EPTPresident Obama Re-Elected - Page 1197
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:40 jdsowa wrote: Of course not. And nobody is physically preventing them from going to the polls. But ask yourself--isn't it utterly ridiculous that somebody who hasn't bothered to learn to speak the language should be voting in the election? Speak what language? WE HAVE NO OFFICIAL LANGUAGE. You could speak turkadakadurk and I'd still say you should be able to vote. | ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
If people don't understand what those figures mean, essentially they are the return you win back for every dollar bet, providing you bet on the correct outcome. So a win for Obama will only yield 17 cents profit per dollar. A very meagre return. On the other hand a win for Romney will yield $3.75 profit per dollar bet. So in other words, Obama is a MASSIVE favourite at every single bookie that this comparison website takes readings. The amount of money going on Romney to win is massively outweighed by the bets going for Obama to win. To add some perspective, these sort of odds in a two horse race are similar to the odds you would see for Roger Federer at his peak facing some unknown unseeded player in the first round of Wimbledon about five years ago. Federer was super consistent back then and would get really short odds to win especially in the early rounds, because everyone knew he was going to win and backed him heavily. So the bookies odds are saying that a Romney win would be a massive upset similar to if Federer had been knocked out in the First Round of Wimbledon by an unseeded player while at his peak. (NB Federer never did lose in the first Round of Wimbledon to an unseeded player while at his peak). You can see the odds for yourselves, and they change in Real-Time http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election/winner | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:41 oneofthem wrote: apparently CIA agents were involved in benghazi and they didn't want people giving it more attention. if the romney campaign isn't making a big deal out of it now, republicans should take a hint. I have no idea what you mean by this statement. | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:38 EvilTeletubby wrote: It's almost over, it's almost over... *rocks back and forth* And when the opposing candidate wins they will complete their satanic ritual to engulf the earth in flames and demons that rape us with barbed penises. But if MY candidate wins he will usher in an era of peace and prosperity for everyone. We will all have UNLIMITED nutella and be able to afford TWO Iphones! | ||
|
ThreeAcross
172 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:38 Risen wrote: There is no official language in the United States. Every citizen deserves the right to vote. Edit: Pottymouth language. Correct but there are states with English as the official language. | ||
|
MVega
763 Posts
We really need a voting system like Australia has where voting is mandatory and if you don't vote there is some sort of fine. At least that's how I remember Australian voting being, it's been quite awhile. I'd gladly pay the fine for not voting this election, I think as long as the money from that fine went into helping any one of my countrymen it would be worth a lot more than my vote. Edit: I'll just add this ... The candidates running for president don't take this as seriously as some of the voters do. If either candidate believed that the other guy was as evil/horrible/whatever as all the attack ads and spin claimed, if either candidate believed that the other candidate was going to run the country into the ground ... They wouldn't have been joking and laughing and chummy together after the debates. Since they were that either means they both, while wanting the job, think that the other guy is capable OR they're both equally bad. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18818 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:42 Risen wrote: I have no idea what you mean by this statement. I think he is suggesting that, via the Romney campaign's likely access to better information on the timeline, Romney's decision to not harp on Benghazi is telling of where the evidence points. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:42 ThreeAcross wrote: Correct but there are states with English as the official language. You have a point here somewhere. | ||
|
bOneSeven
Romania685 Posts
"David Seaman @d_seaman Barack Obama is a can of soda advertising as a health drink. Mitt Romney is a can of soda—advertising as a can of soda. " | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:42 Risen wrote: I have no idea what you mean by this statement. they want to avoid public announcements on the matter. it's an intelligence issue | ||
|
jdsowa
405 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:40 Risen wrote: It's racism to think that people might get confused due to misinformation? That's news to me. Oh wait, you're speaking nonsense. Yes, to think that poor black people specifically should be so stupid and ignorant as to not know how to vote, or where to vote, or when to vote, or for whom to vote--as implied in this charge of disenfranchisement--is racist. | ||
|
ThreeAcross
172 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:39 farvacola wrote: Hey now, you are the one projecting the facade of an "us vs them" mentality over top my bit of punditry. I am well aware of many Republicans sharing Democratic outrage at the voting debacle in Florida and brazen stupidity of Ohio SoS John Husted; more generally, Florida Gov. Rick Scott is a giant piece of shit with large numbers of detractors on both sides. If you want to jump aboard the "them" bus and share Gov. Scott's douche burden, go right on ahead. But just realize for a moment that if your standard for "proof" requires that someone write up a sign that explicitly says "No poor black voters", you might be going about this the wrong way. I don't think you get it. You said this only effects low income blacks. I called you out on this by saying we should care about everyone's vote and now I'm the one projecting /us versus them/? Take a step back and reanalyze your position. Edit: oh I might see your position now. I used those people when referring to people who got rides to vote on Sundays. You caught me. I was only referring to low income blacks on buses and had no intention of including other people who went from church to voting on Sundays. Got me. | ||
KwarK
United States41958 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:37 jdsowa wrote: I have no issue with a date being wrong in Spanish. If you can't speak English, you shouldn't be voting in the US election. If I lived in a foreign country and wasn't fluent, I sure as hell wouldn't pretend that I had any authority to influence the direction of that country. And many people would advocate disenfranchising people on the grounds of extreme idiocy. However people such as yourself are still able to vote because the dominant opinion is that every free citizen of age deserves a vote. You're sawing away at the branch you sit on, do you really believe your contributions to the dialogue (such as the one quoted above) are so valuable that you couldn't be removed once they start disenfranchising people. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
It seems like impossible, Is english realy not the official language for government and legal documents in the usa and could people make legal documents in anny language they like? could politicians write laws in spanish or german if they wanted and got a vote for it? In the netherlands every citizen is suposed to know the law, and i asume this is the same in the states. To know the law you should be able to read it? | ||
|
jdsowa
405 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:43 MVega wrote: So glad the election will be over soon. This is the first time in my life that I'm not voting. We really need a voting system like Australia has where voting is mandatory and if you don't vote there is some sort of fine. At least that's how I remember Australian voting being, it's been quite awhile. I'd gladly pay the fine for not voting this election, I think as long as the money from that fine went into helping any one of my countrymen it would be worth a lot more than my vote. Edit: I'll just add this ... The candidates running for president don't take this as seriously as some of the voters do. If either candidate believed that the other guy was as evil/horrible/whatever as all the attack ads and spin claimed, if either candidate believed that the other candidate was going to run the country into the ground ... They wouldn't have been joking and laughing and chummy together after the debates. Since they were that either means they both, while wanting the job, think that the other guy is capable OR they're both equally bad. That's a terrible idea. We should be valuing quality votes--people who bothered to give a damn about the candidates and the issues. As it is, we have this culture where we encourage people to vote regardless of their level of ignorance. | ||
|
Saryph
United States1955 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:37 jdsowa wrote: .... Most states have absentee voting and early voting. Florida is one of them. You don't need any excuse to write in an absentee ballot. All you need is a stamp and an envelope. States were taking absentee ballots MONTHS AGO. .... What about the problem that has been posted in this thread and reported in the news multiple times that there are tens of thousands of people who have requested absentee ballots in Florida (many more than two months ago) that have not received them? How exactly are they supposed to fill them out and get them in the hand of the correct people in the next 29 hours. If they get them in the mail today should they have to overnight fedex them? take the day off of work to drive them down in person? You can be rude and complain about this and that or whatever as much as you want, but what is actually going on seems to conflict with your opinion. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41958 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:48 jdsowa wrote: Yes, to think that poor black people specifically should be so stupid and ignorant as to not know how to vote, or where to vote, or when to vote, or for whom to vote--as implied in this charge of disenfranchisement--is racist. I don't think it's controversial to say that stupid people of all races might rely upon a leaflet to tell them how to vote rather than just knowing. Nor do I think it's controversial to think that a disproportionate number of Spanish speakers are Hispanic. Therefore the leaflet is likely to target stupid Hispanics and stop them from voting whereas a stupid white guy may disregard the false information because he can't read it. The leaflet is in Spanish. People aren't saying it only impacts Hispanic people because every idiot everywhere happens to be Hispanic, they're saying it only impacts Hispanic because it's in Spanish. This isn't that hard. | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:50 Rassy wrote: Cant believe the usa has no official language. It seems like impossible, Is english realy not the official language for government and legal documents in the usa and could people make legal documents in anny language they like? could politicians write laws in spanish or german if they wanted and got a vote for it? In the netherlands every citizen is suposed to know the law, and i asume this is the same in the states. To know the law you should be able to read it? In order to pass your citizenship test you do need to have an understanding of the laws and basic history of the country, so you'd need to know some english to be a citizen. But I sorta side with America on this one, knowing English might make your life more convenient so it may behoove you to learn it, but FORCING people to learn English is rather silly and doesn't accomplish much. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41958 Posts
On November 06 2012 03:51 jdsowa wrote: That's a terrible idea. We should be valuing quality votes--people who bothered to give a damn about the candidates and the issues. As it is, we have this culture where we encourage people to vote regardless of their level of ignorance. In this case the level of ignorance of voters is largely self assessed. I have doubts in the ability of an idiot to rate his idiocy. | ||
| ||
