• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Colorado: Tied michigan: Tied new hampshire: Tied nevada: Tied pennsylvania: Tied

MickeyW

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Last edited:
I am starting the feel like turnout will be huuge.

I dont know what to make of that yet.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I am starting the feel like turnout will be huuge.

I dont know what to make of that yet.
Click to expand...

Half the turnout anyway. Trump supporters are if nothing else, enthusiastic. Hillary supporters not so much.

Turnout could well be a huge factor.
 
jimbo said:
Half the turnout anyway. Trump supporters are if nothing else, enthusiastic. Hillary supporters not so much.

Turnout could well be a huge factor.
Click to expand...

I meant to say as in "the turnout will be huge"....lots of people will vote.

Now Trump keeps on saying that this is his silent majority, lapsed voters back in the game, but idk.
 
I said last week and again this week, that I think the media is continually overstating the % for Hillary...no surprise to me, seeing the bias.
 
It was nice to see Cruz make an effort in MI.

Apparently his butthurt is better.
 
MickeyW said:
I said last week and again this week, that I think the media is continually overstating the % for Hillary...no surprise to me, seeing the bias.
Click to expand...

I decided to not pay much attention to the polls at around convention time, the way they have been acting up to now that was a good decision. I saw Peter Hart say that in his opinion the DC ELITE did not understand this election from the jump, and they still dont, and he was I am sure including the pollsters. If they get this right it will be by pure luck I tell ya...

BTW this is exactly what Crazy Bernie said around FEB/MARCH...said that the DC ELITE dont get it, and refuse to listen to him, he the one who had been out there constantly with the little people for months, him trying to pay attention. The DC ELITE was a brick wall he said (paraphrase)
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye10 said:
I meant to say as in "the turnout will be huge"....lots of people will vote.

Now Trump keeps on saying that this is his silent majority, lapsed voters back in the game, but idk.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, it's the Trumpsters that have the enthusiasm. He draws the crowds. I think it's the Trumpsters that will show up. I don't know about Hillary voters.
 
jimbo said:
From what I've seen, it's the Trumpsters that have the enthusiasm. He draws the crowds. I think it's the Trumpsters that will show up. I don't know about Hillary voters.
Click to expand...

Hillary spent almost all of her money and her energy on data and get out the vote efforts, if that worked then The Rebellion is sunk. But then again money has not made any difference up till now, and the experts have mostly flubbed up till now.

It will be a VERY interesting day.
 
MickeyW said:
I said last week and again this week, that I think the media is continually overstating the % for Hillary...no surprise to me, seeing the bias.
Click to expand...

I agree. The leftist propaganda machine called the election a week ago for Globalist Granny. And of course a lot of your simpleton leftists on DP bought it. Hilarious.
 
jimbo said:
From what I've seen, it's the Trumpsters that have the enthusiasm. He draws the crowds. I think it's the Trumpsters that will show up. I don't know about Hillary voters.
Click to expand...

Don't forget leftists cast more than one vote, so they always have voter corruption on their side.
 
Re: Colorado: Tied Michigan: Tied New Hampshire: Tied Nevada: Tied Pennsylvania: Tied

MickeyW said:
Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump tied in Colorado, new poll shows – The Denver Post

EXCLUSIVE POLL: Trump Surging Ahead Of Clinton In Michigan | The Daily Caller

https://www.uml.edu/docs/TOPLINE-NH-GENERAL-20161103_tcm18-264691.pdf

#NVElection: 8 News NOW Poll finds Clinton, Trump races tied -

Pennsylvania Statewide Poll
Click to expand...

Not quite. But, Florida, NC and Nevada are tied, and Ohio is leaning heavily toward Trump. Hill of beans still has a firm grip on Michigan, Pen and Colorado...with NH being a bit less secure.
 
DamnYankee said:
Leftists invented voter fraud.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...the first likely case of voter fraud was on the Pnyx in Athens in 471 B.C.E. in the ostracism trial of Themistocles. His aristocratic opponents didn't like having a common man with an agenda of using public funds to lift poor Athenians out of poverty, initate public education and health care, etc. for a leader. Those opponents distrubted ostraka with his name on it to members of the Aereopagus with the apparent intent of replacing already cast ostraka.

I'm not aware of any earlier governments that allowed voting. So, I'm curious about your claim here. Why do you say that leftists invented voter fraud? What does that have to do with vote fraud as it is currently practiced?
 
code1211 said:
Riiight... That's why the Dems are working tirelessly to increase and enforce Voter ID Laws.
Click to expand...

Voter ID laws won't stop the most common kinds of vote fraud, and instead merely make it more difficult for people with limited resources to vote. Proponents of such laws have been caught on record saying that they intend the law to disenfranchise poor and minority voters, not stop vote fraud. That said, I'm having a hard time figuring out what your point is. You should spell out your reasoning a little more clearly.
 
ashurbanipal said:
Hmmmm...the first likely case of voter fraud was on the Pnyx in Athens in 471 B.C.E. in the ostracism trial of Themistocles. His aristocratic opponents didn't like having a common man with an agenda of using public funds to lift poor Athenians out of poverty, initate public education and health care, etc. for a leader. Those opponents distrubted ostraka with his name on it to members of the Aereopagus with the apparent intent of replacing already cast ostraka.

I'm not aware of any earlier governments that allowed voting.
Click to expand...
So, I'm curious about your claim here. Why do you say that leftists invented voter fraud? What does that have to do with vote fraud as it is currently practiced?
Click to expand...

I think voting with the sword was the most common method of choosing a leader.
 
ashurbanipal said:
Why do you say that leftists invented voter fraud? What does that have to do with vote fraud as it is currently practiced?
Click to expand...

Everywhere you look leftists are responsible for committing acts of fraud of this type. I'm sure GOP'ers do it as well, but not on the level of leftists. That's why I'm in full support of voter ID laws which will guarantee an eligible citizen to vote, and only vote once.
 
humbolt said:
I think voting with the sword was the most common method of choosing a leader.
Click to expand...

In what context? Athens famously endured some pretty violent coups and revolts in the 9th-6th centuries B.C.E., but I'm not aware of one having taken place during the classical period (but then, it's been quite a while since I studied the history of classical Athens). In general in the ancient world (Near East, Greece, Rome, Egypt, China), it was less common than one might think that a leader rose to power through violence. Of course, there definitely were such instances.
 
DamnYankee said:
Everywhere you look leftists are responsible for committing acts of fraud of this type. I'm sure GOP'ers do it as well, but not on the level of leftists. That's why I'm in full support of voter ID laws which will guarantee an eligible citizen to vote, and only vote once.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that's the case everywhere you look, but it's not the case everywhere I look. What I see is that vote fraud is rare enough so as not to really matter to the outcome of elections (especially national ones), and both sides do it. I would suggest to you that you:

1. Read the link I posted as an example. Pretty easy to see, based on the kinds of vote fraud actually caught, that voter ID laws won't help.

2. Consider that you may have a bias in where you look and what you see.
 
ashurbanipal said:
Voter ID laws won't stop the most common kinds of vote fraud, and instead merely make it more difficult for people with limited resources to vote. Proponents of such laws have been caught on record saying that they intend the law to disenfranchise poor and minority voters, not stop vote fraud. That said, I'm having a hard time figuring out what your point is. You should spell out your reasoning a little more clearly.
Click to expand...

"make it more difficult for people with limited resources to vote"

Bought that BS did you?

Ask yourself this, how do these 'limited resources' people collect their government benefits without a picture ID?
That same picture ID is all that's being requested to be presented at the polling place.

This argument is facetious.
 
ashurbanipal said:
Perhaps that's the case everywhere you look, but it's not the case everywhere I look. What I see is that vote fraud is rare enough so as not to really matter to the outcome of elections (especially national ones), and both sides do it. I would suggest to you that you:

1. Read the link I posted as an example. Pretty easy to see, based on the kinds of vote fraud actually caught, that voter ID laws won't help.

2. Consider that you may have a bias in where you look and what you see.
Click to expand...

Your obvious choosing to be uninformed. Sad.

How much voter fraud is acceptable? A little?
 
Last edited:
ashurbanipal said:
Voter ID laws won't stop the most common kinds of vote fraud, and instead merely make it more difficult for people with limited resources to vote. Proponents of such laws have been caught on record saying that they intend the law to disenfranchise poor and minority voters, not stop vote fraud. That said, I'm having a hard time figuring out what your point is. You should spell out your reasoning a little more clearly.
Click to expand...

Politicians are constantly working for only one goal and that goal is to be re-elected once in power. IF voter fraud is a practice that is believed to benefit one side or the other, you can quickly determine whom it favors by who opposes it.

I believe that a good voter fraud reduction policy would be to use that indelible ink to semi permanently dye people's fingers or whatever appendage is available lacking fingers.

So what if you have to have a purple finger for two months? It might become a sign of fashionable participation.

No need for a photo ID then. One man, one vote. At least to some extent. I suppose the truly dedicated could vote ten times given the right amputations.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom