Officerrob
Banned
Does anyone think Jerry Lawler having a heart attack 30 minutes after wrestling a match at 62 years old might hurt Linda McMahon?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2012 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
Aaron Strife
Banned
AZ Senate has been surprisingly close every time PPP has polled it. Carmona's got the right profile for the state, but it might not be enough to overcome the natural advantage Republicans have.
Flake has 79% name rec while Carmona has only 50%, so maybe he has room to grow.
Flake has 79% name rec while Carmona has only 50%, so maybe he has room to grow.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I'm not setting up that expectation for myself just so I'm not disappointed, but it's definitely possible.
thezerofire
Banned
I'm not familiar with Ari Fleischer, is this hypocritical in some way?
It'll hurt some because it'll bring up all the other wrestler deaths, etc again in the media, but I don't think WWE is to blame for the Lawler heart attack. I'm not sure if the part-timers like Lawler, etc get the heart screenings like the full-timers do, but that'd really be the only thing to be critical of. I know Lawler would get drug-tested like everyone else.
Lawler isn't going to be speaking out against the company after he recovers, either.
eBay Huckster
Member
Still going to project 347 EVs, 52 Senate seats and around 210 House seats for the Democrats.
I think Lawler is probably lucky that this happened while he was working because if this had happened at his home (where there are no medical staff to immediately begin CPR) he would likely be dead.
I'll get optimistic about Obama winning and dems holding the senate, but I refuse to set my heart on democrats winning the House. I have to keep myself in check at least a little bit.
Learn2read
Member
Former Bush Press Secretary, is equating NYT story about Bush dropping on the ball on terror intelligence pre-9/11 with Truthers.
Well, this is unexpected:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/jim_cramer_pennsylvania_voter_id.php
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/jim_cramer_pennsylvania_voter_id.php
You mean, Jim Cramer can't figure out how to resolve that issue?
This guy gives financial advice?
Why not move to a biometric voter ID system? You register and have fingerprint scan information stored in secure database, then verify at polling place.
Privacy concerns I guess but if you required they legally be separated from law enforcement etc. would that compensate?
Edit:
Once you successfully register once re-registering elsewhere is just a matter of demonstrating your new residence. All the other information demonstrating you are eligible has already been verified.
Privacy concerns I guess but if you required they legally be separated from law enforcement etc. would that compensate?
Edit:
Once you successfully register once re-registering elsewhere is just a matter of demonstrating your new residence. All the other information demonstrating you are eligible has already been verified.
CharlieDigital
Banned
I'm sure he can, but he's highlighting the issue that many seniors now face. Consider cases where family live out of state or there aren't people to help them get IDs or they simply don't know about the changes in the law and show up at the polling booth -- as they've done for decades -- only to be turned away.
I'm in Florida and I just want to be 100% clear about something since this is my first time voting in the state...
I'm registering to vote and we are a closed primary election state. I'd rather just remain unaffiliated but, will I be able to vote for Obama if I do? Or must I register as a Democrat in order to do so? The instructions say that you can only vote for partisan candidates of the affiliation you choose but, says nothing about how that would play out for me should I choose to not be affiliated with a party :/
With the reputation FL has for election shenanigans, I should probably assume I can't vote for a candidate, only election issues and nonpartisan races if I register as having no affiliation, heh.
I'm registering to vote and we are a closed primary election state. I'd rather just remain unaffiliated but, will I be able to vote for Obama if I do? Or must I register as a Democrat in order to do so? The instructions say that you can only vote for partisan candidates of the affiliation you choose but, says nothing about how that would play out for me should I choose to not be affiliated with a party :/
With the reputation FL has for election shenanigans, I should probably assume I can't vote for a candidate, only election issues and nonpartisan races if I register as having no affiliation, heh.
You can vote for whoever you want to vote for in the general election regardless of your registration. You must register as a Democrat to vote in the Democratic primary, but this is pretty irrelevant this year since it's over and Obama won unopposed. So don't worry, register however you want.
