Vacant Horizon Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Someone really does need to investigate Benghazi! And uncover what really happened there. \\ All secretary of states and presidents have done that awful shit. that's no excuse though. Link to post Share on other sites
ditty Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 just a little something to read and think about. I haven't heard anyone here thinking of voting third party, but I have read "I'm voting against Hillary" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ralph-nader-voters_us_57f55aa4e4b0b7aafe0ba7f1?section=& Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 just a little something to read and think about. I haven't heard anyone here thinking of voting third party, but I have read "I'm voting against Hillary" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ralph-nader-voters_us_57f55aa4e4b0b7aafe0ba7f1?section=&Nader is very unjustly villainized for "stealing" Gore's supposed victory against Bush. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/dont_fall_for_it_the_nader_myth_and_your_2016_vote_20160802 I wish that myth would die already. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Nader is very unjustly villainized for "stealing" Gore's supposed victory against Bush. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/dont_fall_for_it_the_nader_myth_and_your_2016_vote_20160802 I wish that myth would die already. No it was the Supreme Court who did that. Which brings up an interesting point. This appears (at this point anyways) that it will be a very close election. And it a similar thing to 2000 happens and for some reason this goes to the Supreme Court, which due to the wisdom of GOP controlled Senate, is a 4-4 split down ideological lines, we would be truly hosed. The only logical conclusion would be that Obama would have to remain as President / Emperor so he could institute Sharia Law. See this was all set in motion when Obama killed Scalia (more than likely with his own hands). The writing is on the wall. Sincerely Alex Jones. Link to post Share on other sites
ditty Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Nader is very unjustly villainized for "stealing" Gore's supposed victory against Bush. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/dont_fall_for_it_the_nader_myth_and_your_2016_vote_20160802 I wish that myth would die already.Both are opinion pieces, just like ass holes, we all have one. Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Both are opinion pieces, just like ass holes, we all have one.Exit polling stats taken from Nader voters in Florida are not opinion pieces. Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Samantha Bee's show last night was incredible, especially the interviews w Trump voters. Link to post Share on other sites
ditty Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Exit polling stats taken from Nader voters in Florida are not opinion pieces. those that are saying they are sorry for voting for Nader are not villainizing Nader. They think if they voted differently, things would have turned out differently Samantha Bee's show last night was incredible, especially the interviews w Trump voters. she's ruthless with a take no prisoners approach, I love it! Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 those that are saying they are sorry for voting for Nader are not statsI'm not disagreeing with you. One is an opinion piece - the article you linked to, with zero factual basis for why voting for Nader was something to regret (in fact, one of the regretters that was quoted in your article voted in California, which Gore won, so, that doesn't even make sense). I'm just disgusted with the Hillary Campaign (whom I'm voting for!) for dredging up a disproved myth about Nader stealing the 2000 election from Gore - which is definitely the subtext of that article you linked to. Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I'm convinced Nader would have been a non-issue if Gore hadn't chosen such a pathetic running mate in Joe Lieberman. Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Isnt it a recognized notion that if Nader didn't run, Gore would've won? Man, imagine what a different world we'd live in today if that spoiled brat wasn't selected by the Supreme Court Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I'm convinced Nader would have been a non-issue if Gore hadn't chosen such a pathetic running mate in Joe Lieberman.If I recall, Gore/Lieberman won the popular vote by a landslide and the electoral college vote was very close. Also, something about voting poll count impropriety in Florida... Link to post Share on other sites
ditty Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I'm not disagreeing with you. One is an opinion piece - the article you linked to, with zero factual basis for why voting for Nader was something to regret (in fact, one of the regretters that was quoted in your article voted in California, which Gore won, so, that doesn't even make sense). I'm just disgusted with the Hillary Campaign (whom I'm voting for!) for dredging up a disproved myth about Nader stealing the 2000 election from Gore - which is definitely the subtext of that article you linked to. I haven't heard her bring anything up, BUT, her supporters should. Third party canidates have no place in presidential politics (really all politics - see Samantha Bee last night, poor Maine) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC18vz5hUUqxbGvym9ghtX_w until we fix the money first political system we have. If I recall, Gore/Lieberman won the popular vote by a landslide and the electoral college vote was very close. Also, something about voting poll count impropriety in Florida...yup...we will relieve the opposite in a month. Drumpf will win the popular vote and Clinton will win the electorate. Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 No it was the Supreme Court who did that. Not if you trust the New York Times recount. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 If I recall, Gore/Lieberman won the popular vote by a landslide and the electoral college vote was very close. Also, something about voting poll count impropriety in Florida...No landslideBush/Cheney 50,456,002Gore/Lieberman 50,998,897Nader/whoever it was he was running with 2,882,955The popular vote is almost, though not quite irrelevant. You win the majority of votes in key states, you win. If you win by a landslide in New York and California, but lose a close vote in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Illinois...well..it's obvious.2000 wasn't the first time it happened and may not be the last. Link to post Share on other sites
nalafej Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Nader/whoever it was he was running with 2,882,955I love that you looked up the vote totals but not all the candidates names. I too have no idea who Nader's running mate was and am not going to spend another 20 seconds googling it. Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Just in case it's getting lost in the statistics, Donald Trump and Mike Pence are fucking monsters. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted October 7, 2016 Author Share Posted October 7, 2016 I love that you looked up the vote totals but not all the candidates names. I too have no idea who Nader's running mate was and am not going to spend another 20 seconds googling it.Winona Laduke, no googling. Scout's honor. It was my first vote and maybe why it came as news to me when someone mentioned Lieberman as Gore's vp pick earlier in the thread. Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 yup...we will relieve the opposite in a month. Drumpf will win the popular vote and Clinton will win the electorate. How do you draw that conclusion? Link to post Share on other sites
ditty Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 How do you draw that conclusion?I believe rule areas will vote heavy on Trump, but the major metropolitan areas where the electorate numbers come from will vote Clinton. The outcome will be an electorate win for Clinton and a popular vote for Trump. I think Trump already knows this too, hence his comments about the system being rigged. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I believe rule areas will vote heavy on Trump, but the major metropolitan areas where the electorate numbers come from will vote Clinton. The outcome will be an electorate win for Clinton and a popular vote for Trump. I think Trump already knows this too, hence his comments about the system being rigged. If there were to happen (and honestly very doubtful, especially with his standings with women and minorities), he could argue that it was rigged. He would be wrong, because it clearly spells out the electoral process in the constitution. Of course Trump has never been one to let the constitution get in the way of his thinking or statements. Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I believe rule areas will vote heavy on Trump, but the major metropolitan areas where the electorate numbers come from will vote Clinton. The outcome will be an electorate win for Clinton and a popular vote for Trump. I think Trump already knows this too, hence his comments about the system being rigged. I don't think that's mathematically plausible. The rural population makes up less than 20% of the electorate. Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Samantha Bee's show last night was incredible, especially the interviews w Trump voters.Yes, twas. Her show is great. Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I don't think that's mathematically plausible. The rural population makes up less than 20% of the electorate.yeah but they actually show up to vote. Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 yeah but they actually show up to vote. Is it known to be true that rural voters show up in higher percentages than urban or suburban voters? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts