - 11/03 981 LV 3.2 52 44 Obama +8
FOX News 11/01 - 11/02 971 LV 3.0 50 43 Obama +7
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 11/01 - 11/02 1011 LV 3.1 51 43 Obama +8
Gallup 10/31 - 11/02 2472 LV 2.0 55 44 Obama +11
Diageo/Hotline 10/31 - 11/02 887 LV 3.3 50 45 Obama +5
CBS News 10/31 - 11/02 714 LV -- 51 42 Obama +9
ABC News/Wash Post 10/30 - 11/02 2470 LV 2.5 53 44 Obama +9
Ipsos/McClatchy 10/30 - 11/02 760 LV 3.6 53 46 Obama +7
CNN/Opinion Research 10/30 - 11/01 714 LV 3.5 53 46 Obama +7
GWU/Battleground 10/29 - 11/02 800 LV 3.5 50 44 Obama +6
Pew Research 10/29 - 11/01 2587 LV 2.0 52 46 Obama +6


EDIT: Also even if you went with a margin of error of say 5 percentage points on the McCain side, McCain would still be losing, or tied, in every poll above except one. Of course we all know that the margin of error does not pick sides, however.

[dudalb]

See, this is what you get when you listen to the media. All of the polling data does not point to a landslide victory - that is the media narrative that they want you to believe so they can suppress McCain voter turnout.

A majority of the polls, when you take into account the margin of error, show either a dead heat or Obama winning by 1-3 points. Of course the media is ignoring the margin of error because the polls are going in the direction they want them to go in. Also, for most of the polls the methodology is beyond questionable - some are not even bothering to get a statistically significant sample size, and others are over sampling demographic groups that always CLAIM they will vote liberal but never actually go out to vote (like college students).

Obama is likely to win, but not by a landslide. If McCain does win it certainly wouldn't be weird, but the media is trying to create a narrative that an Obama win is inevitable in order to destroy a McCain presidency by claiming it was fraudulent.


Sad to see you straying into CT territory.

[gtc]

Zogby,

Off topic but appropriate for this forum:

That always sounds like it should be the official Zionist Occupying Government poll to me.

[LightinDarkness]

I'm not sure what the definition of a landslide is, but when you look at all the reputable polls, Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup, etc..., they all point to an easy Obama victory. The media can only report on these polls, they can not distort the data.

Oh my goodess, please tell me you are kidding me.

MARGIN
OF
ERROR

Read about it. Study it. Learn about it. Then learn what the margin of error in those polls are (its larger than 5 percent in nearly all cases), then consider the overt errors in methodology, then learn about the electoral college.

Then, maybe, you will understand why this is by no means a landslide and a McCain win is completely possible, although not likely. The media wants you to believe a Obama win must be inevitable.

This is why I advocate people should have to take tests before they can vote.

[LightinDarkness]

Sad to see you straying into CT territory.

I have worked as a political strategist in a paid capacity for both the Democrat and Republican National Committees.

Manipulating the media is not CT, its fact - both parties do it.
Media bias is not CT, its fact.

There is peer reviewed, scholarly evidence to support it. Don't confuse it with CT. Political propaganda is real, and it has been since the rise of the New York political machine. Its been documented, analyzed, and reviewed.

[Nutcase]

Oh my goodess, please tell me you are kidding me.

MARGIN
OF
ERROR

Read about it. Study it. Learn about it. Then learn what the margin of error in those polls are (its larger than 5 percent in nearly all cases), then consider the overt errors in methodology, then learn about the electoral college.

Then, maybe, you will understand why this is by no means a landslide and a McCain win is completely possible, although not likely. The media wants you to believe a Obama win must be inevitable.

This is why I advocate people should have to take tests before they can vote.

You're not very nice are you? Do you know me, do you know my educational background? I majored in U.S history in college, so yeah I know what the electoral college is you elitist scum. Vey interesting views on the voting process. Everyone should take a test huh? Aristocracy much?

[LightinDarkness]

You're not very nice are you? Do you know me, do you know my educational background? I majored in U.S history in college, so yeah I know what the electoral college is you elitist scum. Vey interesting views on the voting process. Everyone should take a test huh? Aristocracy much?

You're not very into admitting when you are wrong, are you?

Oh my goodness, a history major! Perhaps you should study those books again, since if you knew how the electoral college worked you would understand why a McCain win - while not probable - would also not be unusual.

Please learn to how use the term "aristocracy." Making sure voters understand how the election system works and how government works at the most basic of levels is actually quite populist of me.

[defaultdotxbe]

Oh my goodness, a history major! Perhaps you should study those books again, since if you knew how the electoral college worked you would understand why a McCain win - while not probable - would also not be unusual.
last i checked most swing states were leaning obama and showed a probable landslide in the electoral vote

[LightinDarkness]

last i checked most swing states were leaning obama and showed a probable landslide in the electoral vote

Simply not true. Most swing states were/are toss ups.

Obama will likely win, but the landslide is a media myth.

[Whiplash]

I must say, the Republican's did an awesome job of stealing this election!

So, what's the point of view of die hard lefties going to be now? That the fix really was just in, but the real votes were just too much to overcome? Or will sanity prevail and they will finally understand that they were hysterical about something that was non-existent?

[LightinDarkness]

I must say, the Republican's did an awesome job of stealing this election!

So, what's the point of view of die hard lefties going to be now? That the fix really was just in, but the real votes were just too much to overcome? Or will sanity prevail and they will finally understand that they were hysterical about something that was non-existent?

Interesting how that works, isn't it? Somehow the Republicans were capable of stealing 2 elections but not this one.

Anyways, as expected, Barack won, and now we are going to have a DNC house/senate too.

I can't wait to see who is blamed when screw ups happen now. Who do you blame when the party doing the screwup is in complete control?

[Horatius]

Who do you blame when the party doing the screwup is in complete control?



You blame it on problems inherited from the previous administration, of course. For someone throwing about a lot of insults about others not knowing anything about how government works, you really seem to have missed a trick here.

[1337m4n]

FRAUD! This election was stolen!

...oh...

[Spud1k]

Most conspiracy theorists are saying the usual stuff, i.e. it doesn't matter who is elected, both parties are NWO puppets, etc. If that's the case, why bother rigging voting machines?

[JihadJane]

I must say, the Republican's did an awesome job of stealing this election!

So, what's the point of view of die hard lefties going to be now? That the fix really was just in, but the real votes were just too much to overcome? Or will sanity prevail and they will finally understand that they were hysterical about something that was non-existent?

Feeling the collar of Republican IT Guru, Mike Connell, might have helped.

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/#102908

[PingOfPong]

I haven't read this thread but I have something to say anyway. Now that Mccain is the president elect, all of you nay-sayers can go eat your hat. We truthers knew that Obama could never win. As if the racist and fascist Illuminati of America would ever allow such a thing. The Repugnicans stole the election in 2000, 2004, and now 2008...

Uhm, I just turned on the TV and Mccain is conceeding the election in a speech from last night.

Aha! I knew Obama wasn't on our side. He's really a gray alien that is in league with Jewish bankers. Go on sheeple of America. Enjoy your new master. I'll be in my bunker parents' basement.

[Nutcase]

Scoreboard. Maybe not a landslide, but a definate mandate. So I guess the left wing media doctored up the polls, and we all fell for it and blindly did what the media told us to do. After all we're all too dumb to think for ourselves. Thank you media;)

[dudalb]

And Obama won a couple of states by very narrow 1 to 3% margins. So much for the "Obama needs to win by 6 or 7% or the GOP will steal it" theories.

[defaultdotxbe]

And Obama won a couple of states by very narrow 1 to 3% margins. So much for the "Obama needs to win by 6 or 7% or the GOP will steal it" theories.
he did win by 6 or 7%, the GOP just stole 5% ;)

[LightinDarkness]

Not a landslide or a mandate - let the Empire of Barack begin.

[Jontg]

he did win by 6 or 7%, the GOP just stole 5% ;)

Pretty much. And it's not just the actual voting process that they try to screw with, either; they pull out every nasty trick they have during the weeks before Election day. Does nobody else remember the crap that went on during the past two elections? The fliers distributed in black neighborhoods with the wrong dates printed on them? The combing of the lists of convicted felons in search of Democrats to turn away? Stop fixating on the machines, people--this is all tried and true Republican crap.
Oh, and I love the smug, pseudo-cynical backslapping--way to be smarter than everyone else. Those damn Democrats think they can fool us with their "disagreeing with the Republicans" and their "progressive politics" and their "not lowering themselves to populism and smear tactics," but gee, you're just too gosh-darned wordly. Remember, the more something matters, the dumber you are for caring about it!

[1337m4n]

Pretty much. And it's not just the actual voting process that they try to screw with, either; they pull out every nasty trick they have during the weeks before Election day. Does nobody else remember the crap that went on during the past two elections? The fliers distributed in black neighborhoods with the wrong dates printed on them? The combing of the lists of convicted felons in search of Democrats to turn away? Stop fixating on the machines, people--this is all tried and true Republican crap.


I remember unsubstantiated claims being made based on a lack of hard evidence and conclusions being jumped to based on personal incredulity and stuff that "looks suspicious".

I am applying the same standards of proof to this as I do to the 9/11 conspiracy theories. To believe a group stole an election, or attempted to steal an election, I need hard evidence. Not "Gee-what-a-coincidence-how-suspicious" incredulity.

[PingOfPong]

Remember, the more something matters, the dumber you are for caring about it!


Then color me stupid!



Are you calling the non-CT'ers smug? How can you say that when you're posting snappy tag lines. I imagine you wanted to snap your fingers in someone's face while you typed it. If that's even possible.

[Neckbone]

Even if it was "proven" that he was not born on US soil, how would that disqualify him if he was born to a US citizen? Or are we now doubting that his mother is really his mother? Maybe he just made up the "white" lady to give him an edge since some would have a hard time voting for a 100% black man.

:rolleyes:

If it was conclusively established (I assume that is what you meant by "proven") that Obama was not born on US soil, he would clearly be ineligible to be President because of Art. II Sect. 1 of the US Constitution:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President

I think in Obama's case it's been conclusively established (at least from what I've seen on the net, both pro and con) that he was born in Hawaii and is thus eligible. McCain was born on the US Naval Base in the Panama Canal Zone which at the time was US territory, so McCain was equally eligible.

No one seriously questioned whether McCain was eligible due to where he was born. However, the initial questions about Obama's eligibility were, IMO, legitimate. The Obama questions became illegitimate and "black helicopter" stupid a few months back when the evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii was established. But like the 9/11 truthers, the Obama-is-ineligible crowd won't trade faith for facts.

Neckbone

[defaultdotxbe]

If it was conclusively established (I assume that is what you meant by "proven") that Obama was not born on US soil, he would clearly be ineligible to be President because of Art. II Sect. 1 of the US Constitution:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
the problem is the wording, "natural born citizen" isnt defined

children of US citizens, born anywhere in the world, are automatically US citizens at and by birth, and some laws define "natural born citizen" to include those people, which is why in the "obama was born on kenya" thread i pointed out the only consitutional crisis that would arise should it be proven he was born in kenya would be the supreme court defining "natural born citizen" in such a way that children of citizens born overseas are includided

[Neckbone]

the problem is the wording, "natural born citizen" isnt defined

children of US citizens, born anywhere in the world, are automatically US citizens at and by birth, and some laws define "natural born citizen" to include those people, which is why in the "obama was born on kenya" thread i pointed out the only consitutional crisis that would arise should it be proven he was born in kenya would be the supreme court defining "natural born citizen" in such a way that children of citizens born overseas are includided

I believe that you are correct where both parents are citizens of the U.S., but was Obama's father a U.S. citizen? And does the provision mean both parents or only one need be a US citizen? It clearly disqualifies some from office else it is meaningless. IMO, it would bar Arnold Schwarzeneger and the late Congressman Tom Lantos, but beyond that, I really don't know what it means. It's one of those untested constitutional provisions like the quartering troops amendment.

I stand corrected on my original post. There may have been just as much question about McCain's eligibility as obama's, except that BOTH of McCain's parents were U.S. citizens. It's an interesting legal question that I trust will never be heard.

Neckbone

[tomwaits]

Pretty much. And it's not just the actual voting process that they try to screw with, either; they pull out every nasty trick they have during the weeks before Election day. Does nobody else remember the crap that went on during the past two elections? The fliers distributed in black neighborhoods with the wrong dates printed on them? The combing of the lists of convicted felons in search of Democrats to turn away? Stop fixating on the machines, people--this is all tried and true Republican crap.
Oh, and I love the smug, pseudo-cynical backslapping--way to be smarter than everyone else. Those damn Democrats think they can fool us with their "disagreeing with the Republicans" and their "progressive politics" and their "not lowering themselves to populism and smear tactics," but gee, you're just too gosh-darned wordly. Remember, the more something matters, the dumber you are for caring about it!


I believe he was being sarcastic.

[defaultdotxbe]

I believe that you are correct where both parents are citizens of the U.S., but was Obama's father a U.S. citizen? And does the provision mean both parents or only one need be a US citizen? It clearly disqualifies some from office else it is meaningless. IMO, it would bar Arnold Schwarzeneger and the late Congressman Tom Lantos, but beyond that, I really don't know what it means. It's one of those untested constitutional provisions like the quartering troops amendment.

I stand corrected on my original post. There may have been just as much question about McCain's eligibility as obama's, except that BOTH of McCain's parents were U.S. citizens. It's an interesting legal question that I trust will never be heard.

Neckbone
i dont know about obamas father, but citizenship is also granted to children with 1 US citizen parent, provided other conditions are met (related to how long they have lived in the US)

i think someone looked up the text of that law from the year obama was born (its changed several times) and found that his mother would have had to have lived in the US for 5 years after age 14 for barack to be eligible for citizenship, but she was 18 when he was born, so she hadnt lived 5 years anywhere

personally i think this would result in another court ruling, to determine the intention of the law


as for what the constitutional law about natural born citizens means, its really just a revolutionary throwback, to prevent a european from becoming elected president and handing the country back over to britain or some other european power

if you look at the line of succession for the presidency, there are 2 people whose positions put them in slots 10 and 11, but both are disqualified for the presidency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_line_of_succession

I believe he was being sarcastic.
yes, yes i was

[Spud1k]

as for what the constitutional law about natural born citizens means, its really just a revolutionary throwback, to prevent a european from becoming elected president and handing the country back over to britain or some other european power

You never know... that could still happen... ;)