I forgot his basic platform was ill sweep away Bush's failures!

Thanks!

10/1/2012 8:53:03 PM

I hadn't realized the Sproul thing might have such a potential far reaching impact. Obviously it didn't look great for Florida GOP to get caught up in a voting scandal, but if what I'm reading right here is right the Republican National Committee is shutting down their voter registration operations in many swing states because of this prematurely.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-01/republicans-end-swing-state-voter-sign-up-after-firing-company.html

Quote :

"The Republican National Committee ended efforts to sign up new voters before the deadline in key states for the presidential race because of questions raised over registration applications tied to the party. Republican parties in Florida, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina and Virginia -- all states that both campaigns view as competitive -- fired Glen Allen, Virginia-based Strategic Allied Consulting, the company in charge of registrations, said Kirsten Kukowski, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee. The national committee also canceled its contract with the company, its only vendor signing up new voters, Kukowski said. The five states have registration deadlines from Oct. 6 to Oct. 15. Stopping efforts before then could hurt Republican nominee Mitt Romney in his bid to unseat Democratic President Barack Obama, said Lance deHaven-Smith, a Florida State University political science professor in Tallahassee. “In any swing state that’s going to be significant because these elections are so close,” deHaven-Smith said. “This gives an advantage to Obama.” Firing the company didn’t hurt the party’s registration efforts, Kukowski said. ‘No Impact’ “It was wrapping up at the same time this happened, so there is no impact,” Kukowski said in an e-mail."

10/1/2012 10:02:24 PM

As if anybody gives a shit about a fucking DNC delegate weighing in on Romney.

All these threads in the god damned Soapbox are just full of 1) Democrats patting themselves on the back already like a bunch of overconfident assholes, and 2) pseudo-Conservatives flailing about like a squid in a sandstorm.

How about everyone just shut the fuck up for now and make a new all-encompassing thread during/after the debate Wednesday night? Let all the credibility watch and similar threads DIE ALREADY. At the very least take it to the Romney thread in Chit Chat; that's where 99% of this garbage actually belongs. The only decent thread going these days is the global warming one...

Beating a dead horse at this point doesn't begin to describe it. Both sides have completely exhausted the same.old.shit.

This is why both sides hate each other SO BAD. Nobody ever just takes a step back.

10/1/2012 10:31:40 PM

Philips Pulls Presidential Debate Sponsorship, Protests Johnson Exclusion


Philips Electronics has dropped its sponsorship of the 2012 presidential debates, citing a desire not to associate itself with “partisan politics,” POLITICO has learned.

Philips is the third and by far the largest of the original ten sponsors to pull its support, following similar decisions by British advertising firm BBH New York and the YWCA over the last week. Their decision to do so is seen as the result of intense lobbying efforts by advocacy organizations — primarily Libertarian supporters of former Gov. Gary Johnson — who oppose the exclusion of third-party candidates and who therefore believe the Commission on Presidential Debates is an anti-Democratic institution.

Mark A. Stephenson, the head of corporate communications at Philips North America, told POLITICO that the company doesn’t want to provide “even the slightest appearance of supporting partisan politics.”

Philips “has a long and proud heritage of being non-partisan in the many countries it serves around the world. While the Commission on Presidential Debates is a non-partisan organization, their work may appear to support bi-partisan politics,” Stephenson said in a written statement. “We respect all points of view and, as a result, want to ensure that Philips doesn’t provide even the slightest appearance of supporting partisan politics. As such, no company funds have been or will be used to support the Commission on Presidential Debates.”

http://libertycrier.com/politics/philips-pulls-presidential-debate-sponsorship-protests-johnson-exclusion/

10/2/2012 3:39:52 AM

Judge blocks PA Voter ID law:

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14182503-judge-blocks-pennsylvania-voter-id-law?lite

A Pennsylvania judge has blocked enforcement of the voter identification law which the legislature enacted and Republican Gov. Tom Corbett signed last year, meaning the law will not be in effect for the Nov. 6 election.

