Trump now has to win 99% of the swing states, and can't drop any of the lean Trump states. Feel bad for anyone who put a bet on Trump. Never thought I'd see the day SC wasn't solid red.
Is this still fallout from the whole "locker room chatter" or was there another fumble?
Trump now has to win 99% of the swing states, and can't drop any of the lean Trump states. Feel bad for anyone who put a bet on Trump. Never thought I'd see the day SC wasn't solid red.
Is this still fallout from the whole "locker room chatter" or was there another fumble?
Trump was already declining. Remember, just a week before, Donald Trump had been panned for a terrible debate performance, had part of his 1995 taxes leaked, and went on a tirade against a Miss Universe for DAYS culminating in a 3AM tweetstorm smearing a woman that had only been mentioned once almost five days earlier. You can go back to where I assessed that week would have ended his pursuit of undecided voters.
Well, I can say now I was wrong... somehow internet sensation Ken Bone for no reason beyond being adorkable on camera is an actual undecided voter.
Okay, being serious now, I can say I was wrong because that tape not only shot his outreach a second time, the schism it put into the female demographic is probably the point of no return now. Donald Trump is bleeding so much support that Independent Evan McMullin is competitive in Utah, and the Solid South is now competitive for Democrats.
Ultimately, this "locker room chatter" is what finally put a competitive end to the race (I am amazed it was this and not one of the abundant other examples). In hindsight, Trump's support was only ever solid enough to win primaries.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Increased vigilance and suspicion
Increased sensitivity to threat
Increased psychological and physiological symptoms (including risks for depression and anxiety disorders, and disruption to child development and quality of emotional attachment in family and social relationship)
Increased alcohol and drug usage
Increased aggression
Narrowing sense of time
I'm not understanding why people are upset about the mere suggestion that our election process is actually free from corruption. We have evidence that clearly shows the Democrats aren't afraid to manipulate the electoral process, and one can only imagine the Republicans do similar things. We've seen countless times that the media has corruption issues and has both political and financial biases towards corporate candidates. Why, then, is it such a ridiculous suggestion that maybe the groups that stand to gain the most from election fraud in favor of certain candidates might actually be committing election fraud? Are we seriously too afraid to even question it, let alone discuss the issue? The way that the media is so casually dismissing the idea as crazy is somewhat disturbing to me.
What evidence do you think we have that "clearly shows the Democrats aren't afraid to manipulate the electoral process"?
Can you name some of these "countless times" that we've seen the media has "corruption issues"?
As far as manipulation of the electoral process goes, what about Voter ID Laws [link], which are pretty much always used to stop poor people from voting in areas where they traditionally vote Democrat?
Or how Donald Trump is calling for his supporters to show up at voting stations and intimidate people who won't vote for him? [link]
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
I'm not understanding why people are upset about the mere suggestion that our election process is actually free from corruption. We have evidence that clearly shows the Democrats aren't afraid to manipulate the electoral process, and one can only imagine the Republicans do similar things. We've seen countless times that the media has corruption issues and has both political and financial biases towards corporate candidates. Why, then, is it such a ridiculous suggestion that maybe the groups that stand to gain the most from election fraud in favor of certain candidates might actually be committing election fraud? Are we seriously too afraid to even question it, let alone discuss the issue? The way that the media is so casually dismissing the idea as crazy is somewhat disturbing to me.
What evidence do you think we have that "clearly shows the Democrats aren't afraid to manipulate the electoral process"?
Can you name some of these "countless times" that we've seen the media has "corruption issues"?
I'm going to assume that they are referring to the O'Keefe video, though I certainly hope not since it's a steaming pile of hot garbage.
Honestly, if there is an issue, I'd suspect it has more to do with election fraud rather than voter fraud. For instance, there's some interesting video testimony from a computer programmer who stated flat out that he had specifically created a program designed to electronically "flip the vote" in favor of whichever candidate the user wanted to win. Unfortunately, he died in a plane crash a few years afterwards, which could very possibly have been a retaliatory act for his testimony. As I recall, in specific instance it was alleged that the GOP was the beneficiary of the fraud, but honestly the fact that such programs exist should scare you, because again, if one party isn't above doing it, why would you think the other one is?
Is this a mashup of the Michael Connell and Clint Curtis conspiracy theories?
As far as manipulation of the electoral process goes, what about Voter ID Laws [link], which are pretty much always used to stop poor people from voting in areas where they traditionally vote Democrat?
Or how Donald Trump is calling for his supporters to show up at voting stations and intimidate people who won't vote for him? [link]
I bet all those poor people have some sort of ID. Thats a b.s argument.
Edit: Oh and no one ever said bush stole the election in 00&04...
Generally, lots of them don't. Or at least, they don't have the ID the Voter ID law wants them to have. That's the point of the laws.
It's also why they get struck down as discriminatory by the Federal Court. Eventually. [Observe.]
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
I bet all those poor people have some sort of ID. Thats a b.s argument.
Really, you think every single poor person has a valid ID?
So you`re poor. I bet you are getting government assistance. Gonna need an ID for that. You wanna go see a Dr.? Gonna need an ID for that. Drive a car? Wait for it... ID required. If you can not afford some sort of ID the state should pay for it.
Not everyone is getting assistance, not everyone needs to go to the doctor, and I know tons of people who just decided "Don't get caught" is better than getting a license. That isn't even accounting for the fact that poor people can't take the time off of work to go the the DMV and there have been instances of states actually cutting back on DMV hours after passing laws to require photo ID.
So you`re poor. I bet you are getting government assistance. Gonna need an ID for that. You wanna go see a Dr.? Gonna need an ID for that. Drive a car? Wait for it... ID required. If you can not afford some sort of ID the state should pay for it.
You need an ID to apply for welfare, you do not need an ID to receive it. Many poor people have expired or otherwise no longer valid IDs.
I know this might come as a shock, but poor people can't afford to own a car, or see a regular doctor (they go to the ER if they have something serious, where they will be treated regardless of their ID situation). That's how being poor works. If these are your examples, I have to think you haven't really thought this through all the way.
I'm not understanding why people are upset about the mere suggestion that our election process is actually free from corruption.
"The mere suggestion"? I hope you're lifting those goalposts with your knees and not your back, they are heavy.
The Trump campaign is not merely suggesting that there's corruption going on. Trump is saying outright that he's losing because the media and the Democrats are rigging the election. And that's bull***** and anyone who knows facts knows this.
Honestly, if there is an issue, I'd suspect it has more to do with election fraud rather than voter fraud. For instance, there's some interesting video testimony from a computer programmer who stated flat out that he had specifically created a program designed to electronically "flip the vote" in favor of whichever candidate the user wanted to win.
While the double standards surrounding violence and the sabotage of the democratic system are certainly more important, let's not forget the way the left-wing power structure uses the media to harp on the mistakes of 3rd party candidates as well, while ignoring items like Hillary's Mosul Moment. You're probably not going to see the Times making a big deal out of that.
As for the Russians, curious that they are suddenly viewed as a terrifying menace! Ooh.. the Russians, how scary! We could have used your support ~40 years ago when you were employed as useful idiots for the Soviet regime.
Not everyone is getting assistance, not everyone needs to go to the doctor, and I know tons of people who just decided "Don't get caught" is better than getting a license. That isn't even accounting for the fact that poor people can't take the time off of work to go the the DMV and there have been instances of states actually cutting back on DMV hours after passing laws to require photo ID.
Well if they are employed they better have an ID to get the job plus those are all excuses. You are basically saying if you are poor you are to dumb, lazy,law breakers or dont have enough time to obtain an ID.
So you`re poor. I bet you are getting government assistance. Gonna need an ID for that. You wanna go see a Dr.? Gonna need an ID for that. Drive a car? Wait for it... ID required. If you can not afford some sort of ID the state should pay for it.
You need an ID to apply for welfare, you do not need an ID to receive it. Many poor people have expired or otherwise no longer valid IDs.
I know this might come as a shock, but poor people can't afford to own a car, or see a regular doctor (they go to the ER if they have something serious, where they will be treated regardless of their ID situation). That's how being poor works. If these are your examples, I have to think you haven't really thought this through all the way.
Wait what?!! poor people cannot afford a car?! No crap dude. Everything you listed is a worst case example. Those are a few examples I put out there. All those poor people are poor to eat, drink, smoke, buy drugs, or live in some sort of house? Sure in some cases that is true but to act like just because you are low to no income there is no way you can obtain an ID.
Wait what?!! poor people cannot afford a car?! No crap dude. Everything you listed is a worst case example. Those are a few examples I put out there.
If it's such a bad example, maybe you shouldn't have put it in your list?
All those poor people are poor to eat, drink, smoke, buy drugs, or live in some sort of house?
Are these supposed to be more things that require an ID? What is this list even?
Sure in some cases that is true but to act like just because you are low to no income there is no way you can obtain an ID.
If it's true in some cases, then requiring them to vote unconstitutional. Everyone has a right to vote - even the people who are the "worst case example".
While the double standards surrounding violence and the sabotage of the democratic system are certainly more important, let's not forget the way the left-wing power structure uses the media to harp on the mistakes of 3rd party candidates as well, while ignoring items like Hillary's Mosul Moment. You're probably not going to see the Times making a big deal out of that.
