CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › How to win, part 4: Disqualify people who have lost their homes to foreclosure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How to win, part 4: Disqualify people who have lost their homes to foreclosure

post #1 of 75
9/8/08 at 9:42am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Nearly 600,000 Subject to Possible Caging in Ohio

How many voter-registration mass mailers are "returned to sender" in the run-up to Election Day may determine how many Ohio residents are eligible to vote.

Ohio election officials are sending out a mass mailer stamped "do not forward" to all registered voters today (Sept. 5) with an absentee ballot application and other important notices for Nov. 4.

What's important here is not so much what's going out as what's being returned to sender.

Unbeknownst to the would-be recipients, the same mailer - just 60 days before the election - has the potential to determine their eligibility to vote, challenged not by election officials but by partisan opposition.

A similar mailer in March netted nondeliverable mail from almost 600,000 registered voters in just five Ohio counties who could now have their ballots thrown out for voting under the wrong address.

The National Voter Registration Act prohibits any state from purging names from the voting rolls within 90 days of an election.

The law doesn't, however, preclude mass partisan challenges on or shortly before Election Day - known as voter caging - based on the same returned envelopes from state-sponsored mailers like the ones in Ohio and others going out across the country.

In 2004, the year the national election hinged on results from Ohio, the Ohio Republican Party challenged 35,000 voters based on returned mail from the GOP's own friendly reminder notices. From 2004 to 2006, Republicans challenged 77,000 voters this way nationwide. A consent decree issued in 1982 and amended in 1987 enjoins the GOP from instituting "ballot security programs" that focus on minority voters.

No evidence so far suggests Republicans - vote caging is essentially a GOP sport - have mounted a caging campaign this year. Yet, in July, Franklin County Election Director and County GOP Chairman Doug Preisse told reporters he didn't rule out challenges before November, particularly because of increased home foreclosures, which would make failures to change address on voter registration records more common.
More here.
Reply
post #2 of 75
9/8/08 at 3:08pm
I mentioned this in the Election thread, but didn't know a thread had begun. This is serious.

From what I've been reading, this shit is happening in no less than EIGHT states (mentioned six in the other thread. But it's eight, including Ohio).

http://www.alternet.org/democracy/92695/?page=entire

Quote:
Election officials in a handful of states appear to be ignoring the federal law dictating the way registered voters may be purged from voter rolls, civil rights attorneys say.

National voting rights groups have contacted officials in Kansas, Michigan and Louisiana in recent weeks because those states appear to be purging registered voters after election officials found duplicate names and birthdays of people on their voter lists and in out-of-state databases, such as driver's license records.

The states are assuming that a more recent driver's license or voter registration in another state indicates that the voter has relocated, meaning the voter registration tied to their prior address is no longer valid. While purging voters who move, die or are imprisoned is a routine part of managing elections, the federal law governing purges -- the National Voter Registration Act -- lays out a multiyear process of trying to contact voters to confirm a change of address before deleting them from voter rolls.

http://www.gregpalast.com/obama-does.../#comment-7058

Quote:

Listen to the report on the Air America Radio's Thom Hartmann

In swing-state Colorado, the Republican Secretary of State conducted the biggest purge of voters in history, dumping a fifth of all registrations. Guess their color.

In swing-state Florida, the state is refusing to accept about 85,000 new registrations from voter drives – overwhelming Black voters.

In swing state New Mexico, HALF of the Democrats of Mora, a dirt poor and overwhelmingly Hispanic county, found their registrations disappeared this year, courtesy of a Republican voting contractor.

In swing states Ohio and Nevada, new federal law is knocking out tens of thousands of voters who lost their homes to foreclosure.

My investigations partner spoke directly to Barack Obama about it. (When your partner is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., candidates take your phone call.) The cool, cool Senator Obama told Kennedy he was “concerned” about the integrity of the vote in the Southwest in particular.