Judge Robert Simpson said even with the streamlined procedures that state officials proposed to make it easier for voters without ID cards to obtain them, “the proposed changes are to occur about five weeks before the general election, and I question whether sufficient time now remains to attain the goal of liberal access” to ID cards.

He said, “I expected more photo IDs to have been issued by this time. For this reason, I accept Petitioners’ argument that in the remaining five weeks before the general election, the gap between the photo IDs issued and the estimated need will not be closed.”

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM. Reason : .]

10/2/2012 10:37:56 AM

Good. In person voter fraud is a non-issue and that is backed up with tons of evidence

In the future I actually have no issues with these laws but you cant institute this in less than six months and railroad it through with obvious intent. If Republicans want this law it needs to be done both over time and the government infrastructure needs to be in place to make it as easy as possible to attain.

This kind of crap is exactly the reason why the new Republican Party is far from one that actually wants smaller government.

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 10:53 AM. Reason : Can't]

10/2/2012 10:44:30 AM

agreed, if done it should be clearly announced and phased in over years

10/2/2012 10:51:35 AM

Quote :

"Good. In person voter fraud is a non-issue and that is backed up with tons of evidence"

Can I see this "tons of evidence"

10/2/2012 10:56:25 AM

Do you have google?

Here:
http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/

Quote :

"Summary * Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. * Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. * Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct. * Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda. * Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action."

Quote :

"Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. Most citizens who take the time to vote offer their legitimate signatures and sworn oaths with the gravitas that this hard-won civic right deserves. Even for the few who view voting merely as a means to an end, however, voter fraud is a singularly foolish way to attempt to win an election. Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote. The single vote is simply not worth the price. Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."

Quote :

"Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. Although there are a few scattered instances of real voter fraud, many of the vivid anecdotes cited in accounts of voter fraud have been proven false or vastly overstated. In Missouri in 2000, for example, the Secretary of State claimed that 79 voters were registered with addresses at vacant lots, but subsequent investigation revealed that the lots in question actually housed valid and legitimate residences. Similarly, a 1995 investigation into votes allegedly cast in Baltimore by deceased voters and those with disenfranchising felony convictions revealed that the voters in question were both alive and felony-free. Many of the inaccurate claims result from lists of voters compared to other lists - of deceased individuals, persons with felony convictions, voters in other states, etc. These attempts to match information often yield predictable errors. In Florida in 2000, a list of purged voters later became notorious when it was discovered that the “matching” process captured eligible voters with names similar to - but decidedly different from - the names of persons with felony convictions, sometimes in other states entirely. A 2005 attempt to identify supposed double voters in New Jersey mistakenly accused people with similar names but whose middle names or suffixes were clearly different, such as “J.T. Kearns, Jr.” and “J.T. Kearns, Sr.,” of being the same person. Even when names and birthdates match across lists, that does not mean there was voter fraud. Elementary statistics students are often surprised to learn that it is more likely than not that among just 23 individuals, two will share a birthday. Similar statistics show that for most reasonably common names, it is extremely likely that at least two people with the same name in a state will share the same date of birth. The ostensible “matches” may not represent the same person at all. Other allegations of fraudulent voting often turn out to be the result of common clerical errors, incomplete information, or faulty assumptions. Most allegations of voter fraud simply evaporate when more rigorous analysis is conducted."

Quote :

"Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda. Voter fraud is most often invoked as a substantial problem in order to justify particular election policies. Chief among these is the proposal that individuals be required to show photo ID in order to vote - a policy that disenfranchises up to 10% of eligible citizens. But the only misconduct that photo ID addresses is the kind of voter fraud that happens as infrequently as death by lightning. Therefore, it suits those who prefer photo ID as a policy to lump as much misconduct in with “voter fraud” as possible, to create the impression that the problem is far more significant than it actually is. Moreover, to the extent photo ID is suggested as a solution to the perception that voter fraud occurs, it behooves those who prefer photo ID to reinforce the unsubstantiated perception that voter fraud exists. Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action. Researchers, reporters, public figures, and policymakers confronted with claims of potential fraud should carefully examine these claims before calling for action. Do the claims depend on matching information from one list to another? Is the matching process accurate? Does a match indicate an illegal vote, or is there a more plausible explanation? Is corroborating evidence available? If there actually appears to be a problem, can it be addressed by existing practices, or is a new solution necessary? If so, will the solution proposed - usually either a mass purge or photo identification - really solve the problem? Is the solution sufficiently burdensome that it becomes a greater problem than the problem itself? These basic questions are crucially important to evaluating claims of voter fraud, but are all too often unasked and unanswered."

10/2/2012 11:04:02 AM

^^^^^^I too would like to see Johnson included. I wish the GOP had put him up there directly rather than Romney, but third parties should be included more in general anyways.

^^^^Basically agree there. If you're going to pass laws that restrict voter access, then you should have to do it well in advance, in a thoughtful way, and with enough money behind it to do it right. Not haphazardly while declaring passing this law will let your Presidential candidate win like they did in PA. I'm glad it got struck down for now.

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 11:06 AM. Reason : .]

10/2/2012 11:05:37 AM

Quote :

"Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote. The single vote is simply not worth the price."

Just like drinking and driving is not worth the penalty so nobody does it.
Just like smoking marijuana is not worth the penalty so nobody does it.

You have a strong case, dtownral!

thanks for changing my mind with your mountain of evidence!

10/2/2012 11:12:07 AM

holy fuck dude, just read a few more lines

Quote :

"Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM. Reason : .]

10/2/2012 11:15:06 AM

Quote :

"There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. "

I just posted a video of 1 case of documented voter fraud. That blows "no documented" out of the water.


Shall I keep going, jackass?

10/2/2012 11:16:23 AM

Wave dude, wave

seriously, keep going a few more lines

Quote :

"evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%"

is evidence of

Quote :

"no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. "

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 11:22 AM. Reason : .]

10/2/2012 11:21:37 AM

No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend
No documented wave or trend

10/2/2012 11:23:56 AM

It definitely says ""There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. "

wave or trend. oh no's! Wow you really got me now!

"There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. "

10/2/2012 11:27:14 AM

fuck dude, try to pay attention

it happens, it does not happen to a degree that it has any impact. when it was looked into in Florida it was actually only about 40 people who were non-citizens and just a few of them actually voted. It's just not an issue man.

Also, as a rule of thumb, using videos as evidence is annoying because its more work to locate the source. There was also no reason to post from YouTube when that video is still available on NBC's 2 website along with the story.

10/2/2012 11:39:14 AM

Hilarious.

Democrats can bus people to the polls, but not to an office to obtain ID.

Your hearts are truly in the right place, sirs.

...but have at it! Really!

Hispanics voting for Romney thanks to Obama's performance on Univision are terrific.

10/2/2012 11:42:53 AM

It's inconceivable that you think something with a REAL reason, such as obtaining power over an entire body of people, would be completely void of voter fraud.

If anything in this world was worth committing voter fraud for, it would be for an elected position.

But you sit here and act like there is no voter fraud because you found some statistics on the internet.

There is clear motive for a cover up.

Without picture IDs, how would you as the precinct captain catch voter fraud? You want them to show you an ID that they aren't legally required to show?

I wish I could smack some sense into you, but you're in this stage of denial that is incomprehensible to me.

10/2/2012 11:49:56 AM

holy fuck dude

seriously

no one is saying it never happens

we are saying there is not any evidence that it happens at any kind of significant rate

posting a couple youtube videos doesn't change that

10/2/2012 11:58:12 AM

"Without picture IDs, how would you as the precinct captain catch voter fraud? You want them to show you an ID that they aren't legally required to show?"


This is the reason there is hardly any evidence that it happens at any kind of significant rate.