Ah yes, poor oppressed Gary Johnson. How dare anyone ever say anything negative about his fragile candidacy. No one ever says anything negative about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, so it's just so abjectly unfair that they would think to criticize Gary.
Being wrong about the position of Mosul is a bit different than looking like a deer in the headlights when asked about Aleppo, don't you think? Or being unable to name even a single world leader, and needing your VP to bail you out? Maybe if Hillary's response to the question had been "and what is Mosul?", he'd have a point. As it is, this sort of whining comes off as more than a little pathetic on Johnson's part.
Wait what?!! poor people cannot afford a car?! No crap dude. Everything you listed is a worst case example. Those are a few examples I put out there.
If it's such a bad example, maybe you shouldn't have put it in your list?
All those poor people are poor to eat, drink, smoke, buy drugs, or live in some sort of house?
Are these supposed to be more things that require an ID? What is this list even?
Sure in some cases that is true but to act like just because you are low to no income there is no way you can obtain an ID.
If it's true in some cases, then requiring them to vote unconstitutional. Everyone has a right to vote - even the people who are the "worst case example".
As for the list i put there (eat,drink, and etc) does not require an ID but it requires cash just like it would to buy an ID.
Then +1 free renewal each time it expires. You're missing the point - we make the ID free and only then require it for voting.
And what will be the requirements to be issued this ID? Are you just going to hand it out to everyone who comes walking through the door, with no other verification of their identity?
Well if they are employed they better have an ID to get the job plus those are all excuses. You are basically saying if you are poor you are to dumb, lazy,law breakers or dont have enough time to obtain an ID.
Many poor people aren't employed. That's why they're poor. And many other poor people have sources of income that don't require an ID (eg, off-the-books employment).
As for the list i put there (eat,drink, and etc) does not require an ID but it requires cash just like it would to buy an ID.
Sustenance is required for survival, photo ID is not. Therefore, food takes priority in a budget over getting an ID. When you're poor, you can't necessarily have both.
The biggest problem with Voter ID laws is that they're discriminatory against the poorest citizens.
The second biggest problem with Voter ID laws is that they're a solution to a problem that does not exist.
Voter ID laws can only prevent voter impersonation. With the data available to us, you can count the number of voter impersonation cases in the history of this country on your fingers. Voter impersonation is the stupidest form of fraud, since it's not going to make a difference in any election at higher level than class president and there's a lot of manual effort required to achieve it.
Then +1 free renewal each time it expires. You're missing the point - we make the ID free and only then require it for voting.
And what will be the requirements to be issued this ID? Are you just going to hand it out to everyone who comes walking through the door, with no other verification of their identity?
As for the list i put there (eat,drink, and etc) does not require an ID but it requires cash just like it would to buy an ID.
So your point is that if you've got enough money to not starve, you also have enough extra money floating around to spend on an ID?
You really don't grasp how poverty works, do you?
Oh no i have somewhat of a grasp. Been low income at one point of my life. Guess what? I had an ID. I think you really dont grasp my point. If you are to poor to buy food you will attempt to get assistance from the government and that will require an ID. Unless you are some recluse that lives of the land in the middle of nowhere you are going to need some sort of ID 1 to 100 times in your life.
I'm not worried about the Russians corrupting our election system. I'm worried about the people working internally within that system being the ones corrupting it. IE, the people who write the software, oversee the security of the machines, and such.
Trump now has to win 99% of the swing states, and can't drop any of the lean Trump states. Feel bad for anyone who put a bet on Trump. Never thought I'd see the day SC wasn't solid red.
Is this still fallout from the whole "locker room chatter" or was there another fumble?
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Trump was already declining. Remember, just a week before, Donald Trump had been panned for a terrible debate performance, had part of his 1995 taxes leaked, and went on a tirade against a Miss Universe for DAYS culminating in a 3AM tweetstorm smearing a woman that had only been mentioned once almost five days earlier. You can go back to where I assessed that week would have ended his pursuit of undecided voters.
Well, I can say now I was wrong... somehow internet sensation Ken Bone for no reason beyond being adorkable on camera is an actual undecided voter.
Okay, being serious now, I can say I was wrong because that tape not only shot his outreach a second time, the schism it put into the female demographic is probably the point of no return now. Donald Trump is bleeding so much support that Independent Evan McMullin is competitive in Utah, and the Solid South is now competitive for Democrats.
Ultimately, this "locker room chatter" is what finally put a competitive end to the race (I am amazed it was this and not one of the abundant other examples). In hindsight, Trump's support was only ever solid enough to win primaries.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Also, Trump's focus on racial rhetoric is driving an up-tick in racist bullying in US schools and children's clubs. So even when/if he loses, we've got a new generation of racist ***** to work through, and a generation of kids dealing with these stress symptoms.
Art is life itself.
What evidence do you think we have that "clearly shows the Democrats aren't afraid to manipulate the electoral process"?
Can you name some of these "countless times" that we've seen the media has "corruption issues"?
Or how Donald Trump is calling for his supporters to show up at voting stations and intimidate people who won't vote for him? [link]
Art is life itself.
I'm going to assume that they are referring to the O'Keefe video, though I certainly hope not since it's a steaming pile of hot garbage.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Is this a mashup of the Michael Connell and Clint Curtis conspiracy theories?
Republican offices firebombed in North Carolina.
Clinton and DNC activists inciting violence at Trump rallies, undermining our democratic system.
You're still falling for O'Keefe videos?
I bet all those poor people have some sort of ID. Thats a b.s argument.
Edit: Oh and no one ever said bush stole the election in 00&04...
It's also why they get struck down as discriminatory by the Federal Court. Eventually. [Observe.]
Art is life itself.
Really, you think every single poor person has a valid ID?
So you`re poor. I bet you are getting government assistance. Gonna need an ID for that. You wanna go see a Dr.? Gonna need an ID for that. Drive a car? Wait for it... ID required. If you can not afford some sort of ID the state should pay for it.
You need an ID to apply for welfare, you do not need an ID to receive it. Many poor people have expired or otherwise no longer valid IDs.
I know this might come as a shock, but poor people can't afford to own a car, or see a regular doctor (they go to the ER if they have something serious, where they will be treated regardless of their ID situation). That's how being poor works. If these are your examples, I have to think you haven't really thought this through all the way.
The Trump campaign is not merely suggesting that there's corruption going on. Trump is saying outright that he's losing because the media and the Democrats are rigging the election. And that's bull***** and anyone who knows facts knows this.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/politics/election-day-russia-hacking-explained/
You do know IDs expire, right?
As for the Russians, curious that they are suddenly viewed as a terrifying menace! Ooh.. the Russians, how scary! We could have used your support ~40 years ago when you were employed as useful idiots for the Soviet regime.
Well if they are employed they better have an ID to get the job plus those are all excuses. You are basically saying if you are poor you are to dumb, lazy,law breakers or dont have enough time to obtain an ID.
Wait what?!! poor people cannot afford a car?! No crap dude. Everything you listed is a worst case example. Those are a few examples I put out there. All those poor people are poor to eat, drink, smoke, buy drugs, or live in some sort of house? Sure in some cases that is true but to act like just because you are low to no income there is no way you can obtain an ID.
If it's such a bad example, maybe you shouldn't have put it in your list?
Are these supposed to be more things that require an ID? What is this list even?
If it's true in some cases, then requiring them to vote unconstitutional. Everyone has a right to vote - even the people who are the "worst case example".
Ah yes, poor oppressed Gary Johnson. How dare anyone ever say anything negative about his fragile candidacy. No one ever says anything negative about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, so it's just so abjectly unfair that they would think to criticize Gary.
Being wrong about the position of Mosul is a bit different than looking like a deer in the headlights when asked about Aleppo, don't you think? Or being unable to name even a single world leader, and needing your VP to bail you out? Maybe if Hillary's response to the question had been "and what is Mosul?", he'd have a point. As it is, this sort of whining comes off as more than a little pathetic on Johnson's part.
As for the list i put there (eat,drink, and etc) does not require an ID but it requires cash just like it would to buy an ID.
And what will be the requirements to be issued this ID? Are you just going to hand it out to everyone who comes walking through the door, with no other verification of their identity?
So your point is that if you've got enough money to not starve, you also have enough extra money floating around to spend on an ID?
You really don't grasp how poverty works, do you?
Sustenance is required for survival, photo ID is not. Therefore, food takes priority in a budget over getting an ID. When you're poor, you can't necessarily have both.
The biggest problem with Voter ID laws is that they're discriminatory against the poorest citizens.
The second biggest problem with Voter ID laws is that they're a solution to a problem that does not exist.
Voter ID laws can only prevent voter impersonation. With the data available to us, you can count the number of voter impersonation cases in the history of this country on your fingers. Voter impersonation is the stupidest form of fraud, since it's not going to make a difference in any election at higher level than class president and there's a lot of manual effort required to achieve it.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Oh no i have somewhat of a grasp. Been low income at one point of my life. Guess what? I had an ID. I think you really dont grasp my point. If you are to poor to buy food you will attempt to get assistance from the government and that will require an ID. Unless you are some recluse that lives of the land in the middle of nowhere you are going to need some sort of ID 1 to 100 times in your life.