He’s concerned. I’m sweating.

http://www.gregpalast.com/MultiMedia...ann7-29-08.mp3
Reply
post #3 of 75
9/8/08 at 3:11pm
You'd think between Social Security numbers and driver's licenses, there wouldn't be a need for a separate voter registration.
Reply
post #4 of 75
9/8/08 at 3:20pm
Thread Starter 
Keep an eye out for the next GOP talking point about how Obama's association with ACORN is somehow tied to "widespread" voter fraud.

But while these right wing extremist blogs were at it, I wish they'd document exactly how many cases of "widespread" voter fraud there have been in the past six years:
Quote:
Since 2002, the Justice Department’s Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative has, as Gonzales put it, “made enforcement of election fraud and corruption offenses a top priority.” And yet between October 2002 and September 2005, just 38 cases were brought nationally, and of those, 14 ended in dismissals or acquittals, 11 in guilty pleas, and 13 in convictions. Though a Justice Department manual on election crime states that these cases “may present an easier means of obtaining convictions than do other forms of public corruption,” federal attorneys have failed to rack up those convictions, for the simple reason that incidents of fraud have been few and far between.
Source

So, "widespread" voter fraud is actually "nearly nonexistent" voter fraud. But it's a brilliant pretext for upending and stealing elections.
Reply
post #5 of 75
9/11/08 at 9:54am
Thread Starter 
Michigan is also going to be a voter suppression state.

Quote:
Lose your house, lose your vote
By Eartha Jane Melzer 9/10/08 6:42 AM

Michigan Republicans plan to foreclose African American voters

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

State election rules allow parties to assign “election challengers” to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they “have a good reason to believe” that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a “true resident of the city or township.”

The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.”

One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.

“You can’t challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,” said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.-based public-interest law firm. “I don’t think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.”

As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, “mean-spirited.”

GOP ties to state’s largest foreclosure law firm

The Macomb GOP’s plans are another indication of how John McCain’s campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state. McCain’s regional headquarters are housed in the office building of foreclosure specialists Trott & Trott. The firm’s founder, David A. Trott, has raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for the Republican nominee.

The Macomb County party’s plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans — the most likely kind of loan to go into default — were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.

Challenges to would-be voters

Statewide, the Republican Party is gearing up for a comprehensive voter challenge campaign, according to Denise Graves, party chair for Republicans in Genessee County, which encompasses Flint. The party is creating a spreadsheet of election challenger volunteers and expects to coordinate a training with the regional McCain campaign, Graves said in an interview with Michigan Messenger.

Whether the Republicans will challenge voters with foreclosed homes elsewhere in the state is not known.
Story continues here.

And more on voter suppression in Ohio here.
Reply
post #6 of 75
9/11/08 at 10:04am
I'm amazed that this can take place in a modern society. These are things you expect to hear from countries like Russia.
Reply
post #7 of 75
9/11/08 at 12:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitches Leave View Post
I'm amazed that this can take place in a modern society. These are things you expect to hear from countries like Russia.
What's worse is that hardly anyone seems to know or care about it. This is absolutely ridiculous. It's unacceptable, and I can't believe I'm seeing it occur in my lifetime. I am astounded (though not surprised) by the level of deception being practiced here, and with each new story I read, I'm getting more and more depressed about the upcoming election.
Reply
post #8 of 75
9/11/08 at 12:49pm
Wasn't there some douchbag on the Chud boards that suggested that only property owners should get voting rights? I think Elaine or Nick cast him into the ether. This sounds very familiar.
Reply
post #9 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:37pm
I guess everything is a conspiracy.

You know, I moved and didn't re-register. When I went to vote, they told me to beat it because I was no longer at that address and I had to re-register. Did I call a fucking press conference to say that my rights were being suppressed? That's the way the system works, you have to re-register.

It's unfortunate that these people lost their homes, but I don't know that making sure they can vote is at the top of their list of shit to do. These poor people are just fucked, yet you want to paint it in a way that the GOP is taking advantage of them.

I suppose you could follow that logic and say that this is the ultimate goal of the GOP. They didn't want people to vote, so they created all the bad loans that people knowingly took, so then the GOP knew that they would then lose their houses and not be able to vote. Everything is coming together as planned.

Also, who's to say that all these people are Dems? Just because the states lean that way, doesn't make them all Dems. So they are not all votes that His Worshipfulness may be losing.
Reply
post #10 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:47pm
It doesn't matter if they are Dems or Pubs, this shit shouldn't take place in a so-called "modern society". Anyone with a social security number and a US citizenship should be able to go and cast their vote at the nearest voting booth come election day.
Reply
post #11 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:50pm
OK, that's a different argument. You should be able to, regardless of where you live. The argument yt is making is that the Republicans are taking advantage of the people losing their homes and denying them their voting rights.

They are two different positions.
Reply
post #12 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
I guess everything is a conspiracy.

You know, I moved and didn't re-register. When I went to vote, they told me to beat it because I was no longer at that address and I had to re-register. Did I call a fucking press conference to say that my rights were being suppressed? That's the way the system works, you have to re-register.

It's unfortunate that these people lost their homes, but I don't know that making sure they can vote is at the top of their list of shit to do. These poor people are just fucked, yet you want to paint it in a way that the GOP is taking advantage of them.

I suppose you could follow that logic and say that this is the ultimate goal of the GOP. They didn't want people to vote, so they created all the bad loans that people knowingly took, so then the GOP knew that they would then lose their houses and not be able to vote. Everything is coming together as planned.

Also, who's to say that all these people are Dems? Just because the states lean that way, doesn't make them all Dems. So they are not all votes that His Worshipfulness may be losing.
You really don't see a problem with economic struggle becoming a major barrier to voting, when a failed economy is THE issue this election?
Reply
post #13 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
I guess everything is a conspiracy.

You know, I moved and didn't re-register. When I went to vote, they told me to beat it because I was no longer at that address and I had to re-register. Did I call a fucking press conference to say that my rights were being suppressed? That's the way the system works, you have to re-register.

It's unfortunate that these people lost their homes, but I don't know that making sure they can vote is at the top of their list of shit to do. These poor people are just fucked, yet you want to paint it in a way that the GOP is taking advantage of them.

I suppose you could follow that logic and say that this is the ultimate goal of the GOP. They didn't want people to vote, so they created all the bad loans that people knowingly took, so then the GOP knew that they would then lose their houses and not be able to vote. Everything is coming together as planned.

Also, who's to say that all these people are Dems? Just because the states lean that way, doesn't make them all Dems. So they are not all votes that His Worshipfulness may be losing.
Your situation is apples and oranges to what's happening here, sunny jim. Everybody who has moved has done what you did. This is massive displacement of a whole lot of people, who are being targeted specifically because they lost their homes.

And who's to say that all these people are Dems? Because they wouldn't be targeted if they weren't Dems. Please point out one case of Democrats trying to prevent people from voting. I have yet to find one. It's always Republicans. It a key part of the "permanent Republican majority" campaign.

Also, did you read the story? It's a fairly in-depth piece and will answer a lot of your doubts about what's going on here.
Reply
post #14 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:53pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
OK, that's a different argument. You should be able to, regardless of where you live. The argument yt is making is that the Republicans are taking advantage of the people losing their homes and denying them their voting rights.
That is exactly my point. Why else would it be happening at all? Please at least read the article I posted in full.

From the story:

The Macomb County party’s plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans — the most likely kind of loan to go into default — were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.
Reply
post #15 of 75
9/11/08 at 1:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Vogel View Post
You really don't see a problem with economic struggle becoming a major barrier to voting, when a failed economy is THE issue this election?
The economy is the issue, which neither candidate is addressing as they should be. The economy is for shit right now, and needs help. Obama has some plans that may hurt or help it, same with McCain, but both are busing talking about the war or abortion rights. They need to work more on the economy and how to make it better. Pulling out of Iraq and that bullshit will help, but not solve it.

Again, that is not the argument that yt is making. I am responding to her ideas that everything bad that happens is a GOP conspiracy.
Reply
post #16 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
The economy is the issue, which neither candidate is addressing as they should be. The economy is for shit right now, and needs help. Obama has some plans that may hurt or help it, same with McCain, but both are busing talking about the war or abortion rights. They need to work more on the economy and how to make it better. Pulling out of Iraq and that bullshit will help, but not solve it.

