Why Obama Won

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
781

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Why Obama won ?

Shit like this probably helps a little…

L.A. union worker told members to put fake names on voter petition

One of Los Angeles’ largest public employee unions admitted Tuesday that a staffer sent an email to members asking that they sign “fake names/addresses” on a petition being circulated by former Mayor Richard Riordan to place a pension initiative on the ballot.

Voter ID Laws are race-ess !!![/quote]

I’m pretty sure petition signatures aren’t the sme as votes?

But here is a story of a Nevada woman who was arrested for trying to vote twice.

782

Christine,

If you think someone who would get fake petition signatures would stop there, I have some beach front property for sale in Arizona for you.

783

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Christine,

If you think someone who would get fake petition signatures would stop there, I have some beach front property for sale in Arizona for you. [/quote]

MaximusB: It absolutely goes boths ways, if it true for either side I can guarantee its true for the other. I don’t think this small level idiocy affects things on the greater level (still despicable and should be tried under treason…or something more serious than it is currently-see if it keeps up then…), but you have plenty of reports of Reps pulling similar stunts. People are people and people are imperfect.

784

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Christine,

If you think someone who would get fake petition signatures would stop there, I have some beach front property for sale in Arizona for you. [/quote]

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2012/06/ruthless-extrapolation/

785

[quote]CornSprint wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Christine,

If you think someone who would get fake petition signatures would stop there, I have some beach front property for sale in Arizona for you. [/quote]

MaximusB: It absolutely goes boths ways, if it true for either side I can guarantee its true for the other. I don’t think this small level idiocy affects things on the greater level (still despicable and should be tried under treason…or something more serious than it is currently-see if it keeps up then…), but you have plenty of reports of Reps pulling similar stunts. People are people and people are imperfect.[/quote]

After things like ACORN, you’re telling me the stories of how “amazing” obam’s ground game is don’t strike you as odd?

I mean, you’re not skeptical of this impeccable ground game at all, in any way?

Do me a favor and look at the county map of the electorate, think about things like not needing to prove who you say you are in any way shape or form, this ground game that only one side has, and then please go on about how “both sides do it”.

786

ZEB: Good call with the hurricane…It may have also helped wash away a lot of the bad taste in people’s mouths after the mudslinging.

Of course can’t mention the hurricane without Christie-he’s absolutely making a run in 2016 IMO after seeing him on SNL now too. The best gauge of his intents will be his waistline: I guarantee that if his waist decreases that means the odds of him making a play are increasing. I feel like that’s a Silver stats post we could all enjoy…

787

Beans: This article explains a lot of it, at least from a results standpoint:

However, knowing many of the people who work along side these individuals and having a good understanding of programming in general makes the power of these systems entirely believable. Effective distribution of resources is undeniably important.

As far as bull happening on both sides, I obviously don’t need to supply with dem sources given your start of the discussion, so here are some rep misdeeds:
http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/third-instance-of-voter-registration-dumping-found-in-virginia,50819bcbd7fc7b567022f6b1

If I want to go full blown conspiracy theory: Anonymous, Karl Rove and 2012 Election Fix?
(For the record, I personally find the last link to be paranoid and false. I refuse to acknowledge the alternative.)

People are people-people are imperfect and at times dishonest. No matter the group, there will always be bad apples in it.

Edited to address correct poster

788

Going to bed after this but I did look up county maps, but also maps that overlay with population density and shades based on percentages. It really didn’t do much to change my mind one way or another.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2012/

790

I’m not at all trying to say the GOP doesn’t/didn’t have some dirty tricks up their sleeve…

But nevermind, whatever.

791

Trib: Why is it stupid to believe that fiscal conservatism cannot exist with moral liberalism? That is exactly what I am (I’m more of a moral moderate I guess), and I believe it to be a reasonable choice.

ZEB: Normally, I agree with you. But …

-Pregnancy out of wedlock cost taxpayers. Answer: That’s what abortion is for, and I support that. No cost to taxpayers other than possibly the cost of the abortion in some cases.

-Behavior that brings on HIV cost taxpayers. Answer: Moral liberalism has never advocated the practice of unprotected sex. In a fiscally conservative world, it wouldn’t cost taxpayers anything as my tax money would not pay for other people’s mistakes.

-Drug Usage cost taxpayers. Answer: It shouldn’t. You wanna OD? Fine, then die. Fiscal conservative would not allocate money to protecting said scum.

