I never claimed that every poll had him down before the debate. But he was down according to Gallup. I cited the Gallup poll because that was THE most accurate of its time (as it is today). But every poll even the inferior ones that you rely on gave Reagan a larger margin over Carter after the debate. Thus proving my point once again that the first debate changed the tide of the election.
I love how you lefty’s want to rewrite history. By the way it was the news media that called Reagan “The Great Communicator” and for good reason. He showed up Carter in that first debate took the lead and ended up winning TWO TERMS.
And all that is still difficult for you to deal with isn’t it? LOL
Anyway, I didn’t think you’d be man enough to apologize so…give your picture of Obama a great big kiss and get back under your rock.
I never claimed that every poll had him down before the debate. But he was down according to Gallup. I cited the Gallup poll because that was THE most accurate of its time (as it is today). But every poll even the inferior ones that you rely on gave Reagan a larger margin over Carter after the debate. Thus proving my point once again that the first debate changed the tide of the election.
I love how you lefty’s want to rewrite history. By the way it was the news media that called Reagan “The Great Communicator” and for good reason. He showed up Carter in that first debate took the lead and ended up winning TWO TERMS.
And all that is still difficult for you to deal with isn’t it? LOL
Anyway, I didn’t think you’d be man enough to apologize so…give your picture of Obama a great big kiss and get back under your rock.
[/quote]
ZEB-
You are the one rewriting history to be consistent with your mythology- not me. You have one poll supporting your point of view, I have MANY supporting mine. This point is undeniable. But your vast knowledge of who performed reputable polls (and who didn’t) in 1980 prevents you from admitting you are wrong.
I am not afraid to call bullshit when I see it and you are full of shit on this issue (and you know it, but won’t admit that you were wrong…which is funny at this point).
Claiming I live under a rock and kiss pictures of Obama doesn’t change the fact that you are dead wrong on the effects of the 1980 debate. Attacking me because you got caught in a lie is really weak, but that seems to be your style in this forum.
I never claimed that every poll had him down before the debate. But he was down according to Gallup. I cited the Gallup poll because that was THE most accurate of its time (as it is today). But every poll even the inferior ones that you rely on gave Reagan a larger margin over Carter after the debate. Thus proving my point once again that the first debate changed the tide of the election.
I love how you lefty’s want to rewrite history. By the way it was the news media that called Reagan “The Great Communicator” and for good reason. He showed up Carter in that first debate took the lead and ended up winning TWO TERMS.
And all that is still difficult for you to deal with isn’t it? LOL
Anyway, I didn’t think you’d be man enough to apologize so…give your picture of Obama a great big kiss and get back under your rock.
[/quote]
ZEB-
You are the one rewriting history to be consistent with your mythology- not me.[/quote]
Wrong, I made a claim and backed it up with proof which is more than you have done. Yet, you continue to drone on as if you an somehow be right by posting more of your nonsense.
Why don’t you take a look at where Reagan was in the polls during the Spring and Summer of 1980. He was far behind by virtually every reputable polling company. But his great communication skills convinced people that he would be better than their current failed President (By the way Obama is far worse than Jimmy Carter, but that’s another topic).
Your posts say nothing. They claim that I lied yet I’ve shown proof of my position. You’ve attacked Gallup the most trusted name in polling and one of, if not the oldest firm in that business! THEY turned out to be correct in the 1980 race, and they were one of the most accurate in every race since then. But you’d actually have to know something about politics and to have followed it closely over the years as I have to appreciate that. But in your limited world republicans are evil and left win wacko’s are saints. So, that means Reagan is bad and me saying that he came from behind to win is also bad. You are pretty much black and white…no credibility.
[quote]Claiming I live under a rock and kiss pictures of Obama doesn’t change the fact that you are dead wrong on the effects of the 1980 debate. Attacking me because you got caught in a lie is really weak, but that seems to be your style in this forum.
jnd[/quote]
I attacked you because you first called me a liar and that is inaccurate. I have proved to you throught the poll posted (and again at the bottom of this post) that I was in fact correct!
You don’t know a lie from a fact because you are too biased to see the truth. You want to rewrite history because you hate Reagan so much.
One more time just for you light weight…
Fact: Reagan was behind 6-8 points (according to Gallup) prior to his first debate with Jimmy Carter
Fact: After the first debate Reagan took the lead and held it.
Fact: Every credible polling establishment had Reagan going up after the first debate with Carter.
You can continue to parade around this site like you know something, but that will not change the facts that I’ve posted.
I don’t mean to intrude on your convo with Beans, but some of what you say is just pathetic sissified bullshit.