Again, that is not the argument that yt is making. I am responding to her ideas that everything bad that happens is a GOP conspiracy.
Huh? Where the fuck have you been? The overwhelming majority of Obama's words have been about the economy.

I highly doubt yt thinks it's an 8-year reaching conspiracy, but it does reek of immoral strategy, considering which administration is largely held responsible for how shitty the economy has been for most americans. If the economy is the issue, don't you think those in the most dire straits would be the ones most likely to vote against the incumbent party? The GOP sure knows it, apparently. What they're doing to discount those votes might technically be legal, but it's pretty damn clear that it goes against the ideals of democracy.
Reply
post #17 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
That is exactly my point. Why else would it be happening at all?
Really, that is your belief? There is a group of Republicans somewhere that sits and singles out every Dem and thinks of a way to fuck up their lives? That's worse than the overall cynicism that I have of distrusting every politician that comes along, Dem or GOP.
Reply
post #18 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Vogel View Post
Huh? Where the fuck have you been? The overwhelming majority of Obama's words have been about the economy.

I highly doubt yt thinks it's an 8-year reaching conspiracy, but it does reek of immoral strategy, considering which administration is largely held responsible for how shitty the economy has been for most americans. If the economy is the issue, don't you think those in the most dire straits would be the ones most likely to vote against the incumbent party? The GOP sure knows it, apparently. What they're doing to discount those votes might technically be legal, but it's pretty damn clear that it goes against the ideals of democracy.
Where have you been? The majority of her posts are about the last 8 years worth of conspiracy. I get a kick out of reading them.

I've heard Obama and McCain make plenty of promises. Promising to do shit that is out of their control. I don't believe either one, they are just the latest in a long line of promise makers.
Reply
post #19 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Really, that is your belief? Their is a group of Republicans somewhere that sits and singles out every Dem and thinks of a way to fuck up their lives? That's worse than the overall cynicism that I have of distrusting every politician that comes along, Dem or GOP.
It's simple math. Make it harder for people in areas unfavorable to your candidate to vote, and you increase your chances of winning. A complacent news media makes it inevitable. Fucking up people's lives doesn't even enter into it other than as collateral damage. You need look no further than the allocation of voting machines in Ohio in a year where the head of Bush's Ohio campaign was also in charge of running the Ohio elections. How else could such an election possibly turn out?
Reply
post #20 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Really, that is your belief? There is a group of Republicans somewhere that sits and singles out every Dem and thinks of a way to fuck up their lives? That's worse than the overall cynicism that I have of distrusting every politician that comes along, Dem or GOP.
Is that what yt said? or was it: the Republicans are taking advantage of the people losing their homes and denying them their voting rights.

I am not one to defend yt's conspiracy theories but this is not a conspiracy theory. It's not a conspiracy. They're doing it in the open. All you fucking morons are the same.
Reply
post #21 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Where have you been? The majority of her posts are about the last 8 years worth of conspiracy. I get a kick out of reading them.

I've heard Obama and McCain make plenty of promises. Promising to do shit that is out of their control. I don't believe either one, they are just the latest in a long line of promise makers.
It's at least been 8 years of corruption, and this reeks of continuation. I can't say Obama's promises are any more likely to be followed through with at this point (I personally believe they are, based on what I see in his conviction, and the amount of thoughtfulness that seems to go into his plans/opinions, but it's not something that anyone can really know until someone actually gets elected), I'm not going to argue with you over that, but I think it's pretty clear that the republican party has stunk of corruption far, far worse than the other party over the last 8 years. I can't fully trust either side, but I sure as fuck know which side I don't trust at all anymore. These election machinations reinforce that.
Reply
post #22 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:18pm
So nothing bad or weird every happened while a Dem was in office? All those rumors of getting JFK into office and the tactics that his father used are just conspiracies? Just a load of bullshit?

In spite of my ideas of distrusting politicians as a whole, I still can't buy that they (GOP) deliberately do the things that you are accusing them of. I also don't believe that the GOP are the only party that is doing them. It's probably only the Independents or Libertarians that are not getting involved in this kind of shit. Mostly just because they don't have the opportunities to do so.
Reply
post #23 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuddL View Post
All you fucking morons are the same.
Ha ha, likewise my friend.
Reply
post #24 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
In spite of my ideas of distrusting politicians as a whole, I still can't buy that they (GOP) deliberately do the things that you are accusing them of. I also don't believe that the GOP are the only party that is doing them.
So the Republicans and the Democrats are both doing the things that the Republicans aren't doing. That clears everything up.
Reply
post #25 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Vogel View Post
It's at least been 8 years of corruption, and this reeks of continuation. I can't say Obama's promises are any more likely to be followed through with at this point (I personally believe they are, based on what I see in his conviction, and the amount of thoughtfulness that seems to go into his plans/opinions, but it's not something that anyone can really know until someone actually gets elected), I'm not going to argue with you over that, but I think it's pretty clear that the republican party has stunk of corruption far, far worse than the other party over the last 8 years. I can't fully trust either side, but I sure as fuck know which side I don't trust at all anymore. These election machinations reinforce that.
You're right, there are a group of fuckups in there right now, screwing things up. My contention is that a president cannot wave a wand and make everything better. There will be people against them, especially with what these presidents have to accomplish. Getting out of foreign oil use isn't going to be easy, getting out of debt isn't going to be easy, changing the health care system isn't going to be easy. I don't know that either candidate is going to pull this off. In the end I think they will worry more about re-election than getting their promises covered.
Reply
post #26 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
My contention is that a president cannot wave a wand and make everything better.
This is totally true. But he can certainly wave the one that makes everything worse. And that wand's name is Sarah Palin.
Reply
post #27 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie-wanker View Post
So the Republicans and the Democrats are both doing the things that the Republicans aren't doing. That clears everything up.
I don't mean this in particular, but crooked shit in general. The Dems are always held up to be the best, angelic. The Reps are always the people trying to take advantage of the poor. I don't buy that. Every politician is there to do one thing, get re-elected and take care of their people. The people that donated to their campaigns and who are their friends. That happens across both parties.
Reply
post #28 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
So nothing bad or weird every happened while a Dem was in office? All those rumors of getting JFK into office and the tactics that his father used are just conspiracies? Just a load of bullshit?

In spite of my ideas of distrusting politicians as a whole, I still can't buy that they (GOP) deliberately do the things that you are accusing them of. I also don't believe that the GOP are the only party that is doing them. It's probably only the Independents or Libertarians that are not getting involved in this kind of shit. Mostly just because they don't have the opportunities to do so.
I never said that. And I never said I fully trust the democrats. My point was that, as RECENT as the last 8 years, one party has been remarkably more corrupt than the other.

And regarding this specific issue, "accuse" is a word that can barely be used. Like someone said earlier, they're doing it right out in the open. It says it right there in the article.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week.

So, he's clearly doing it. The only question, well, your question, is the motivation. I mean, if you wanted to, and I'm sure you do, you could make the point (a very stupid one, granted), that he's completely unaware of the demographic that such a practice would affect, that he fully believes such a practice would affect democrats and republicans equally, and that it's completely fair and non-partisan. But, considering which party he's the fucking chair of, and considering how fucking uninformed he'd have to be to think this, not to mention how dumb it would be to put forth this amount of effort if he really thought equal amounts of democrats and republican would-be voters would be affected, it's a really fucking stupid point to make.
Reply
post #29 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie-wanker View Post
This is totally true. But he can certainly wave the one that makes everything worse. And that wand's name is Sarah Palin.
Really? While it could be argued that Cheney holds the reigns right now, when does the VP control what is going on? When have they been in charge? granted, if McCain checks out, she's in. The same could be said about Obama. If he checks out, we get Biden, a clone of McCain, just wearing a Democrat costume.

I don't get the hatred for Palin. I don't trust her bullshit either, she was just a strategic pick to get the woman's votes and people that vote for emotional reasons. Biden was a strategic pick because he filled the experience gaps that Obama had, yet Biden is the kind of politician that Obama was campaigning against. Biden did not receive very many votes during his run for presidency, yet here he is with a chance to become president down the road. They are very similar positions.
Reply
post #30 of 75
9/11/08 at 2:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Vogel View Post
So, he's clearly doing it.
You're right, caught red-handed. I guess my larger contention is that everyone here, except probably you, believe that this kind of underhanded shit only is done by the GOP. My argument is that both parties do it. You have plenty of ammo from the last eight years, and there is a lot there. I just don't believe that the Dems are above all of this and have/will never do this. I just don't think that they have had the opportunity. Something that they can remedy over the next eight years.

My main point is that both parties do evil shit. I just like to read yt's posts where she lays it all at the feet of the GOP and the Dems are Holy and clean.
Reply
post #31 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
I don't mean this in particular, but crooked shit in general. The Dems are always held up to be the best, angelic. The Reps are always the people trying to take advantage of the poor. I don't buy that. Every politician is there to do one thing, get re-elected and take care of their people. The people that donated to their campaigns and who are their friends. That happens across both parties.
I'd like to see you explain the minimum wage increase, which the Democrats supported and the Republicans opposed, in this context. Why the Republicans oppose it is obvious, but who paid the Democrats to support it?
Reply
post #32 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:18pm
Poor people. Duh, Seabass.
Reply
post #33 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
I'd like to see you explain the minimum wage increase, which the Democrats supported and the Republicans opposed, in this context. Why the Republicans oppose it is obvious, but who paid the Democrats to support it?
Unions maybe? Minimum wage doesn't only help people making minimum wage, it moves everyone's pay up. Also, what about people that were shitcanned because the company now had to pay more to everyone and they couldn't afford to keep them on.

There are single issues on both sides that say they are good, depending upon your perspective. I am simply stating that neither one is only all good or all bad.
Reply
post #34 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Really? While it could be argued that Cheney holds the reigns right now, when does the VP control what is going on? When have they been in charge? granted, if McCain checks out, she's in. The same could be said about Obama. If he checks out, we get Biden, a clone of McCain, just wearing a Democrat costume.

I don't get the hatred for Palin. I don't trust her bullshit either, she was just a strategic pick to get the woman's votes and people that vote for emotional reasons. Biden was a strategic pick because he filled the experience gaps that Obama had, yet Biden is the kind of politician that Obama was campaigning against. Biden did not receive very many votes during his run for presidency, yet here he is with a chance to become president down the road. They are very similar positions.
In addition to finding Palin intensely unlikable as a media personality, I find her record more than speaks for itself. "I was just asking about how someone might theoretically go about banning books, I wasn't going to actually ban anything." Sure you weren't.
Reply
post #35 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Really? While it could be argued that Cheney holds the reigns right now, when does the VP control what is going on? When have they been in charge? granted, if McCain checks out, she's in. The same could be said about Obama. If he checks out, we get Biden, a clone of McCain, just wearing a Democrat costume.
Right. Because they're both old white guys.

Quote:
I don't get the hatred for Palin. I don't trust her bullshit either, she was just a strategic pick to get the woman's votes and people that vote for emotional reasons. Biden was a strategic pick because he filled the experience gaps that Obama had, yet Biden is the kind of politician that Obama was campaigning against. Biden did not receive very many votes during his run for presidency, yet here he is with a chance to become president down the road. They are very similar positions.
You mean that they have strengths that account for their running-mate's weaknesses? Shocking. I can't believe CNN and Fox aren't all over this.
Reply
post #36 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:35pm
Thread Starter 
Fundamental human nature dictates that people who have power will collude to maintain power. Even the most cursory look at history supports this notion. It's hardly a conspiracy theory.
Reply
post #37 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
Fundamental human nature dictates that people who have power will collude to maintain power. Even the most cursory look at history supports this notion. It's hardly a conspiracy theory.
You're right, and therein lies the problem with politicians. This applies to both parties.
Reply
post #38 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie-wanker View Post
In addition to finding Palin intensely unlikable as a media personality, I find her record more than speaks for itself. "I was just asking about how someone might theoretically go about banning books, I wasn't going to actually ban anything." Sure you weren't.
So, Obama is a Muslim!!! and hates Whitey!!!!

Does that sound silly to you? Book banning has been going on for a long time. It's a dumb and scary practice, but to think that a VP is going to be able to go in and start doing this is silly. Is she going to disband the Congress, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and all state legislation to do this? There are retards out there who believe in this, but that group is too small to have any effect.

There are also far left people who think all machinery in the world should be shut down and we should go back to living in caves. Does this have any better of a chance of happening?
Reply
post #39 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
You're right, and therein lies the problem with politicians. This applies to both parties.
Except that Democrats haven't really been in power for 30 years. Ergo...

ps. that argument that both sides engage in dirty play to hang onto to power is negated by the fact that only republicans get caught red-handed doing it. Please point me in the direction of democrats corrupting voting machines, vote caging, challenging the opposition at the polls to intimidate them from voting, jamming republican phone lines at critical times, stacking republican districts with too few voting machines while giving their own ample voting machines, striking republicans off the rolls because their names vaguely sound like the names of felons, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Show me one case of democrats doing the kind of voter suppresion and election tampering that republicans have been doing in the last ten years and I will accede to you. Just one.
Reply
post #40 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
So, Obama is a Muslim!!! and hates Whitey!!!!

Does that sound silly to you? Book banning has been going on for a long time. It's a dumb and scary practice, but to think that a VP is going to be able to go in and start doing this is silly. Is she going to disband the Congress, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and all state legislation to do this? There are retards out there who believe in this, but that group is too small to have any effect.
Okay...whether or not she actually could do it is kind of a moot point (to me, at least). The fact that she believes it's okay to even consider doing it is what I find deplorable.
Reply
post #41 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
So, Obama is a Muslim!!! and hates Whitey!!!!

Does that sound silly to you? Book banning has been going on for a long time. It's a dumb and scary practice, but to think that a VP is going to be able to go in and start doing this is silly. Is she going to disband the Congress, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and all state legislation to do this? There are retards out there who believe in this, but that group is too small to have any effect.

There are also far left people who think all machinery in the world should be shut down and we should go back to living in caves. Does this have any better of a chance of happening?
It's not about the possibility of it happening you jarhead, it's what it says about the judgment of a woman who could possibly be running this country. Just like the fact that you squirm away from keeping on point betrays your lack of interest in the truth of the matter.
Reply
post #42 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
Right. Because they're both old white guys.
You're right, that is the only thing that they have in common. He is also the very thing that Obama wants to "change". Old time politicians that have grown comfortable in their 30 year terms in Senate.

Quote:
You mean that they have strengths that account for their running-mate's weaknesses? Shocking. I can't believe CNN and Fox aren't all over this.
I know, I haven't heard a single thing about this on the news. Come on, what I mean is that they were picked as a political move, nothing new.

It is odd that Obama, who is preaching new and change picks an old school guy while McCain, the old school guy, picks someone new and fresh. I think that Obama could have made a better choice to be more in tune with his campaign guidelines. McCain made the smarter choice, politically speaking, but I can't say if she is a good choice.
Reply
post #43 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuddL View Post
It's not about the possibility of it happening you jarhead, it's what is says about the judgment of a woman who could possibly be running this country. Just like the fact that you squirm away from keeping on point betrays your lack of interest in the truth of the matter.
The truth of the matter is that throwing your hands up and saying "everything's fucked on all sides" is the path of least resistance. It's used not just to excuse oneself from participating in the process, but from even spending the time to learn about it. It's the height of laziness.

