Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * - - 1 votes

Romney v Obama


  • Please log in to reply
206 replies to this topic

Poll: Who would you vote for? (42 member(s) have cast votes)

Who would you vote for?

  1. Obama (33 votes [78.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 78.57%

  2. Romney (4 votes [9.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.52%

  3. Neither (3 votes [7.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.14%

  4. I'm not American, why should I care. (2 votes [4.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.76%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,717 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:58 AM

What I'd like to know is where do Mitt's Magic Underpants come in all this? :unsure:
"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#82 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,236 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:25 AM

What I'd like to know is where do Mitt's Magic Underpants come in all this? :unsure:


It'll all come out in the wash.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#83 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,506 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:35 AM

Its all odd to me. However, there is a distinct possibility that whoever is elected will not hold to all their pre-election promises.

I think it's more difficult for presidents or parties in the States to hold to their promises because the chances of those promises being fulfilled depends heavily on their ability to win over the opposition. At the outset of a presidency the president's party can be the majority party in congress but then during their premiership one or both houses could fall to the opposition, so putting paid to the pre-election intentions of the president. Obama lost the house to the republicans a year into his term of office and that no doubt has had a negative effect upon his plans although such as his universal healthcare idea was not popular with all members of his own party never mind the republicans.

#84 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:08 PM

Fake (apparently) but funny

Posted Image

Edited by gingerjon, 06 November 2012 - 01:10 PM.

Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#85 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:24 PM

Meanwhile, this is happening ... and this is how the race will be decided.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#86 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,710 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:37 PM

Our lass hasn't voted yet,but we will be on the transport bus to take us at lunchtime.I will have a laugh with the bible reciting GO ladies by singing"while cowards weep and traiters sneer"and not finish it off,and see if they know what it is.They are ok really all good fun
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#87 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:58 PM

Meanwhile, this is happening ... and this is how the race will be decided.


Thank God, the democrats are above such petty cheating.

http://www.cbsnews.c...er-fraud-video/

#88 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:00 PM

Thank God, the democrats are above such petty cheating.

http://www.cbsnews.c...er-fraud-video/


Yes. That is clearly the same and in no way an example of false equivalance.

It shows a Project Veritas "investigator" telling Patrick Moran that he has a friend who is seeking to "get in a van" and vote on behalf of about 100 people. Patrick Moran responds with skepticism, but is later shown saying the person voting on behalf of others could potentially use "utility bills or something like that."
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#89 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:04 PM

Yes. That is clearly the same and in no way an example of false equivalance.

It shows a Project Veritas "investigator" telling Patrick Moran that he has a friend who is seeking to "get in a van" and vote on behalf of about 100 people. Patrick Moran responds with skepticism, but is later shown saying the person voting on behalf of others could potentially use "utility bills or something like that."


Moran later says the person would be better off participating in traditional get-out-the-vote efforts, but he goes on to have a conversation about how to forge documents.

Unwise to say the least.

But if you investigate more throughly you'll find that both parties indulge in gerrymandery of voting districts. You seemed to suggest that only the Republicans would be so devious.

On the subject of black voters, ironically, the Republicans have a better record on not screwing over blacks in the American south than the democrats.

Edited by Northern Sol, 06 November 2012 - 03:07 PM.


#90 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:10 PM

You seemed to suggest that only the Republicans would be so devious.


Right now, I'd suggest that only the Republicans are using legislation to exclude legitimate votes.

Gerrymandering, which as far as I'm aware doesn't impact this election as you can't change the shape of Wyoming, is something both parties are guilty of, I agree.

And, yes, it is quite eye-watering the Democrat position on segregation (for example) historically.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#91 RidingPie

RidingPie
  • Coach
  • 1,209 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:19 PM

And of course a catholic bishop has said that voting democrat will send you to hell

See here

Somehow I don't think that would have as much effect in the UK as it would in the US

#92 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:22 PM

Romney's faith. It's all about Missouri for a Millennium.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#93 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,710 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:27 PM

I wouldnt mind being back home in Bramley right now and would like a couple of wealthy young mormons to knock on my door.
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#94 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:35 PM

Gerrymandering, which as far as I'm aware doesn't impact this election as you can't change the shape of Wyoming, is something both parties are guilty of, I agree.


No, but the electoral college weighting is somewhat subjective as it isn't directly proportional to the population of the state.

#95 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,936 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:36 PM

Romney's faith. It's all about Missouri for a Millennium.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxMD02zU9SE


Is it a good thing that someone that believes in the second coming of Christ and that, being one of the righteous, they will live in paradise could potentially have his finger on the big red button? (Assuming it is a big red button, I would be disappointed if it wasn't big and red).
Fides invicta triumphat

#96 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

No, but the electoral college weighting is somewhat subjective as it isn't directly proportional to the population of the state.


That's interesting. I didn't know the EC votes had been amended but now thanks to the power of Wiki I see that Florida is going to get even more important.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#97 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

California is the tricky one. It has (relative to the others) a huge population and thus loads of EC votes, votes consistantly democrat.

If it was split into two states (as some think it should) then the combined EC votes would be higher or possibly the Republicans might win Northern California.

#98 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 04:32 PM

California is the tricky one. It has (relative to the others) a huge population and thus loads of EC votes, votes consistantly democrat.

If it was split into two states (as some think it should) then the combined EC votes would be higher or possibly the Republicans might win Northern California.


According to a piece I've just read of California has a whole some 30% of the population is registered Republican and yet they stand not a chance of getting a say in the election of the President.

It was apparently 13 counties in the south of the state - all Republican leaning - who last put up the idea of splitting. That was last year and they plan to rally again for it next year.

It seems that there are a couple of states that divide their EC votes according to proportion rather than "all or nothing". Is that right?
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#99 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 05:28 PM

That is true.

Strictly speaking the electoral college is simply how many voters each state will have in the election of a president. Who those voters are is a matter for the state and its electoral system, the federal government merely sets the number. The voters could theoretically vote for anyone, they aren't bound to vote the way that the electorate said they should.

#100 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,171 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 06:20 AM

According to the figures on Wiki Obama polled 50.9m to Romney's 50.7m.

EDIT:
So far. I imagine not even they are claiming to know the vote in polls which haven't actually closed yet.

Edited by gingerjon, 07 November 2012 - 06:20 AM.

Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users