-Gluttony costs taxpayers. Answer: I hate fat people, too. This is a terrible argument ZEB. America has been fat for decades and we’ve seen a mix of Republican and Democrat presidents since then. Fat people, if I had to guess, are not inclined to vote either way. Fat people should pay significantly more for health insurance in a true fiscally conservative society.

-Alcoholism costs taxpayers. Answer: Same as above. Alcoholics are as useless as fat fucks. Again, rehabilitation for drug abuse is not the burden of the common taxpayer, but the burden of the abuser.

To be clear, I DO NOT support Mr Obama and never have. I was very unhappy to see him win the election. The Government should be run more like a business, and like any good business, SHOULD NOT reach their hands into issues pertaining to morality or social interactions.

792

Regarding Christie, he’s about the only fat guy I like. I saw him on the news the morning after the hurricane. He was in something like a sweatsuit and he looked as if he had not slept in days. Dude was worn out; clearly he was working very hard to restore his state. He’s got a great “I don’t give a shit what you think about me” attitude which is reminiscient of GWB, but without the antics.

Some NYS officials (believe the Governor was there), on the other hand, were well dressed and appeared to be well rested the day after Sandy. Par for the course. My state sucks.

793

You cannot run government like a business; the public and private sectors have two different motives. The private sector’s bottom line is the most important. With the public sector the most important thing is to govern through the consent of those governed and to protect the people. If the private sector ran a deficit it would go out of business.

Now government can be more efficient like the private sector but government also have to balance that with equity. You are right that government should not have an all consuming mandate where it continually broadens its scope. Private sector philosophies in government have only led to problems such as the military industrial complex and the corporate industrial complex.

With the corporate industrial complex researchers are finding that the perceived theories of New Public Management are failing to guarantee government the outcome it had desired. Government believed if it continued to offer tenders in certain areas of its purview to allow corporate entities to deliver government services this would always be cost effective. Not so, as in a lot of cases only one or two companies have the current infrastructure to absorb some government responsibilities and leverage that ability over government and force them to sign financial contracts that always increase due to monopolization.

Government always has to focus on accountability and responsibility before efficiency in order to prevent corruption. The focus on accountability creates layers of bureaucracy that we all tire of. The risk adverse nature of government prevents it from being run like a business. Government will never run like a business because its intent was never to run for the sole purpose of capital accumulation.

794

[quote]CornSprint wrote:
ZEB: Good call with the hurricane…It may have also helped wash away a lot of the bad taste in people’s mouths after the mudslinging.

Of course can’t mention the hurricane without Christie-he’s absolutely making a run in 2016 IMO after seeing him on SNL now too. The best gauge of his intents will be his waistline: I guarantee that if his waist decreases that means the odds of him making a play are increasing. I feel like that’s a Silver stats post we could all enjoy…[/quote]

That is one republican that I will NEVER endorse and in fact will work mightily against him. He is an obese traitor.

795

[quote]njrusmc wrote:

ZEB: Normally, I agree with you. But …

-Pregnancy out of wedlock cost taxpayers. Answer: That’s what abortion is for, and I support that. No cost to taxpayers other than possibly the cost of the abortion in some cases.[/quote]

It’s called aborton out of convenience and that is just about as immoral a thing to do as putting a gun to an innocent persons head and pulling the trigger.

Thoretically you are correct. But they’ve tried this type of education all over the country. In fact, the spread of HIV is so great in San Fransisco that they spent something like 5 million dollars on trying to educate gay men over a very short period of time. What happened? The HIV actually went up the following year! Weakness is weakness and it costs the tax payers big bucks!

They’re no more “sad” than the young gay man who didn’t pay attention to the education program and now has HIV. Are we going to let him die as well without trying to help? Of course not! We are America we’re not going to let anyone die without trying to save them and that’s the way it should be.

I never once said that fat people were one party or the other. Where did you get such nonsense? We are discussing why we have such a fiscal mess and it has to do with social problems which have to do with not containing your immediate desires. As for the obese that specific group has doubled over the past 25 years. And 40 years ago we didn’t have a problem at all. I notice that you say you said “I hate fat people…” So you have your favorite weakness and you also have your least favorite. Didn’t read anywhere you saying “I hate drug users, or I hate gay people” The fact is they are all part of the problem.

I see you hate alcoholics as well. I think you should save up all that hate for something that is more worthy than human weakness disguised as social liberalism. Each is a human weakness and each costs the taxpayers in a big way. And if there were no unwanted pregnancy’s, no HIV, no obese people and no alcoholics and no drug addicts we would save 10’s of billions of dollars per year.

We as a people are doing this to ourselves as being socially liberal is a gigantic part of the fiscal mess that we’re in.

