Next best thing for the US (and perhaps the world)

[Beriallord]

 

You say it's unfair to throw the blame to one side?

 

Give me one example of legislation pushed by the democratic party to try to repress people from voting. I bet you can't find one because none exist!

 

What you call "vote repression" is nothing but a subjective view on the election laws. Some people just stretch it out so far that is starts to sound like a conspiracy theory. Hence, the tinfoil hat.

[colourwheel]

 

You say it's unfair to throw the blame to one side?

 

Give me one example of legislation pushed by the democratic party to try to repress people from voting. I bet you can't find one because none exist!

 

What you call "vote repression" is nothing but a subjective view on the election laws. Some people just stretch it out so far that is starts to sound like a conspiracy theory. Hence, the tinfoil hat.

 

It's not subjective. Pennsylvania’s Senate Republican leader out right was bragging these new laws would help Romney win. How is it subjective when the republican party admits they are purposely making these new laws to repress people from voting who would normally vote democratic? It's hardly a conspiracy theory when it's completely out in the open.

Edited November 5, 2012 by colourwheel

[ginnyfizz]

I actually wasn't even going to vote in this election, but I changed my mind and am going to cast a vote for Romney. Also we got a senator that needs to take a hike right along with Obama, and he is on the rail this election. Obama getting the boot and - 1 to the Democratic Senate would be a great victory.

 

Good luck voting this year if you haven't already registered. The Republican party has made it so hard to vote this year if you haven't already registered last week in most states you won't beable to vote. The republican party might have just disenfranchised you from voting.

 

I've been registered for years. You only have to do it once. Actually the thing that tipped my decision was the Democratic Party calling my cell phone up and wasting my minutes. Registered independents get called by both political parties. At least the Republicans have the courtesy not to call my cell phone! And they were trying to get me to re-elect their worthless Senator, and the best pitch they could make to re-elect him was he saved 300 jobs or something. If that is the best he can do then he obviously isn't cut out for the job.

 

This is not true. You have to get your Voting registration renewed everytime you move out of state or change postal address. Also your valid voting registration card will become void if you stop voting for a few years. You might want to check up and see how the Republican party might have just unintentionally disenfranchised you one of their supporters from voting this year. Depending on which state you live in you might need to register again to vote if you haven't voted in the past 4 years. The republican party has been very sneaky this year.

 

Good Lord...you actually call it unfair if you get barred from voting for not registering a week/two weeks before the poll? Over here each householder (in my case for example, my father) gets a form once per year to fill in concerning all residents in their property. People who rent but do not own should also get a form. The forms are sent in and the register is published. This ensures that people who are not householders but care about their right to vote can inspect the register and object if they are not on it. If they can show good cause and should be entitled to vote, then they will be added. If you have a dodgy landlord who might have some reason not to let the electoral forms through (like if some of the tenants are illegals), you can always go to the Town Hall and insist on your rights to be added. But you get one chance per year and a limited period in which to object, so need to be clued up about when the register of electors forms go out. So to any outsider the practice of allowing people to register to vote as late as they are in the USA looks remarkably liberal,

[colourwheel]

Good Lord...you actually call it unfair if you get barred from voting for not registering a week/two weeks before the poll? Over here each householder (in my case for example, my father) gets a form once per year to fill in concerning all residents in their property. People who rent but do not own should also get a form. The forms are sent in and the register is published. This ensures that people who are not householders but care about their right to vote can inspect the register and object if they are not on it. If they can show good cause and should be entitled to vote, then they will be added. If you have a dodgy landlord who might have some reason not to let the electoral forms through (like if some of the tenants are illegals), you can always go to the Town Hall and insist on your rights to be added. But you get one chance per year and a limited period in which to object, so need to be clued up about when the register of electors forms go out. So to any outsider the practice of allowing people to register to vote as late as they are in the USA looks remarkably liberal,

 

It might seem liberal for you but this is just how America has been. Recently with the new legislation the republican party has been pushing is an attempt to shirnk the electoral college so fewer people can vote each year having a smaller amount of people voting to decided who runs the country. The republican party has always wanted to shrink the electoral college since before reagan.

Edited November 5, 2012 by colourwheel

[Deleted472477User]

Its like the democratic party has become the new Republican party and the Republican party has become some crazy political movement with the purpose of duping the nation with complete nonsence with no real proof about anything they preach just to get into power.

 

 

I have to agree, especially since I look back at history and see that we had some excellent presidents who did some great things and they identified as Republican. Lincoln was a Republican. so were Eisenhower and Teddy Roosevelt, who got the whole National Parks thing rolling (to my knowledge, if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong) and now? The same party wants to reverse all that. Someone I know who identifies as Republican said (out loud, not on a forum) that he thought the best solution to joblessness and poverty was just have all the poor people and homeless put into work camps. I asked him who would make his latte on the way to work every morning, because since Starbuck's employees aren't known for their vast amounts of wealth and they would be there too. He shut up pretty fast, but I've also heard him say something similar to Scrooge's comment about "Then let them die and therefore decrease the surplus population."

 

 

I won't say they all think this way, but those who do aren't likely to voice it so bluntly, or publicly. It would lose them votes. The point of my without caffeine yet this morning rambling is they've gotten to be really, really scary, and I don't see the Democrats doing much to stop them, even when they can. All I know is I don't know what I'm going to do if Romney wins. I'm not well-off, I do what I can work-wise, but unless I win a mega millions lottery, I won't be safe.

[Tidus44]

Colourwheel – I believe you may just want to accept the fact that there is at least one individual in the US who is going to vote this year who is currently wearing a tinfoil hat as they sit in a corner rocking back and forth hugging their cell phone and mumbling about their precious minutes. Sadly, there seems to be a fairly large number of people who do get to vote simply because they exist and who have no idea and cannot be convinced of the issues that exist. Simply, you are flogging a dead horse here.

 

As for the UK, I do not recall there being a “one time only” registration law in the UK or anyone having to force officials to place them onto the registration list. If anyone has to force someone in the UK to register, it’s the officials forcing the voter not the reverse. The registration system is sort of tied to a taxation system called Council Taxes and it is unlawful not to register as the list is also used to identify who owes the taxes.

A person in the UK can register anytime of the year including the day of the election if they show up and are not on the registration list. The electoral offices set their own rules and each is different, but generally there is no big issue registering to vote in the UK. All one needs is something to prove they live at an address and are eligible to vote.

I believe the system has even changed over the last few years anyway and is just as liberal if not more so than the US system of registration. Its been a few years since I voted in the UK, but I highly doubt it is the restrictive, hard and fast system described.

 

And Yes, people in the US can be prevented from voting because they did not register prior to the deadline. Some states have no deadline, others require registration as many as 31 days before the election.

[Syco21]

Good Lord...you actually call it unfair if you get barred from voting for not registering a week/two weeks before the poll? Over here each householder (in my case for example, my father) gets a form once per year to fill in concerning all residents in their property. People who rent but do not own should also get a form. The forms are sent in and the register is published. This ensures that people who are not householders but care about their right to vote can inspect the register and object if they are not on it. If they can show good cause and should be entitled to vote, then they will be added. If you have a dodgy landlord who might have some reason not to let the electoral forms through (like if some of the tenants are illegals), you can always go to the Town Hall and insist on your rights to be added. But you get one chance per year and a limited period in which to object, so need to be clued up about when the register of electors forms go out. So to any outsider the practice of allowing people to register to vote as late as they are in the USA looks remarkably liberal,

I disagree. I can't vote because I had the displeasure of moving to another district shortly before registration ended and couldn't change my current registration in the previous.

 

The net effect is that I have to drive 160 miles if I want to vote. Not possible.

[colourwheel]

Colourwheel – I believe you may just want to accept the fact that there is at least one individual in the US who is going to vote this year who is currently wearing a tinfoil hat as they sit in a corner rocking back and forth hugging their cell phone and mumbling about their precious minutes. Sadly, there seems to be a fairly large number of people who do get to vote simply because they exist and who have no idea and cannot be convinced of the issues that exist. Simply, you are flogging a dead horse here.

 

I can agree there is a lot of americans who cannot be convinced that voter repression exist. But honestly I think a lot of republicans and even people who I know personally just don't care. As long as they get to vote and it helps their canidate get elected they won't even admit how obscene it really is.

 

But good news for democrates in America is that according to Nate Silver's Political Calculus Obama has a 86.3% chance of winning the election tomarrow over Romneys low chance of 13.7% chance of winning.

 

One thing this years election has shown is Democrates seem much better at arithmetic than the Republicans. :thumbsup:

Edited November 5, 2012 by colourwheel

[Tidus44]

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-discredit-fox-news-benghazi/?mobile=nc

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-cias-benghazi-timeline-reveals-errors-but-no-evidence-of-conspiracy/2012/11/01/a84c4024-2471-11e2-9313-3c7f59038d93_story.html

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/world/africa/cia-played-major-defensive-role-in-libya-attack.html?ref=world&_r=1&

 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=164156200

 

 

These pretty much show everything Fox News has been saying about Benghazi has been a complete fabrication by Fox News.

 

One wonders what Fox News is going to say now?

 

 

One wonders if there was a test that demonstrated the voter was aware of issues and had given some thought (other than I vote Republican because I vote Republican) as to why they were voting one way or another, that the voter had to pass in order to vote, how many people would get to vote? On second thought, I don't think I want to know the answer to that question - I might just have a stroke.

[colourwheel]

@Tidus44 Only the republican base really cared about the Benghazi incident after Romney was called out on his misinformation at the second debate. Not only did it embarrace how uninformed mitt was about the whole thing but made Foxnews even less creditable after the 2nd debate.

 

Which explains a lot why the final debate Mitt Romney never brought up Benghazi because not only was he embarraced about being wrong but also embarraced about being called out by Obama trying to make political points while the Benghazi event was unfolding.

 

Even Mitt Romney's advisors probably told him to not ever talk about the topic ever again because it would be politically toxic for him when it was dangerous to begin with to make a press release to the public while such a dangerous situation was unfolding.

 

The whole Benghazi incident seemed after the debates were over was only being covered so much on Foxnews only to keep the republican base energized to distract their core viewers on all the romney campaigns follies being covered by every other news network. lol

 

Since Foxnews has been offically discredited on benghazi coverage, it wouldn't suprise me if we never hear about it again on foxnews. Either that or they will spin their reports to make it seem like everything is just dandy and pretend they did nothing wrong. lol

Edited November 5, 2012 by colourwheel