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

Once again, I haven't seen much of that either. There's plenty of fraud to go around. It'll all even out in the end. The left's claims of 'stolen' elections appear petty and childish at best. I don't think Republicans will come even close to stooping to that level. A win is a win.

At work if something's broken we change it. That doesn't always mean better. In Obama's case it won't even mean different.

I never said the election would be stolen, flere, or that McCain would win. I responded to the "If Obama wins by 7, oversampled his votes, blah blah" joke, because I do believe that there is voter fraud going on.

I believe that it happens in both directions, but is much more prevalent on the Democrat side.

You have misinterpreted me.

Again, I believe McCain has lost this election fair and square. While I wholeheartedly disagree with the decision our nation is making today, I don't doubt that the result for Obama will be the will of the people.

I'd echo Jon in clarifying that I was referring to the margin of lead in the polls, and the margin of victory in some states.

This lol'd me for some reason.

If McCain had selected a more moderate candidate, if their entire focus of the campaign had gotten away from the religious right, the extreme social issues and focused on going with a more sound way of improving the economy be encouraging spending through less taxes and cutting of various un-needed government fat, etc.. I would have likely voted for him.

As it is, I could care less to vote for pushing the far right social agenda and I honestly don't think mcCain wanted that either but instead had his hand forced by the party, or someone just convinced him unwisely to do so. I think everyone pushing him further right is what actually caused him to lose the election. Sure he might get more votes from the far right, but those people were not voting Obama anyways. This current strategy on their part might have added more far right votes, but also pushed a good number of votes towards voting Obama. Net gain for the democrats.

I don't understand how conservatives can say that Obama is way left, and yet insist that Palin was positive or necessary for a close race or victory.

If Obama is far left, a centrist campaign should beat him right? Because the base will show up to vote against a far left candidate like Obama. And, as I have read here, we are a right center nation?

I don't understand the conservative logic, does not compute.

I looked at Beatty some, but I couldn't find anything that he really stood strong for other than his past military experience and how his past with the CIA and in the military makes him an expert on the war in Iraq. I also looked at Underwood, and he is a complete joke of a candidate.. I really didn't see any option other than voting Kerry for senator. I don't really like him that much, but considering the other options, it didn't seem like we had a great choice for U.S. senate this time.

You can't state that empirically though, so we'll have to wait and see until such a time as we can determine that.

I'm voting in 3 hours and still don't know who I'm voting for.

WASHINGTON – The only way Barack Obama can win in Indiana is to cheat, one of John McCain's stand-ins said Thursday.

He said votes have already been cast by "people who don't exist" and that a national voter-registration effort is "trying to steal the election in Indiana."

In an interview before headlining the Indiana Republican Party's fund-raising dinner in Indianapolis Thursday night, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Hoosiers are too smart to vote for Obama.

Democrats, he said, "can't win fairly out here."

Asked if Democrats could win without cheating, Graham said, "No. They can't win fairly out here 'cause their agenda is so far removed from the average Hoosier.

Fraud is a problem with voter registration, not with actual voter fraud. Maybe if you had some basis of reality, you would see that vote fraud doesn't really play a big role in elections, unless you think stats like this: "In the United States, fifty-two people have been convicted of federal election fraud for voting in multiple locations since 2002" underestimate the vote fraud by 1000-fold.

Unless of course you have some statistical data to back any of your assertions up, which as usual is doubtful. Now if you'd like to talk about voter coercion and intimidation, and even disenfranchisement, then maybe things like that play a role. But please, at least consult reality sometimes.

The discussion revolved around this thread. I'm guessing those guys didn't post in this thread, though it would make it interesting if they had. I have no doubt that you'll find an idiot here or there to claim that (yes, I include Graham in the idiot group).

I expect Indiana to be a McCain state in the end, so I'm not sure it matters all that much.

While apparently the numbers don't support this assumption, it's really sad that people feel this way. Palin panders to the lowest common denominator. I really liked McCain. While I have lost quite a bit of respect for him over the last 4+ years or so, I still think he could make a decent president.

Palin, however, is beyond the pale. She is a divisive force and seems to bring out the worst in folks. I seriously hope she ends up a footnote, if so, that will be a very good sign for America. That said, I think she'll be around for a long, long time, which is despressing.

Palin certainly didn't influence my vote, but it certainly did make me feel better when I got to vote against her.

Seriously?

I thought you people were a myth!

As was pointed out earlier, the statistics cited in regard to this included partisan Obama voters, which is obviously not reflective of the overall effect. Many wouldn't have voted for McCain no matter what. We don't have a poll to compare what effect the other options would have had in comparison, so information in that regard is subjective at best.

Well in that case, I'm sure there was someone bitching if it included blogs. :D

Wow, miked. You sure told him.

Oh by the way, I've exceeded the speed limit in my car at least 1000 times for every ticket I've gotten. Just sayin.

I haven't seen any Ayers stuff on tv the last week in Virginia- hence why I didn't mention it. It's run its course and it didn't really work.

However, showing the Rev Wright stuff the last night before an election is clearly used to evoke a "see, look at his friend. fear the black guy when you go to the polls tomorrow" snap response.

I think it's pretty clear that when you bring back something that hasn't been used for months in a quick, sharp ad like that with the "God Damn America" clips- you know what the ad people were going for.