Sorry if my bluntness comes off rough, but seriously, you need to show ID to collect public benefits, yet you whine about showing ID to vote ?! WTF ?! If you can get your poor or elderly ass out to the office to get your public benefits, you can get to a DMV. Sorry, no excuses, voting should be MUCH more respected in this country than I see. When I used to vote in Italy, it was a big Goddam deal.
If you value voting, you will do what it takes, and as a guy who earned his citizenship, I don’t see getting or showing a valid ID as a big deal. [/quote]
Your bluntness isn’t the problem. Blunt away. I am not asking the polling stations to just roll on in any old fart without ID. I also realise that if people are able bodied they should do their best to get that photo ID. But I argue the principle of the thing. My point is that a great deal of American citizens can expect being denied a vote in select states, but are in fact who they say they are as displayed on a normally valid ID which is now suddenly invalid. They must now prove even more than before that they are who they say they are. I mean, that a social security card still isn’t enough to prove your identity, that just screams ‘legislature with ulterior motive’. And this ruling isn’t even fair on Republican voters. My girlfriend’s abuela is a naturalised Cuban immigrant. She’s so damn republican she still thinks Obama is a Muslim. She will not be able to vote because she doesn’t have a photo ID! The ruling is undermining many people’s ability to vote on a technicality and not on the issue of citizenship.
I need to add a disclaimer here. I am not in fact naturalised yet, hence me spelling naturalised with an ‘s’. As soon as I am naturalised I promise to start adding z’s to words.
[/quote]
You’re kidding me right? A perfectly valid Social Security card isn’t even enough to get you into a local bar if you’re anywhere near 21. They still require photo ID. Fuck man, you can’t get a driver’s license or a passport with an SS card as your only form of identification. You know why? Because you could easily steal any damn wallet or purse and use all of the non-photo IDs as yours (insurance card and claims, SS card medical card) if they didn’t require a photo ID to get into a bar. Or for that matter buy cigarettes. Or visit strip clubs. All of these things are peanuts compared to voting for the most powerful leader in the free world, and all of them require photo IDs–not even a driver’s license, just a valid photo ID.
Tell your girlfriend’s abuela to get a photo id.
There’s no reason whatsoever in 2012 that you can’t find a way to get one. I have no sympathy. Further, the contention that “a great deal of American citizens” are being foiled is spurious at best. You need a source for that claim because I don’t believe that for one second.
Why doesnt the states that have this voter ID restrictions give out Voter ID to every citizen, then it would not be a problem and it would stop all the alleged voter fraud.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Why doesnt the states that have this voter ID restrictions give out Voter ID to every citizen, then it would not be a problem and it would stop all the alleged voter fraud.
[/quote]
?? Clarification please?
Voter ID “restrictions” simply amount to requiring a valid photo ID. I am not sure how much simpler it can be. If you’re asking why we don’t have a single National ID card it is because the states take care of that on their own at drivers license bureaus.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Why doesnt the states that have this voter ID restrictions give out Voter ID to every citizen, then it would not be a problem and it would stop all the alleged voter fraud.
[/quote]
?? Clarification please?
Voter ID “restrictions” simply amount to requiring a valid photo ID. I am not sure how much simpler it can be. If you’re asking why we don’t have a single National ID card it is because the states take care of that on their own at drivers license bureaus. [/quote]
No not a national ID card, but a ID card with picture issued out by the state( not federal state ) to every citizen. To me that would be the best way to make sure that every citizen are able to vote and at the same time combat voter fraud if thats a real issue.
It can be issued out at several public buildings, doesnt take more resources than a guy with a camera and a machine that prints out ID cards LOL.
Is it more clear now?
Ps. In my country we are obligated to bring a picture ID card to the voting place. Some have voiced concern that the poorest of the poor are disabled to vote because of this, but we have still not done anything about it and its been years. Its a discrace for Norways democracy IMO.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Why doesnt the states that have this voter ID restrictions give out Voter ID to every citizen, then it would not be a problem and it would stop all the alleged voter fraud.
[/quote]
?? Clarification please?
Voter ID “restrictions” simply amount to requiring a valid photo ID. I am not sure how much simpler it can be. If you’re asking why we don’t have a single National ID card it is because the states take care of that on their own at drivers license bureaus. [/quote]
No not a national ID card, but a ID card with picture issued out by the state( not federal state ) to every citizen. To me that would be the best way to make sure that every citizen are able to vote and at the same time combat voter fraud if thats a real issue.
It can be issued out at several public buildings, doesnt take more resources than a guy with a camera and a machine that prints out ID cards LOL.
[/quote]
Yeah, we already have that. This is why the “outrage” is bullshit. The only reason the left is pissed is they can’t cheat.
You literally need to get a cab down the street, boom, picture ID.
Just read this opinion piece from the Baltimore Sun. It talks about what the President has learned over his four years. It’s interesting especially since it came out of Baltimore.
[quote]Pigeonkak wrote:
My point is that a great deal of American citizens can expect being denied a vote in select states…[/quote]
A “great deal?”
Who doesn’t have a picture ID these days?
Seriously, there are a “great deal” of Americans without photo IDs?[/quote]
+/- 10 000 000 Hispanic voters to start. It’s not who they want to vote for that makes this an unfair rule. It’s that people legally allowed to vote, and who are in fact who they say they are, must now go a step further than they’ve had to before to fulfill their constitutional right to vote. I have heard polls suggesting 70 percent of Hispanic voters tend towards choosing Obama. I don’t necessarily believe that figure, i think it’s too ‘liberal’ if you like. But it really doesn’t matter to me who they vote for. Like I said in a previous post. it’s the principle of the matter.
I don’t mean to intrude on your convo with Beans, but some of what you say is just pathetic sissified bullshit.
Sorry if my bluntness comes off rough, but seriously, you need to show ID to collect public benefits, yet you whine about showing ID to vote ?! WTF ?! If you can get your poor or elderly ass out to the office to get your public benefits, you can get to a DMV. Sorry, no excuses, voting should be MUCH more respected in this country than I see. When I used to vote in Italy, it was a big Goddam deal.
If you value voting, you will do what it takes, and as a guy who earned his citizenship, I don’t see getting or showing a valid ID as a big deal. [/quote]
Your bluntness isn’t the problem. Blunt away. I am not asking the polling stations to just roll on in any old fart without ID. I also realise that if people are able bodied they should do their best to get that photo ID. But I argue the principle of the thing. My point is that a great deal of American citizens can expect being denied a vote in select states, but are in fact who they say they are as displayed on a normally valid ID which is now suddenly invalid. They must now prove even more than before that they are who they say they are. I mean, that a social security card still isn’t enough to prove your identity, that just screams ‘legislature with ulterior motive’. And this ruling isn’t even fair on Republican voters. My girlfriend’s abuela is a naturalised Cuban immigrant. She’s so damn republican she still thinks Obama is a Muslim. She will not be able to vote because she doesn’t have a photo ID! The ruling is undermining many people’s ability to vote on a technicality and not on the issue of citizenship.
I need to add a disclaimer here. I am not in fact naturalised yet, hence me spelling naturalised with an ‘s’. As soon as I am naturalised I promise to start adding z’s to words.
[/quote]
You’re kidding me right? A perfectly valid Social Security card isn’t even enough to get you into a local bar if you’re anywhere near 21. They still require photo ID. Fuck man, you can’t get a driver’s license or a passport with an SS card as your only form of identification. You know why? Because you could easily steal any damn wallet or purse and use all of the non-photo IDs as yours (insurance card and claims, SS card medical card) if they didn’t require a photo ID to get into a bar. Or for that matter buy cigarettes. Or visit strip clubs. All of these things are peanuts compared to voting for the most powerful leader in the free world, and all of them require photo IDs–not even a driver’s license, just a valid photo ID.
Tell your girlfriend’s abuela to get a photo id.
There’s no reason whatsoever in 2012 that you can’t find a way to get one. I have no sympathy. Further, the contention that “a great deal of American citizens” are being foiled is spurious at best. You need a source for that claim because I don’t believe that for one second. [/quote]
Cool. I promise I will help Abuela get her photo ID. Promise!
I’m not sucking this Great deal of Americans from my thumb. And I’m also not claiming that every figure presented in these obviously Democrat leaning surveys is 100 percent correct.
If you don’t like what the “liberal media” is reporting, then you’re also not liking the fact that some of these reports are being compiled by leading universities. And any claim by ridiculous news sources like WorldNetDaily that a conspiratorial Soros is making these figures up is equally spurious in my jaded opinion. It boils down to this shit being unfair, on everyone. That first link also paints a clearer picture why young, educated voters (especially among minority families) will be so polarised from voting for Romney.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Indeed, heaven forbid we stop dead people from voting. [/quote]
Let me guess…
Dead People tend to vote Democratic?
Mufasa[/quote]
Funny stuff Mufasa.
But what the democratic party is saying by being against voter ID is pretty simple to figure out. “Many of our constituency are too dumb, or lazy to obtain an identification card.”
