At best, that was Obama making a very nebulous statement. Combined with CNN leaking debate questions to Hilary, the "mirror dimension" is the one where liberals don't have to bend over backwards trying to ignore the corruption running through their midst.
How was he saying anything nebulous?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well that's embarrassing. We live in an age with google you know. It's not hard to research things. If it comes from a republican source that's usually the safest thing to do (not that any news source is particularly good these days) but republican sites are getting desperate right before the election.Obama Encourages Illegals to Vote
A sitting US President encouraging voter fraud on live TV in order to make sure that his party stays in power.
That supposes they would want the objective facts over their version of Truthiness.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At best, that was Obama making a very nebulous statement. Combined with CNN leaking debate questions to Hilary, the "mirror dimension" is the one where liberals don't have to bend over backwards trying to ignore the corruption running through their midst.
Ah yes...the moving goalposts. It's not about what Obama said...it's about the debate questions. Or the e-mail. Or Benghazi. The problem is, any number of unsubstantiated allegations still add up to exactly zero.
In fairness, hammering on those allegations in an attempt to create the appearance of corruption does seem to be Trump's best hope at this point. After all, he certainly isn't going to win based on his qualifications.
Well, remember, you're arguing with the Green Goblin, so whataya expect?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I swear, Obama could say "I won't miss being president when it is time to step down" and it would get reported as "Obama says he won't step down."
Amazing conversation at lunch -- and by "amazing" I mean "actually causing amazement," and not in a good way.
Democrat: "How do you vote for someone who's endorsed by Putin, Kim Jong-un, and the KKK?"
Republican: "You mean Hillary?"
Everyone else (registering shock): "Uh, no, the other one."
Republican: "Well, I don't believe that."
Democrat: "You can look it up."
Republican: "I'm not going to do that. My mind is already made up."
Me: "Your mind was made up before any of the candidates were even announced."
Republican: "That's not true!"
Democrat: "Have you ever voted Democrat?"
Republican: "No, and I never will!"
Me: "Like I said..."
Republican: "But, emails!"
the horns are for the repeated headdesking?
Obama Encourages Illegals to Vote
A sitting US President encouraging voter fraud on live TV in order to make sure that his party stays in power.
Absolutely not. That isn't what happened, and thats why I cannot even consider voting republican, a party that's fighting a war against facts.
The young woman he's talking to was born here. She's worried that if she votes, it will flag her family (who are illegal immigrants)| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obama: "I won't...step down."I swear, Obama could say "I won't miss being president when it is time to step down" and it would get reported as "Obama says he won't step down."
Exactly. After all, what else would one expect from a Kenyan Muslim who kidnapped his daughters?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. After all, what else would one expect from a Kenyan Muslim who kidnapped his daughters?Obama: "I won't...step down."I swear, Obama could say "I won't miss being president when it is time to step down" and it would get reported as "Obama says he won't step down."
A kenyan muslim atheist socialist communist weak willed dictator.
Absolutely not. That isn't what happened, and thats why I cannot even consider voting republican, a party that's fighting a war against facts.
The young woman he's talking to was born here. She's worried that if she votes, it will flag her family (who are illegal immigrants)
Now, now. Context is clearly a liberal mirror-universe construct!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Germany doesn't really have Mexican food places. There's some that claim the title but they don't even qualify as Tex-Mex. So instead I shall be enjoying falafel tomorrow as I watch the east coast results come in. Even going to wake up at 3am so I don't miss anything :)
It's really the only coast worth watching..
|
It's really the only coast worth watching..
Also if Clinton snaps up Florida the fat lady starts singing. If it stays very close or Trump squeaks out a win then my hopes for a big Senate margin & flipping the House almost certainly go *poof*. Which will be sad but not as sad as a President Trump would be, so I'll count my blessings.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clinton is going to win the election.
The real question is will Dems get the Senate...
Even going to wake up at 3am so I don't miss anything :)
Honestly, don't bother. This election is close enough that we probably won't know who won for at least a few days, if not weeks.
Florida is not capable of competently holding an election, and they are basically going to decided this thing. Everyone knows what happened in 2000, but FL has been a total mess in other elections as well.We are in for a long, crappy slog.
EDIT: Based on past and current trends, I'm going to make a prediction that Trump wins Florida.
May god have mercy on our souls.
I think that's what I said? Apologies if I was unclear.
Nope...I didn't mean to imply otherwise. My comment wasn't directed at you.
Even going to wake up at 3am so I don't miss anything :)Honestly, don't bother. This election is close enough that we probably won't know who won for at least a few days, if not weeks.
Florida is not capable of competently holding an election, and they are basically going to decided this thing. Everyone knows what happened in 2000, but FL has been a total mess in other elections as well.We are in for a long, crappy slog.
EDIT: Based on past and current trends, I'm going to make a prediction that Trump wins Florida.
May god have mercy on our souls.
At least this time, with 8 Justices, a split decision will get kicked back to the state. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even going to wake up at 3am so I don't miss anything :)Honestly, don't bother. This election is close enough that we probably won't know who won for at least a few days, if not weeks.
Florida is not capable of competently holding an election, and they are basically going to decided this thing. Everyone knows what happened in 2000, but FL has been a total mess in other elections as well.We are in for a long, crappy slog.
EDIT: Based on past and current trends, I'm going to make a prediction that Trump wins Florida.
May god have mercy on our souls.
Using 538's numbers, if Clinton takes every state they give her +3%, plus NH (2.9%) she wins. Florida and North Carolina wont mater.
edit: If either of those states can be called for Clinton at a reasonable time, the election will be set and you wont have to stay up for the west coast.
|
Also if Clinton snaps up Florida the fat lady starts singing. If it stays very close or Trump squeaks out a win then my hopes for a big Senate margin & flipping the House almost certainly go *poof*. Which will be sad but not as sad as a President Trump would be, so I'll count my blessings.
A big Senate margin or House flip is about as likely as Trump winning the presidency... could happen if the polls have nearly all been consistently off in the same direction, but not very likely. Still, we don't necessarily need that level of success to get things done;
Just a Clinton win = Four more years of gridlock. Clinton probably still gets to appoint a SCOTUS justice and tip the balance of power... thereby allowing her to also move forward with executive actions without worrying about them being over-turned on absurd pretexts. So she'd be better off than Obama had it for most of his presidency. Conversely, if they block her SCOTUS nominee it will be a complete standstill.
+ Senate majority = GOP won't be able to block SCOTUS nominee (Dems will go nuclear if they try) and Clinton will thus have a relatively free hand with executive actions and will also be able to move most other appointments.
+ House flip = Any legislation the Senate cannot filibuster can be moved forward... budgets can be passed, Obamacare can potentially be improved, et cetera.
+ Senate supermajority = Ability to advance anything all Senate Dems agree on. IMO should focus first on a new voting rights act to make voter suppression measures illegal.
Tomorrow's the big day. I'm so excidit!
I predict we'll know tomorrow night. Probably pretty early - though not officially until the West Coast starts coming in, but as Caineach says if Florida or NC get called for Clinton, it's over. The only question left is by how much.
Google say's they'll post real-time results on the search page, updating every 30 seconds
Google Election ResultsWay to stifle the western vote
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Majority is all I'm really hoping for. Flipping the House was a long shot, even before Comey interfered and they took Trump's twitter account away.
Is a Senate super majority even technically possible? I guess it is - 24 Republican seats up for election, but Democrats would need to take 14 of them and hold all theirs. Not happening.
Just remember, folks, we can't trust this guy with a cell phone and 140 characters, but we can trust him with the highest office in the land.
Just a Clinton win = Four more years of gridlock.
Two years. A third of the Senate and all of the House are up for election in 2018.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two years. A third of the Senate and all of the House are up for election in 2018.
Just a Clinton win = Four more years of gridlock.
Republicans will likely retake the Senate in 2018. House wont change until districts are redrawn.
That's true. Most of the Senate seats up in 2018 are currently held by Democrats making any change to the status quo then more likely to favor the Republicans. I was just pointing out that there is a decision point ahead of 2020.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Need some Alt-Delete...
For us to get that, we'd first need to have some semblance of Control.
One recent morning, after the release of Donald Trump’s Tic Tac tape and his subsequent mansplanation about locker-room talk, Glenn Beck clicked on a video of Michelle Obama campaigning for Hillary Clinton in a New Hampshire gymnasium. The First Lady ripped into Trump’s comments, calling them “disgraceful” and “intolerable,” and adding, “It doesn’t matter what party you belong to—Democrat, Republican, Independent—no woman deserves to be treated this way.” Beck was mesmerized. On his radio program that day, he heralded Obama’s remarks as “the most effective political speech I have heard since Ronald Reagan.”
“Those words hit me where I live,” Beck said the other day. He was speedwalking up Eighth Avenue with his wife, son, and daughter, all in from Toronto. “If you’re a decent human being, those words were dead on.”
The reality television star says celebrity support is cheating. XD
...
You know, I think his opponents would agree. Y'know, the ones who lost while he was getting literally hundreds of millions of dollars worth of free coverage, thanks in part to his existing celebrity status?
He also goes on to say...I suppose that's one way of interpreting that.
Personally, I interpreted it rather differently. He clearly noted that when you vote, you're a citizen - as in, you need to prove you're a citizen to get onto the voter rolls in the first place. Therefore, anybody who votes probably doesn't need to worry about police hammering on their door to investigate them and make sure it was legit - the security is elsewhere in the process.
OBAMA: And the reason that fear is promoted is because they don't want people voting. People are discouraged from voting and part of what is important for Latino citizens is to make your voice heard, because you're not just speaking for yourself. You're speaking for family members, friends, classmates of yours in school...
RODRIGUEZ: Your entire community.
OBAMA: ... who may not have a voice. Who can't legally vote. But they're counting on you to make sure that you have the courage to make your voice heard.
With that context, he's obviously talking about Latino citizens voting, worried about repercussions to their possibly undocumented family members, etc.
It's a really poorly phrased question and not a great answer. He should have made it clearer, but he's not actually encouraging non-citizens to vote.
You're neglecting the possibility that this might be an editing hatchet job simmilar to the ones performed on ACORN and Planned Parenthood.
|
|
Google say's they'll post real-time results on the search page, updating every 30 seconds
Google Election ResultsWay to stifle the western vote
That's not much different than what we see every election.. they're just providing a central locations to access the results... as several news organizations have been doing for decades.
Want to really freak out?
Slate is going to be projecting battlefield state results all day based on early voting totals, exit polls, and other analysis.
I think that could be anywhere between a good thing and a disaster, depending on how they handle it.
The potential benefit is that no one stays home thinking their party has it in the bag or no chance... and then is surprised to discover that it was super close only when the polls have closed. If they announce rough estimates of who is leading with plenty of caveats about the data being incomplete / uncertain and still subject to change if voting patterns shift later in the day... then they can provide a valuable service by giving people a rough idea of how the vote is going. If anything, that might encourage MORE people to vote in close elections. Think about the buyer's remorse after the Brexit vote... with advance notice how things were trending earlier in the day people wouldn't have had any excuse for not voting or choosing exit on a lark.
What they absolutely have to avoid is 'calling' any election or even suggesting that the result is unlikely to change while polls are still open. That could obviously depress turnout.
I mean, he literally said the words "Latino citizens," I don't see how a person can then claim he's talking about non-citizens without the most deliberate of misinterpretation.
I kept turning my clock back to 1am yesterday but Monday still came. Colbert lied to me.
|
I mean, he literally said the words "Latino citizens," I don't see how a person can then claim he's talking about non-citizens without the most deliberate of misinterpretation.
The interviewer offered a creative definition of 'citizen' that includes non-citizens. I can understand the misinterpretation on a surface level, but in full context his meaning is clear.
...He kinda did say that, though. If I remember right, he verbally mentioned something along the lines of "If you're voting, you're a citizen" - which is a bit more indirect, but still hits the main point there.