EPT2008 US Presidential Election - Page 11
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
It needs many people that count, but other countrys can do this also. You only need a % amount of counters per Voters... This just scales up, where exactly is the problem? I ever hear this ... This can't work because there are to many voters, citizens whatever. It's pure bullshit. If i have 1000 Voters and 1 Person that counts it will take X amount of time. If i have 10'000 Voters and 10 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. If i have 100'000 Voters and 100 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. . . . Time goes up a little because increased logistics (but thats not even sure). And thats at the same time the only thing that changes, increaseing logistic problems.. But well... Transporting *paper* around is not really what i would call a logistic nightmare... | ||
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
Fast forward to today. The reason why Barack Obama is winning is that John McCain's campaign has never had a strategy such as the one Rove thought up. The shoe is on the other foot. Now John McCain cannot easily parry Obama's attacks that he brings "more of the same"; after all, he did vote with Bush 95% of the time, no matter how many times he and his running mate use the term "maverick." Meanwhile, how does McCain attack Obama? Is it through Rev. Wright? No, Clinton tried that line of attack for a few weeks and failed. Should McCain stress the difference in experience levels? No, Clinton tried that for twelve friggin' months. So what should McCain do? Ayers? If Wright didn't work, neither will Ayers. The "Chicago politician" theme? To independents, Obama seems too genuine for those charges to stick without hard evidence, of which there is none. If I were McCain, I'd simply send my entire campaign staff to Chicago to try to dig up some sort of October surprise. It's a long shot, but it'll yield more results than anything the campaign has done so far. If McCain can somehow attack Obama consistently, he has a small chance to win. It seems like a simple thing to do, but only one campaign in the past decade and a half has done it right, and that was 4 years ago. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 15 2008 23:36 Velr wrote: Uhm... why can't you count by hand? It needs many people that count, but other countrys can do this also. You only need a % amount of counters per Voters... This just scales up, where exactly is the problem? I ever hear this ... This can't work because there are to many voters, citizens whatever. It's pure bullshit. If i have 1000 Voters and 1 Person that counts it will take X amount of time. If i have 10'000 Voters and 10 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. If i have 100'000 Voters and 100 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. . . . Time goes up a little because increased logistics (but thats not even sure). And thats at the same time the only thing that changes, increaseing logistic problems.. But well... Transporting *paper* around is not really what i would call a logistic nightmare... I can't believe I'm defending it, but I don't think you understand the importance and usefulness of bureaucracy. 15,000 people are not going to hand count 150,000,000 votes. It's slow, and even less reliable and if there is a mishap, it's even more difficult to recount than it already is. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 16 2008 00:03 motbob wrote: There's also been a massive shift in campaign structure. It's not just about the words that come out of the candidate's mouths, there's tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of supporters behind them that making their actions possible.In 2004, at the direction of Karl Rove, all Bush and his surrogates focused on were the assertions that Kerry was both too liberal and a flip-flopper. They pressed that case repeatedly, and Kerry had no answer to the charges that was equally easy to repeat in short soundbites. Meanwhile, the main avenue of attack against Bush, that he led us into the war, was easily parried by the fact that Kerry had also voted for the war. Bush could easily parry Kerry's attacks, while Kerry could not parry Bush's. Fast forward to today. The reason why Barack Obama is winning is that John McCain's campaign has never had a strategy such as the one Rove thought up. The shoe is on the other foot. Now John McCain cannot easily parry Obama's attacks that he brings "more of the same"; after all, he did vote with Bush 95% of the time, no matter how many times he and his running mate use the term "maverick." Meanwhile, how does McCain attack Obama? Is it through Rev. Wright? No, Clinton tried that line of attack for a few weeks and failed. Should McCain stress the difference in experience levels? No, Clinton tried that for twelve friggin' months. So what should McCain do? Ayers? If Wright didn't work, neither will Ayers. The "Chicago politician" theme? To independents, Obama seems too genuine for those charges to stick without hard evidence, of which there is none. If I were McCain, I'd simply send my entire campaign staff to Chicago to try to dig up some sort of October surprise. It's a long shot, but it'll yield more results than anything the campaign has done so far. If McCain can somehow attack Obama consistently, he has a small chance to win. It seems like a simple thing to do, but only one campaign in the past decade and a half has done it right, and that was 4 years ago. Rove's grassroots Christian networks turned the tides of the past two elections and helped make conservative voters far more active than liberal voters. This year, the Obama campaign has emulated parts of Rove's structure. There was a video posted in the Primaries thread where Obama talks to his staff about running the best campaign out there and whether you're a McCain/Barr or Obama supporter, there is no question that Obama for America is the best campaign from an organizational standpoint and is probably the best ever. I won't get into the specifics but if you walk into any of the main regional offices in the battleground states, you'll see the kind of data and personal network I'm talking about. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On October 15 2008 23:36 Velr wrote: Uhm... why can't you count by hand? It needs many people that count, but other countrys can do this also. You only need a % amount of counters per Voters... This just scales up, where exactly is the problem? I ever hear this ... This can't work because there are to many voters, citizens whatever. It's pure bullshit. If i have 1000 Voters and 1 Person that counts it will take X amount of time. If i have 10'000 Voters and 10 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. If i have 100'000 Voters and 100 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. . . . Time goes up a little because increased logistics (but thats not even sure). And thats at the same time the only thing that changes, increaseing logistic problems.. But well... Transporting *paper* around is not really what i would call a logistic nightmare... If only humans were incapable to possess bias or tamper with results. If only humans were ... machines... | ||
|
MiniRoman
Canada3953 Posts
| ||
|
TeCh)PsylO
United States3552 Posts
On October 15 2008 23:36 Velr wrote: Uhm... why can't you count by hand? It needs many people that count, but other countrys can do this also. You only need a % amount of counters per Voters... This just scales up, where exactly is the problem? I ever hear this ... This can't work because there are to many voters, citizens whatever. It's pure bullshit. If i have 1000 Voters and 1 Person that counts it will take X amount of time. If i have 10'000 Voters and 10 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. If i have 100'000 Voters and 100 Persons it will take about the same amount of time. . . . Time goes up a little because increased logistics (but thats not even sure). And thats at the same time the only thing that changes, increaseing logistic problems.. But well... Transporting *paper* around is not really what i would call a logistic nightmare... Why can't we get these voting machines right? This is not overly complicated programming. It's a joke that there is not more integrity in the software. But our voting problems do not end with machines. We have people voting that are not alive, people voting multiple times, votes being purged, people having to wait in line for hours and hours to place a vote, etc... Even with complete integrity within our voting system, I think we should be questioning whether or not our voting system is the best system to begin with(as opposed to preferential voting, range voting). It amazes me that politicians are not putting these issues on there platform. | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On October 16 2008 00:39 BlackJack wrote: If only humans were incapable to possess bias or tamper with results. If only humans were ... machines... the machine is only as reliable as the programmer | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 16 2008 00:55 fusionsdf wrote: Easier to find 5 reliable programmers than 50,000 reliable volunteers. Hypothetically.the machine is only as reliable as the programmer | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
if only a few people have control over the source code, and those people or that company has close ties with one political party... | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/14/campbell.brown.economy/index.html Brown is the only person on CNN with a pair of balls. | ||
|
TeCh)PsylO
United States3552 Posts
On October 16 2008 01:40 fusionsdf wrote: yeah, but its also easier to find 5 unreliable programmers, than 50,000 volunteers Alot of people don't relize how much we depend on the integrity of coding. If code fails, planes fail, hospital equipment fails, pace makers fail, etc... If the integrity of this code is not 100% than nobody would imagine putting it into use. Just as if a plan for a bridge looked sketchy, we wouldn't build the bridge. There is no reason why we can't code a voting machine that is legit. I am not making the argument that they are legit, only that this is a simple problem that can be fixed, and that it amazes me that politicians are not making this a priority. | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On October 16 2008 01:44 Jibba wrote: Well that's why you hire independent reviewers that hopefully won't be bought off by the companies. D: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/14/campbell.brown.economy/index.html Brown is the only person on CNN with a pair of balls. yeah except when the reviewers are bought off by lobbyists, or arent very transparent best in my idea to just make the source code, and make every step-installation and verification of the OS, use of memory cards, counting etc should be as open and transparent as possible or just go back to optical scanners, its harder for one volunteer or section chief to completely fuck up a lot of votes without being caught | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
XoXiDe
United States620 Posts
if you click this you are gay | ||
|
a-game
Canada5085 Posts
On October 16 2008 04:48 XoXiDe wrote: Wow Collin Powell supposedly to endorse Obama, if it's true that would a pretty big endorsement, I don't think it would have much of an effect right now though, any thoughts? if you click this you are gay that article is just some guys opinion, i don't think it contains any credible information on colin powell's intentions =P | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/15/colin-powell-fuels-speculation-possible-endorsement/ ![[image loading]](http://elections.foxnews.com/img/101508_powell.jpg) lol But really, Powell has been saying nothing but nice things about Obama since at least January of this year. I do not know if or when he will publicly endorse Obama, but I'm sure he's not going to endorse McCain. | ||
|
a-game
Canada5085 Posts
how does colin powell doing a hip hop dance and talking proudly about his african heritage in any way shape or form suggest he's imminently about to endorse obama? that has to be one of the more racist ideas i've ever heard bandied about as political commentary. Edit: just in case it wasn't clear, my words are directed against Fox news, not you mindcrime | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Hmmmmmmmm | ||
| ||