10/2/2012 12:01:21 PM

fuck it

10/2/2012 12:04:27 PM

10/2/2012 12:06:08 PM

It's just tiring.

10/2/2012 12:09:52 PM

This is good enough to deserve it's own thread, but I'll just put it here,

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/political_kombat/2012/10/political_kombat_mitt_romney_s_presidential_nomination_battle_as_a_video_game_fight_.html

10/2/2012 12:58:08 PM

The best post you've ever made.

10/2/2012 1:53:00 PM

Quote :

""Without picture IDs, how would you as the precinct captain catch voter fraud? You want them to show you an ID that they aren't legally required to show?""

A person walks in to vote, is told they already voted, proceeds to file a claim and thus prompt an investigation during which they'll prove, one way or another, who they are, and the claim shows up on a map like this:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/09/voter_id_laws_a_state_by_state_map_reveals_how_much_voter_fraud_there_is_in_the_united_states_almost_none_.html

Quote :

"This is the reason there is hardly any evidence that it happens at any kind of significant rate."

No, it's not. It simply doesn't happen at a significant rate because it's a huge pain in the ass to shlep yourself to a dozen different polling stations in one day just to cast a single vote at each, and wearing a different mask every time you try to vote at the same precinct doesn't usually work. And the second you try to vote for someone who already voted, you're busted and on your way to federal lockup. Of all the possible ways to commit voter fraud, in-person fraud probably has the highest risk/reward ratio, risking years of jailtime for the possibility of casting one, maybe two votes per hour.

If you want to commit election fraud, volunteer to become an observer and mess with the votes en masse. Or, get a bunch of absentee ballots and mail em in. You'll get away with way more voter fraud using either method, and the Republicans wont do a thing to stop you, in fact they might hire you.


[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 2:56 PM. Reason : .]

10/2/2012 2:42:09 PM

BUT...BUT...BUT...YOUTUBE VIDEOS!!

10/2/2012 3:04:59 PM

Drudge is pimping some tape from six years ago possibly to be released tonight from Obama... Interested to see it I guess.

10/2/2012 4:25:56 PM

^^^ not to mention that when you have voting results that match the polling done prior to the elections, you also know there wasn't ENOUGH foul play to reasonably believe massive in person fraud was occuring.

10/2/2012 4:29:04 PM

^^ I mean, they MUST have something. No way Obama throws the first punch and they don't counter.

10/2/2012 4:31:36 PM

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 4:31 PM. Reason : double post]

10/2/2012 4:31:36 PM

Quote :

"Drudge is pimping some tape from six years ago possibly to be released tonight from Obama... Interested to see it I guess."

is it the same one that's been referenced in right-wing chain mails where obama admits that he's a muslim and the administration has kept foxnews and hannity from showing? Because if that's the one, it's been on youtube for years. (I got that email from a family member recently)

10/2/2012 4:40:05 PM

It must be the infamous "whitey" video we've been hearing about for years and that Breitbart was murdered over.

Oh and,

Quote :

"@DRUDGE: Internal debate at news network about airing tape tonight, on eve of debate... MORE"

translation: the video actually makes Obama look good, so we're trying to edit it in a way that makes him look bad.

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 4:49 PM. Reason : :]

10/2/2012 4:47:50 PM

Oh boy, WRAL did a poll on the presidential election, bet the comments sections will be fun.

http://www.wral.com/wral-news-poll--presidential-race-still-tight-in-nc/11615486/

10/2/2012 7:44:44 PM

Quote :

"Latino voters are now squarely in Obama's camp, with nearly three-fourths of those surveyed backing the president. In May, Romney held almost a 2-1 lead among North Carolina's growing population of Latino voters."

Ouch.

10/2/2012 7:48:48 PM

Quote :

"The Dems are down 80,000 registered NC voters from 2008. Doesn't matter what the newsie's polls say. The Dems are about 60,000 voters shy of winning NC. Polls don't mean much when you don't have the number of registered voters to win"

Don't they only poll registered voters?