Of course, there are problems with both major political parties. That doesn't mean that the two are interchangeable.
Reply
post #44 of 75
9/11/08 at 3:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
Except that Democrats haven't really been in power for 30 years. Ergo...

ps. that argument that both sides engage in dirty play to hang onto to power is negated by the fact that only republicans get caught red-handed doing it. Please point me in the direction of democrats corrupting voting machines, vote caging, challenging the opposition at the polls to intimidate them from voting, jamming republican phone lines at critical times, stacking republican districts with too few voting machines while giving their own ample voting machines, striking republicans off the rolls because their names vaguely sound like the names of felons, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Show me one case of democrats doing the kind of voter suppresion and election tampering that republicans have been doing in the last ten years and I will accede to you. Just one.
So, the eight years of the Clintons didn't exist? Also, the Dems have had a majority in the Houses off and on through those years, yet they have not accomplished anything, or done anything underhanded?

Also, the Dems are maybe just better at getting away with it? Come on, I'm poking fun here, you're talking this single issue, I'm talking about the overall actions of both parties.
Reply
post #45 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
You're right, that is the only thing that they have in common. He is also the very thing that Obama wants to "change". Old time politicians that have grown comfortable in their 30 year terms in Senate.



I know, I haven't heard a single thing about this on the news. Come on, what I mean is that they were picked as a political move, nothing new.

It is odd that Obama, who is preaching new and change picks an old school guy while McCain, the old school guy, picks someone new and fresh. I think that Obama could have made a better choice to be more in tune with his campaign guidelines. McCain made the smarter choice, politically speaking, but I can't say if she is a good choice.
It could be quite easily argued that Biden was a pick made not for political campaign reasons, but rather more for his usefulness in helping Obama govern. A lot harder to argue that about Palin. I don't see how the two picks are even on the same level if we're talking about how much of a political move they were.
Reply
post #46 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt
that argument that both sides engage in dirty play to hang onto to power is negated by the fact that only republicans get caught red-handed doing it. Please point me in the direction of democrats corrupting voting machines, vote caging, challenging the opposition at the polls to intimidate them from voting, jamming republican phone lines at critical times, stacking republican districts with too few voting machines while giving their own ample voting machines, striking republicans off the rolls because their names vaguely sound like the names of felons, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum.
Chicago.
Reply
post #47 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
So, Obama is a Muslim!!! and hates Whitey!!
Huh? You're comparing a demonstrably false statement to a demonstrably true statement.

Obama isn't a Muslim and doesn't hate whitey.

Palin asked about how to go about banning books.

When people like her start asking questions like that I get antsy, because people like that are never, ever "just asking". And by "people like that" I mean Christian fundamentalists. So what if she doesn't have that power as VP? That she asked at all speaks to her character.
Reply
post #48 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:14pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontEATnachos View Post
Chicago.
The dems were incredibly corrupt in that era ... which is why I posted specifically in the past ten years.
Reply
post #49 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:17pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
So, the eight years of the Clintons didn't exist?
Republican-controlled congress, obstructing and nipping at his heels the whole time, persecuting him relentlessly during his second term. You mean that period?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Also, the Dems have had a majority in the Houses off and on through those years, yet they have not accomplished anything, or done anything underhanded?
Aren't we talking about voter suppression and election tampering?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Also, the Dems are maybe just better at getting away with it?
No, the Dems just don't do it. They don't have anything to get away with. Show me an example of them tampering with elections the way Republicans have for the past decade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrichead View Post
Come on, I'm poking fun here, you're talking this single issue, I'm talking about the overall actions of both parties.
I'm talking about a single issue - note the title of this thread.
Reply
post #50 of 75
9/11/08 at 4:19pm
Mind-boggling.

OK, Electrohead. Let's go with your 'but they're all the same' point. The one you make repeatedly, and with such confidence.

Please, I want you to dip deep into your vast well of political knowledge and point out the endemic racism, homophobia, religious zealotry, gun-toting, war-mongering and bigotry inherent in the Democratic party. List examples, please. They're the same on both sides, right? Could you elaborate on the very clear vote-fixing that the Democrats have indulged in? You could use stuff like faulty diebold machines, or hanging chads, or missing ballots, open discrimination against poor black voters etc etc - I'm sure the evidence is out there, given your towering confience on the matter.

What a stupefying thread. Congrats, Electrichead - tonight, and for one night only, you're the new Snaieke!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › How to win, part 4: Disqualify people who have lost their homes to foreclosure