SI

Ya, seriously. I'm like a unicorn I guess.

LOL. Once again, I'd like to see numbers. But I guess it really depends on what you consider fraud. But I do love your kind of arguments. I can't really show any numbers, so who wants to watch me hit some homers!

I agree 100%. I want to add that even though I disagree with Obama on many issues, I do not think he is an evil man. He believes that he is doing what is right to make this country better. That doesn't make him a bad man.

Is it that you feel that you don't know enough about either candidate or that they both appeal (or don't appeal) to you at about the same level? If you're the former, you shouldn't vote. If you're the latter, you are like a unicorn ;)

Or there's always the option that you fit into one of John Oliver's four categories of undecided voters from a few weeks ago (attention seekers, chronically insecure, racist Democrats, and, by far the largest, the stupid- which can be broken down into many smaller subsets)

SI

Flip a coin...that's how I decided which girl was going to get my extra World Series ticket.

Oh, c'mon- this thread needs to reach 10000 :D

SI

How'd that work out for you?

Did you turn 28 today?

SI

Excellent!

Voter fraud? Really?!?!

:lol:

Sigh. :(

"(ASKED OF LIKELY VOTERS) Does (Obama’s/McCain’s) choice of (Biden/Palin)
for vice president make you more likely to vote for (Obama/McCain), less likely, or won’t it make any difference in your vote? "


Date, Likely/Registered/All, More/Less/Indifferent

Obama’s choice of Biden:

11/1/08 LV 28 14 58

9/29/08 LV 26 14 60

9/4/08 RV 22 11 66

McCain’s choice of Palin:
11/1/08 LV 17 46 37

9/29/08 LV 24 32 43

9/4/08 RV 25 19 55

Compare to:

Kerry’s choice of Edwards:
7/25/08 RV 24 9 66

Gore’s choice of Lieberman:
8/7/00 All 15 10 73

Bush’s choice of Cheney:
7/29/00 RV 14 6 78

Dole’s choice of Kemp:
8/15/96 RV 18 6 75

For recent VP picks other than this year, people haven't historically cared, and the ones who have were roughly 2/1 in support of said VP pick. Palin is roughly 3/1 against. I know this is one poll, but there's no logical way you can conclude Palin is the reason the race is as "close" as it is.

The latter. Both have ideas I like and some ideas I can't see past. I have no desire to state what they are here because they are my opinions and they are too deep rooted for someone to even dent them in short time span.

As for the 4 categories, they are all pretty unflattering. I'm not a racist democraft, I'm not looking for attention (I'd do an Ireport on CNN if that was the case), stupid? I should hope not.. As for insecure, not 100% sure what is meant by that unless they mean that you aren't sure if your stance on an issue is right. (That is.. I'm for abortion, but like McCain otherwise so, maybe I'm wrong and should vote for him anyways...)

that's comparing apples to oranges - try this on instead:

for everytime you have run a red light at an intersection that has traffic cameras, how many warnings/tickets have you gotten later in the mail? I bet the ratio is a lot closer to 1:1

It's clearly obvious that the Republicans needed to pull in swing voters to have a chance to win. Palin probably lost this election for the Republicans by losing the undecided vote more than she provided the base a reason to vote for McCain.

I posted a while back on how the ACORN story was being misreported, because they were focusing on the names being submitted (Mickey Mouse, Tony Romo) which is irrelevant to the issue because they are required by law to turn ALL forms in. The only thing they can do is flag the false forms. Once the the media started to grasp that aspect, the stories died down significantly, because they realized that most of them had been flagged.

Well, yes the four categories are from the Daily Show. It was meant to be funny, not accurate. ;)

But, yeah, if you line up almost identically on both sides of things, you are a weird breed and good luck with your decision.

SI

*warning - blanket generalization below*

seems to me that Democrats have complained in the past about voter disenfranchisement, and now Republicans will complain about vote fraud.

*end blanket generalization*

of the two, there is certainly more evidence that disenfranchisement occurs than VOTE fraud.

Voter REGISTRATION "fraud" if you will, exists, but it's largely for reasons already discussed: volunteers paid by the registration, the requirement to turn in all forms, etc. The fact is though, that nobody named "Micky Mouse" ever shows up to vote, or indeed even makes it onto the voting rolls. In that sense, it's not fraud. It's the system working as it was designed to, to weed out these "bogus" applications.

*L*

Don't watch the Daily Show very much so, you got me there. :p :D

No wonder that list looked so freakin' weird. It was like some said "Ok, you are either stupid, an asshole, egotistical or weak.. pick one!"

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

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

I had not seen this, and am surprised by it.

I wish. It was a few years ago. :D

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

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

Can Obama win popular vote but lose election? - Yahoo! News

so apparently in Philly 2 members of the Black panther party, one with a night stick are blocking the door intimidating voters claiming republican voters shouldnt bother voting because a black man is going to win.

I agree with your experience sentence. The problem with your equation is that judgment is based upon experience. When you were 18, did you have the same judgment you had at 36? Or did your judgment change based upon your life experiences?

I think, however, that there are diminishing returns on experience and judgment.

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

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

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

well if true they ought to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and locked up for years

Has a snowball's chance (if that) but it'd be a hoot, the whole agony of defeat thing would be priceless.

The more appropriate scenario would be the EC tie, which would be pretty indicative of how divided a mess we really are.

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

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

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