10/2/2012 7:54:48 PM

Holy hell, what the fuck is wrong with Drudge? Clicking any link on that fucking site is taking me to a page to donate to Mitt Romney.

Apparently the Daily Caller is releasing a damning video tonight that is blaming whitey for the plight of the poor or something.

^ most reputable polls will have [sample size] and then RV or LV next to it. Registered voters or Likely Voters

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 7:57 PM. Reason : and anderson cooper tweeted about it too]

10/2/2012 7:56:39 PM

^ By whitey, who do you mean?

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 8:01 PM. Reason : x]

10/2/2012 7:59:54 PM

I think it's this from Hampton... it's not bad but there can be excerpts that look bad when out of context like pretty much any speech in human history.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-2007-hampton-speech-full-text-video-drudge-hannity-daily-caller-2012-10?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+businessinsider%2Fpolitics+%28Business+Insider+-+Politix%29

** and apparently it was extensively talked about in 2008 during his election campaign.

[Edited on October 2, 2012 at 8:04 PM. Reason : this must be some crazy desperation time]

10/2/2012 8:02:17 PM

Quote :

"Holy hell, what the fuck is wrong with Drudge?"

He's Drudge.

That's what the fuck is wrong with him.

10/2/2012 8:09:03 PM

So here's the article and video

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans

I don't get it. Is this supposed to be big news? Tucker Carlson ran with the same video in 2007. Maybe I'm just blinded by blue tented glasses, someone explain to me whats wrong with anything he said.

10/2/2012 9:56:41 PM

Can only hope this gets more widespread coverage.

10/2/2012 9:58:43 PM

^^ it doesn't really matter what's wrong.

It's more straws for romney supporters to grasp for.

Although i'm not sure how good of an idea shining a light on Obama's religious background, considering Romney's own religious background.

10/2/2012 10:03:59 PM

God damn it is hilarious to see the hypocritical liberal mind at work.

1) Some shitty little video that you dismiss as inconsequential but gives a little insight into how Obama really thinks/feels. Sounds JUST like Romney's fucking stupid 47% moment.

But this one doesn't matter, it's Obama! It's cool!

2) As much as you assholes promote religious tolerance, yet you jump all over Mormonism because it happens to be Romney's faith.

Well isn't that convenient?

Unbelievable.

10/2/2012 10:29:01 PM

That dumbass accent he put on was the worst part of the video

10/2/2012 11:01:40 PM

imagine that, a politician catering to the audience (w/o a teleprompter!). his "accent" is pretty funny, i gotta admit. he's polished up a lot since 2007, and got a lot grayer.

Quote :

" As much as you assholes promote religious tolerance, yet you jump all over Mormonism because it happens to be Romney's faith."

which "asshole" did that? the only people i've seen "jump all over Mormonism" are atheists who "jump" on Christianity and Islam too. I don't think anyone is saying that Romney doesn't have the right to be a mormon, they're just saying his religion is silly, like all religions. (and come on, Mormonism just adds a lot of really weird stuff to the already-weird Bible. Don't they believe that "native americans" are some of the lost tribes of israel?)

10/2/2012 11:13:55 PM

Isn't this voter fraud situation similar to harsher gun laws bc someone got shot?

Also don't liberals secretly hate religion?

10/2/2012 11:15:42 PM

Quote :

"jump all over Mormonism because it happens to be Romney's faith."

I agree that Romney shouldn't be attacked over his religion, although that didn't seem to be what moron was doing. I can't remember any overt attacks on Romney's religion since like that one Rick Perry-supporting minister guy tried the cult line during the primary campaign and it didn't really go anywhere.

The Mormon church as an organization however I think is fair game for expressing concern about, especially considering how political they are with money that could go to charity instead, and how they bankrolled Prop 8. But that's a topic for another thread.

10/2/2012 11:24:31 PM

Just watched the Daily Caller video. If that's the best they have, LOL...

10/3/2012 12:07:25 AM