I think he's just trying to bring some attention to the issue of voter ID laws. Pretty sure he's an Obama supporter, too, so it makes sense.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
You have to be able to vote for any candidate in a general election, otherwise there would be no such thing as an independent voter.
Yeah, I would have thought so, but ... Florida... >_>
At least it's not as bad as I was thinking. I love the state, but election time(s) come around and things get wacky it seems.
Oh, no. No no no no no! Not gonna happen, haha.
Black Mamba
Member
Sweet, thanks guys
Just please don't vote for Pat Buchanan on accident.
The definitive "won't be allowed to vote" struck me the wrong way I guess. I know he's trying to highlight the issue, but it seemed to personally directed for his dad.
Red Blaster
Member
RustyNails
Member
I always figured Voter ID laws were double-edged swords that Republicans liked to flail rather carelessly. It affects seniors and minorities alike.
Byakuya769
Member
How do you guys feel about the story coming out about Bush siding with the state dept. and ignoring the CIA before 9/11? I kind of feel like the story could have waiting a week or been released earlier, instead of being all over the news today.
We should clearly be angry at the incompetence, but it just feels like taking advantage of the date in a somewhat odious way.
We should clearly be angry at the incompetence, but it just feels like taking advantage of the date in a somewhat odious way.
polyh3dron
Banned
I don't want to be political, but Obummer is weak on national security hur hur hur
Well today's the perfect day to get some visibility, so I understand what the paper is doing.
The Bush family name deserves the same place in history as the Hitler family name.
haha.
It was pretty funny when he tweeted "I miss Justice Harriet Miers" after Roberts upheld PPACA. I LOL'd. Dems thought they won back when they denied her a chance to be confirmed, little did they know it was just the start of that victory as it saved what later would be their biggest domestic/social accomplishment since the 60's. Wowza.
polyh3dron
Banned
It's not based on a single act like this.
The Bush (W) administration was the most corrupt, despicable, and evil group that controlled the United States in modern history.
You can't compare Romney to a guy who said this:
"Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did."
The person that Romney resembles most is the fictionalized version of John Kerry that the GOP created in 2004.
Black Republican
Member
donald trump twitter said:
see what a couple of polls can do?
Who needs ACORN when you can threaten pollsters?
TacticalFox88
Banned
I still hold to the value that the only person who was GENUINELY fucking evil was Dick Cheney. I say the rest were just along for the ride.
polyh3dron
Banned
Misguided, I get. Even corrupt, sure. But despicable and evil, and comparing them to Hitler, come on.
Agree on that part, but still the son tarnishes the family name.
I think it's fair to say that Dubya himself generally tried to do what he believed was right, but he was absolutely being guided by advisors with a radical agenda (especially when it comes to foreign policy).
I do wonder how different the US would be now if Gore had been elected.
CharlieDigital
Banned
They invaded a country based on manufactured "evidence" and some information seems to indicate that there was a bent on invading Iraq even in the early days of the administration.
Not Hitler, but pretty evil.
Fabricating evidence to go to war resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands is evil. They couldn't reach millions, so not Hitler level evil, but close.
On this issue, I believe the CIA as much as I believe Bush.
So honestly, I can't tell.
I'm hearing a lot of "Well, Jimmy Carter was ahead of Reagan during this point in the presidential election" or some variation of that. The electorate, candidates, and a host of other things I'm probably forgetting, are completely different. Romney isn't Reagan. Obama--despite what conservatives say--is not Jimmy Carter. Obama doesn't have a foreign policy debacle hanging around his neck. Hoping that history repeats itself seems rather weak at this point.
Futurevoid
Member
.
Wut.
Futurevoid
Member
.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Futurevoid banned plz.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Also Reagan led in that race before the conventions, whereas Romney hasn't had a real lead at all.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll