President Obama Re-Elected - Page 577

On September 23 2012 00:14 coverpunch wrote:
Beyond the insistence that this would be ineffectual, I don't think there's been any attempt to parse out WHY Republicans are trying to do this.

Here's a similar story about the IRS requiring Social Security numbers for claiming dependents. When they did that, 7.2 MILLION children disappeared from the tax rolls, nearly 10% of all dependents. It looks like Republicans imagine the same thing would happen if they required ID at polls, that thousands of people who are dead or fake or ineligible wouldn't be able to vote.

On September 22 2012 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:


What state do you live in?

On September 23 2012 00:14 coverpunch wrote:
Beyond the insistence that this would be ineffectual, I don't think there's been any attempt to parse out WHY Republicans are trying to do this.

Here's a similar story about the IRS requiring Social Security numbers for claiming dependents. When they did that, 7.2 MILLION children disappeared from the tax rolls, nearly 10% of all dependents. It looks like Republicans imagine the same thing would happen if they required ID at polls, that thousands of people who are dead or fake or ineligible wouldn't be able to vote.

On September 23 2012 00:04 JinDesu wrote:


I never even knew we had frosty relations with New Zealand. Of all places, New Zealand!

The stories of the pro-American Libyan riots is very good to hear - and it's heartwarming to see the signs "Ambassador Chris was our friend". Apparently he was VERY well loved, and his death really polarized quite a bit of the population.

On September 23 2012 00:26 0mar wrote:


Illinois. It's going to go Obama, but I'd rather show my support to the President than throw my vote away.

On September 23 2012 00:45 DoubleReed wrote:


Yea, Libya is ironically one of the most pro-American countries in the region. Egypt is where relations are seriously breaking down and America is amazingly unpopular.

On September 23 2012 01:16 Gorsameth wrote:


Can you blame Egypt with all the suffering they have faced at the hands of an American puppet?
Heck as they went out into the streets and bled for there freedom the white house was still trying to find a way to keep there puppet in place.

On September 23 2012 00:14 coverpunch wrote:
Beyond the insistence that this would be ineffectual, I don't think there's been any attempt to parse out WHY Republicans are trying to do this.

Here's a similar story about the IRS requiring Social Security numbers for claiming dependents. When they did that, 7.2 MILLION children disappeared from the tax rolls, nearly 10% of all dependents. It looks like Republicans imagine the same thing would happen if they required ID at polls, that thousands of people who are dead or fake or ineligible wouldn't be able to vote.

On September 23 2012 00:24 JinDesu wrote:


But the issue I think is that most studies have returned that there are so few voter fraud cases, and so there's no evidence really for mass voter fraud to warrant doing this RIGHT before a major election. And I agree with Doublereed that doing this is fine - if implemented over a long term period.

I also like what I suggested before - make it free, and give it support. I don't mind voter ID laws. Just make it so everyone can get an ID, and make it somewhat efficient.

On September 23 2012 05:32 Defacer wrote:


In British Columbia, voters must bring an ID with their current address. If your ID doesn't have your address on it, you can bring something like your social insurance card (has you name but no address), plus a piece of mail from the power company, your paystub, your tax return --- anything which has your current address and name. Just supplement any government issued ID with a document with your current mailing address.

BOOM. I just saved the US millions of dollars.

On September 23 2012 05:37 Jaaaaasper wrote:

Assuming of course, that the people behind the laws want this to be easy.

On September 23 2012 02:16 aksfjh wrote:

The amount of coordination and man power it would take for people to impersonate a voter and make a difference is absurd. There are tons of phony registrations, that's for sure, but they don't show up to vote (because they don't exist etc.). However, voter fraud is very possible with lockbox electronic voting machines and absentee ballots. Problems in that area of the election have the possibility of turning thousands of votes for a candidate in a single region, as opposed to a potential handful.

MIAMI, Fla. — Mitt Romney's campaign took a hard line with the Spanish-language network Univision, making last-minute demands in the run-up to last week's town hall that helped insure his success in the forum, sources familiar with the broadcast told BuzzFeed.

When the Republican took his place Wednesday night in the first of two back-to-back candidate forums televised on the mega-network, he was greeted by an adoring, raucous crowd that cheered his every word, and booed many of the moderators' questions. The next night, President Obama was treated to stone cold silence from the audience as he was aggressively grilled on his lackluster immigration record.

The contrast was widely noted by observers who watched both forums — and it was glaring enough to evoke some boasting from the Romney campaign in the immediate aftermath.

"These forums are going to be watched by more Hispanics than watched the conventions," said Alberto Martinez, a Florida-based Romney adviser. "I think [Romney] did an amazing job, and I think it was pretty clear there wasn't the same excitement for President Obama."

But the enthusiasm gap may have been an optical illusion formed by a series of last-minute demands by the Romney campaign, according to Maria Elena Salinas, one of the Univision anchors who moderated the forums.

Salinas told BuzzFeed that tickets for each forum were divided between the network, the respective campaigns, and the University of Miami (which hosted the events) — and she said both campaigns initially agreed to keep the audience comprised mostly of students, in keeping with the events' education theme.

But after exhausting the few conservative groups on campus, the Romney camp realized there weren't enough sympathetic students to fill the stands on their night — so they told the network and university that if they weren't given an exemption to the students-only rule, they might have to "reschedule."

The organizers relented. One Democrat with ties to the Obama campaign noted that Rudy Fernandez, the university official charged with coordinating the forums, is a member of Romney's Hispanic steering committee. Fernandez did not respond to BuzzFeed's questions about whether he gave preferential treatment to Romney's campaign.

In any case, Romney's team was allowed to bus in rowdy activists from around southern Florida in order to fill the extra seats at their town hall.

Obama's campaign, meanwhile, stuck to the original parameters and allowed a large chunk of the tickets to be distributed to interested students on campus. The result was a quiet, well-behaved crowd — and a lot of no-shows. Minutes before Obama's forum was to begin, producers began frantically directing university staff and volunteers to sit in the empty seats.

Salinas said both candidates ultimately had partisan crowds at their forums, but that Romney's non-student activists ignored instructions to hold their applause.

"We were a little bit thrown because it was supposed to be a TV show, it wasn't a rally," Salinas said of the outspoken Romney supporters. "It was a little bit of disrespect for us."

That wouldn't be the last demand from the campaign: Romney himself almost pulled the plug on the whole thing minutes before the broadcast, Salinas said.

While introducing Romney at the top of the broadcast, Salinas's co-anchor, Jorge Ramos, noted that the Republican candidate had agreed to give the network 35 minutes, and that Obama had agreed to a full hour the next night. Ramos then invited the audience to welcome Romney to the stage — but the candidate didn't materialize.

"It was a very awkward moment, believe me," Salinas said.

Apparently, Romney took issue with the anchors beginning the broadcast that way, said Salinas, and he refused to go on stage until they re-taped the introduction. (One Republican present at the taping said Romney "threw a tantrum.")

"Our president of news was talking to the Romney campaign and negotiating it," Salinas said. "But at that point, you can't really argue with that. The candidate is there, everyone is in their seats, the show must go on. There's a limit to how much we can object to it."

The compromise reached was that the anchors would note the discrepancy in the candidates' time commitments at the end of the broadcast. But Salinas said, by then, the crowd was cheering so loudly that they drowned out the anchors' words.

On September 23 2012 06:21 IIMARCII wrote:
I don't even think Romney has any chances to get more than 25% of the votes.