796

[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
You cannot run government like a business; the public and private sectors have two different motives. The private sector’s bottom line is the most important. With the public sector the most important thing is to govern through the consent of those governed and to protect the people. If the private sector ran a deficit it would go out of business.

Now government can be more efficient like the private sector but government also have to balance that with equity. You are right that government should not have an all consuming mandate where it continually broadens its scope. Private sector philosophies in government have only led to problems such as the military industrial complex and the corporate industrial complex.

With the corporate industrial complex researchers are finding that the perceived theories of New Public Management are failing to guarantee government the outcome it had desired. Government believed if it continued to offer tenders in certain areas of its purview to allow corporate entities to deliver government services this would always be cost effective. Not so, as in a lot of cases only one or two companies have the current infrastructure to absorb some government responsibilities and leverage that ability over government and force them to sign financial contracts that always increase due to monopolization.

Government always has to focus on accountability and responsibility before efficiency in order to prevent corruption. The focus on accountability creates layers of bureaucracy that we all tire of. The risk adverse nature of government prevents it from being run like a business. Government will never run like a business because its intent was never to run for the sole purpose of capital accumulation.

[/quote]

Was Obama reelected because he was such a good all around President?

Funny stuff…

797

ZEB,

I don’t disagree with your points, and I generally agree with what you say in general. But this comment is outrageous: “We are America we’re not going to let anyone die without trying to save them and that’s the way it should be.”

Sorry Trib and ZEB: Humans are created equal, but that does not mean their lives are equally valuable into adulthood. Servicemembers, working Americans, children, etc should be saved during times of need given their problems are problems of circumstance, not decision. Drug abusers, convicts, and rapists can be left to die in sewers for all I care.

So, let me get this straight. You want the Government to be the hero, and in order to do this, spend taxpayer money on people who have failed? Mind you, they are not victims of circumstance, they made conscious decisions to become drug abusers. The tiny exception would be crack babies and shit like that.

Your solution is instead to magically make unwanted pregnancies, drug abusers, and other “bad” things simply disappear by having the Government press morality unto everyone? This cannot happen.

I do hate drug abusers, fat people, Government-tit-sucking people, and just about everyone else given that they make excuses for their own bad decisions. I don’t hate gay people or women who get convenience-based (or as I call it, common-sense-based) abortions.

I remember another poster once calling you “Big Government ZEB”, and honestly brother, it’s the truth. I’m really a libertarian who DOES NOT CARE what women do with their bodies given that it does not drag everything else down. Many people don’t believe in abortion; fine, don’t have one.

The problem with American politics in general is that the focus is on pathetic, trivial issues like gay marriage and abortion while half the nation pays for the other half to survive. I realize you and I are both in the “giving half” so I will spare you the details of how much it sucks to look at my paycheck every 2 weeks. As I said, live and let live, but don’t give them money for it.

798

[quote]njrusmc wrote:
Humans are created equal, .[/quote]

I want to pick at this point because I hear it a lot to defend collectivism.

We are not created equal, not even close. If we were I’d be playing shortshot for the Yankees. We are created equal in the eyes of the law. We are created equal in terms of natural rights.

I don’t doubt you get this, and weren’t trying to suggest otherwise, but I like to point this out. Because people feel like they can construct “fair” and “equal” beyond the very basic terms intended by that statement. You can’t create fair in an unfair natural world and still allow free will…

ANyway, hyjack over.

800

[quote]njrusmc wrote:<<< The problem with American politics in general is that the focus is on pathetic, trivial issues like gay marriage and abortion while half the nation pays for the other half to survive. >>>[/quote]Except that the morality behind these issues is what’s producing the “need” for your tax money to finance their consequences. THIS is what is missed by almost everybody. Not Alan Keyes though. He is the only candidate I’ve seen in my lifetime who told America that as long she insisted upon her morally degenerate behavior we would continue to slide into a fiscal abyss through financing the results.

Simply stopping the money would cause this now socialist commune of a country to implode upon itself. It would cost more than just continuing to pay them. The ONLY solution is a return to the biblical model of marriage, family and sex that this society was built upon and flourished under. That WILL NOT happen with a liberal apostate church that is no better than the world she is supposed to be an example to.

Yes ZEB again, because to Christians who believe the Word, like the ones who used to represent Jesus Christ on this continent, THAT is the answer. There will be no meaningful change of policy until there is a change of voting hearts and that CANNOT happen just because people will simply do right. Only supernatural motivations can overcome natural depravity. Christians have always understood this. Where are they now? Well, that’s the point.