Support NeoGAF

[avatar299]

I ended up reading some other threads on that crazy site. Scary stuff and it saddens me cos there are probably millions in this country who think Obama is "dangerous". Good grief...

Balanced out by the people who think McCain is secretly a nazi or whatever thing fringe democrats conjure up. It happens all the time during elections.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Balanced out by the people who think McCain is secretly a nazi or whatever thing fringe democrats conjure up. It happens all the time during elections.

I think it's more accurately balanced out by you.

 

[Servizio]

Balanced out by the people who think McCain is secretly a nazi or whatever thing fringe democrats conjure up. It happens all the time during elections.

Blood drinking space lizard, actually. Like Bush and Cheney.

 

[speculawyer]

Here is a good site to find some anti-Obama Lunacy: fstdt.com (as in Fundies Say The Darndest Things.) Enter Obama in the quote field:
http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/search.aspx

Some quotes:

Watch out for the darkies if Barack Obama wins, they will be looking for revenge for all that slavery nonsense and they will want to take it out on your family, with knives and guns.

It's crazy really. 99% of negros had it better as slaves. The were given work, and in return they got good food and a roof over their head. NOW they are living in poverty and can't get a job and are just shooting each other and getting shot by the police. I bet they wished they were slaves again.

Article: "You Want To Get Stabbed?", LiberalsMustDie.com [Comments (17)] [2008-Sep-15]
Submitted by fritistat

"I got sooo very disgusted at ALL this diatribe nonsense coming from that vial evil son of Satan--Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama"

SisterNChrist, Raptureforums [Comments (31)] [2008-Sep-15]

Obama will probably weasel some way for the UN to come in and try to confiscate America's guns. Foreign troops have no qualms about shooting Americans that refuse to give up their arms.

I am now watching Band of Brothers, and they just found the concentration camp. Obama can have my guns, bullets first.

Like Heston said: "From my cold, dead hands...."

[emphasis mine]

A MAttR of Time, Rapture Ready [Comments (48)] [2008-Sep-15]

For quite awhile, I truly believed in my heart that Obama, a closet Muslim and black liberationist, was groomed for our politics long ago by wealthy Muslims and by Satan. Now that I see this article, it pretty much sums up what I have always believed about Barack.

He is nothing more than a lying, deceitful, black radical, socialist, Muslim...who has an agenda for America...to destroy her from within! His rise to fame and run for the presidency is an attempt in the Muslim world to destroy America from within our own government. The role of Satan has been to deceive people and to have people worship BHO as their savior of the world.

Obama-nation is truly an abomination.

><>KarateMom<><, Rapture Ready [Comments (36)] [2008-Sep-07]

WTF happened to Christianity? Well, I guess it hasn't changed . . . I was just brought up in a much more mellow tolerant sect, Lutheran.

 

[johnsmith]

Obama the antichrist???

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

 

[Rapping Granny]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LlrdPmeC64

Bill Maher WOW!

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Watch out for the darkies if Barack Obama wins, they will be looking for revenge for all that slavery nonsense and they will want to take it out on your family, with knives and guns.

Ignoring all the other posts, lemme get this straight:

If Obama WINS, Black people will get violent?

For all that slavery nonsense?

Actually, I seem to remember Black people doing that when the Jena 6 had a victorious outcome.

There were 34 deaths that night iirc.....

 

[Mandark]

avatar: No need to be so pissy. I said in my post it's fine if you're talking about the mandates for minors. And yes, I read the stuff in your link. Two months ago when it was new.

Now...

There are three important things I want everyone to take away from this chart:


1. Obama's plan brings in more revenue than McCain's plan, no matter what assumptions you are using.

Simplest point first. We all see the positive Obama numbers and the negative McCain ones, and in the parts where both are negative Obama's are smaller, right? Good. Moving on...




2. Accounting tricks make Bush's current budget track look better than it is, and make changes to it look worse than they are.

This can be kind of tricky.

Under current law, two things will happen to close the deficit, but neither of these things are supported by Bush or are politically feasible.

First, the Bush tax cuts will expire under current law. Most changes to the tax code are permanent. These were temporary and expire in 2010 and 2011, in order to make their 10-year costs seem lower.

Secondly, the Alternative Minimum Tax. This was designed to make sure a handful of hyper-rich families paid a decent amount of taxes, but the inflation indexing is screwed up. So every year more and more people qualify to pay the higher AMT rate than the normal tax rate. They've been patching it temporarily the last couple years.

The Bush administration has been using long term projections to show the deficit going down, using assumptions that they actually opposed. That's why the chart has different Current Law and Current Policy numbers.

Current Law = Strictly what is on the books, though nobody intends on keeping it that way.

Current Policy = Keeping the Bush tax cuts, patching the AMT.

Current Policy is the realistic baseline which actually compares revenue against the last 6-8 years. The inflated "they'll add 2-4 trillion dollars!" is essentially meaningless.




3. The platform McCain describes publicly to audiences is waaaaaaaaaay more expensive than the one his aides say is his real plan.

That's why they have the difference in "described by campaign staff" and "described in stump speeches."

McCain's staffers have been telling reporters that his real plan is an almost entirely different one than what he says in speeches. He's making promises on the stump that there's no way he could keep, even with a friendly Congress.

Obama's is much much closer and his public version is actually more belt-tightening than his private one.

 

[speculawyer]

These people are insane.

Current state of affairs –

Sitting POTUS Bush, Vice POTUS Cheney both Christians – (Methodists)

Nancy Pelosi House Speaker 3rd in line for POTUS (shudder at the thought) – Roman Catholic

John McCain – Christian (raised Episcopalian and now Baptist)

Sarah Palin - Christian (Protestant Non-Denominational Assemblies of God)

Barack Obama professes Christianity but can’t define it – United Church of Christ

Joe Biden - Roman Catholic

RAPTURE –

Who’s left?

IMHO the following possibilities exist:

Pre-election Rapture - Nancy Pelosi is left to “lead” our country.

Post-election Rapture – pre-inaugural, same scenario as above.

Post-inaugural Rapture - Nancy Pelosi (if McCain/Palin win).

Post-inaugural Rapture – Obama (if Obama/Biden win).

IMHO any of the above scenarios render the U.S. a ship without a qualified Captain at the helm so to speak.
A weakened U.S. (through millions missing in the Rapture and weak, ineffective “leadership” remaining at the top) could easily fall prey to or be absorbed by another country or countries ……….

Thoughts anyone???

steve53, Rapture Ready [Comments (48)] [2008-Sep-10]

[on why "Obama can't win"]

There aren't enough radical muslims, militant anti-American blacks, or communists to vote for him. These groups make up no more than 10% of the population.

J.J., Rapture Ready [Comments (24)] [2008-Sep-09]

I like Sarah Palin. She's a God send. I love her stance against abortion. I think she is the most pro-life candidate who has ever run for anything. However, I don't think we will be here to vote nor do I think she will be around after the rapture to become VP. I believe Obama will win simply because all believers will not be around to vote. It isn't a time in history where anything good or positive is going to "turn America around". The tribulation, I believe, is about to be ushered in. I could be wrong, but all the signs are there, all the chess pieces are in place. We're just waiting for the curtain to go up.

OnlyJesusSaves, Crapture Ready [Comments (34)] [2008-Sep-09]

RE: Palin won't cave to big science

Palin has a level head as well as a pretty one:
http://www.tsas.us/if-72-...isis-from-the-presidency/

Are children these days are facing increasing pressure from the FEDERALLY FUNDED scientific establishment to accept evil-ution as the explanation for everything, but we're lucky that the Republican party gets its answers from the right (no pun intended) place: the good book. The founding fathers as well as every wise man in history has lived his life by the teachings of the bible (Black Hussein Obama lives his life by the KORAN).

Look, nobody's sure where all of this shit came from, but there's a real debate here. Intelligent design is every bit as valid a theory as Evolution, and I'm glad Palin and McCain have the foresight to give the good book back the time it deserves in schools.

sulo, American Conservative Forum [Comments (55)] [2008-Sep-08]

 

[ryutaro's mama]

There aren't enough radical muslims, militant anti-American blacks, or communists to vote for him. These groups make up no more than 10% of the population.

FUCK!!!

What is the Obama campaign gonna do now?

 

[Mandark]

Goddam you pushing my post (with effort! and MS paint!) off the screen with a bunch of pointless nutpicking quotes!

 

[Stinkles]

However, I don't think we will be here to vote nor do I think she will be around after the rapture to become VP. I believe Obama will win simply because all believers will not be around to vote.

Ohpleasegod take them unto your arms, plz.

 

[Schlep]

Sorry if this was already posted and I missed it...

Off the Larry King quick poll:

What do you think of Sarah Palin now?
I like her more 21% 3271
I like her less 79% 12005
Total Votes: 15276
This is not a scientific poll

Kind of interesting, even if it's broken (no in-between or don't care/undecided options).

 

[AniHawk]

Sorry if this was already posted and I missed it...

Off the Larry King quick poll:

What do you think of Sarah Palin now?
I like her more 21% 3271
I like her less 79% 12005
Total Votes: 15276
This is not a scientific poll

And the Research 2000 poll has her up in unfavorability over favorability. That poll has had her the least liked candidate of the bunch for nearly a week now.

 

[Mahadev]

After reading all these quotes do people still believe that everyone should be allowed to vote? Shouldn't there be at least a sanity test for the voters?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

After reading all these quotes do people still believe that everyone should be allowed to vote? Shouldn't there be at least a sanity test for the voters?

According to their quote, it won't matter:

Prior to Nov. 4, Bush/Cheney/McCain/Palin and the Christian masses will be raptured away, leaving Obama and Pelosi to rule.

 

[speculawyer]

After reading all these quotes do people still believe that everyone should be allowed to vote? Shouldn't there be at least a sanity test for the voters?

The scary thing is that web site has pages and pages of these quotes . . . and these are just the quotes submitted to fstdt.com (Fundies say the darndest things)

 

[domokunrox]

McCain heaclth care plan can become much cheaper becuase of how it's implemented. 2500-5000 tax credit isn't as expensive when the economy is going well and the dollar is strong. That is a fact.

Actually no. His health care plan is a disaster. McCain's plan entails taxing the money your employers towards your health care to make health care competitive like a market. Meaning your paychecks are going to shrink a bit. THe "tax credit" is a rebate of sorts during tax time. No thanks. I prefer my money immediately.

The economy isn't going well and the dollar isn't strong, and its going to be like that for a good amount of the next 4 years depending on government regulations that may or may not be introduced at the time.

Bush let go of the reigns on big business and let them do what they wish because its good for business. Its pretty much the same as if you let youf toddler run wild in the living room and leave them unattended a great deal.

Theres 2 ways of going about it. A good spanking and then cleaning up the mess or do nothing about it. I'll let you figure out what party does what and why.

 

[Synth_floyd]

Why is more government revenue a good thing? I don't want to give my money to the government. I want to keep it.

 

[Mandark]

Why is more government revenue a good thing? I don't want to give my money to the government. I want to keep it.

Even if you're a conservatarian it's a good thing if you assume that (1) we're running a deficit and (2) spending won't be significantly cut.

The first is a fact, the second might as well be. Cutting taxes without spending isn't a tax cut. It's a tax shift towards the future, and adds to the total tax burden because you'll now have to pay off billions in interest.

 

[Extollere]

Fuck - this rapture ready site is making my head hurt, and my stomach sick. It's tough to believe that probably half of the country shares these backwards and hateful beliefs, not to mention uniformed, close-minded and uneducated..... Bb...... Bll..... blb.... BLJEEGGGHhgggggbblblblbbgbab!

 

[Dartastic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LlrdPmeC64

Bill Maher WOW!

Oh my god. :lol

 

[kevm3]

Why is more government revenue a good thing? I don't want to give my money to the government. I want to keep it.

We have to pay off this huge debt the government is amassing. "Keeping more of your money" isn't going to help you if the dollar continues to plummet.

 

[slidewinder]

Cutting taxes without spending isn't a tax cut. It's a tax shift towards the future, and adds to the total tax burden because you'll now have to pay off billions in interest.

Nah, it just means that we eventually default. Which is why it's important to keep a strong, practiced military.

 

[Fragamemnon]

GIF of the year.

Make no mistake-Obama is very unlikely to pursue the sort of deficit-killing that Clinton did-he has a different set of economists, and critical domestic pillars like his health care proposals and energy plan are going to cost money.

However, getting out of Iraq and getting rid of the Bush tax breaks is really going to provide some budgetary relief.

 

[StopMakingSense]

And the Research 2000 poll has her up in unfavorability over favorability. That poll has had her the least liked candidate of the bunch for nearly a week now.

And that shit sank FAST. She was something like +15 when Kos began the poll, and is down to -5.

 

[Zen]

What's the source of this chart?

 

[Schlep]

Eery.

At the end... Stockdale = McCain?

Also damn @ Willy laying it down! (and again ... the look on Bush's face :lol )

 

[Sleeker]

We have to pay off this huge debt the government is amassing. "Keeping more of your money" isn't going to help you if the dollar continues to plummet.

"But I am so sick of hearing about, ‘Well, your leaders misspent your hard-earned tax dollars, so you the people, now have to tighten your belts … because we, your leaders, misspent your money."

- Bill hicks

 

[sprsk]

Eery.

At the end... Stockdale = McCain?

Also damn @ Willy laying it down! (and again ... the look on Bush's face :lol )

Man, Dan Quayle embarrassed the shit out of himself.

HEY, HEY AL, HEY AL.


Going back and watching, the republican talking points are all the same.

 

[kevm3]

"But I am so sick of hearing about, ‘Well, your leaders misspent your hard-earned tax dollars, so you the people, now have to tighten your belts … because we, your leaders, misspent your money."

- Bill hicks

If we vote in a competent administration, then we won't have to worry about as much misspending. Didn't 16 billion in cash just up and disappear in Iraq? The bottom line is someone has to pay all of this money that's being spent. It's not something that will magically up and disappear... and what would be even more irresponsible is just to keep on tacking on to this debt and passing it to the future generations.

Also, not that I entirely believe the plan, but Obama is the one that said he's going to lower taxes for the middle and lower class. McCain will lower them for the wealthy, with his trickle-down economics. The rich have had 8 years to make out like bandits at the expense of the mdidle and lower class, so why can't they have their turn?

 

[Jak140]

"But I am so sick of hearing about, ‘Well, your leaders misspent your hard-earned tax dollars, so you the people, now have to tighten your belts … because we, your leaders, misspent your money."

- Bill hicks

The problem with using that quote in this context is that leaders is a general term, while the origin of the problem largely rests specifically on the Republican party. Regardless of who comes into office next, it is the mess left by the previous administration that they will have to clean up, so blaming the next president for raising taxes to clean up the mess left by the last guy you put in office is just plain stupid. Anyone who voted for the GOP in the last 20 years has no right to complain. Next time, don't vote war-mongering, market deregulating retards into office.

 

[Barrett2]

After reading all these quotes do people still believe that everyone should be allowed to vote? Shouldn't there be at least a sanity test for the voters?

There are some good articles and research debating why Americans are so fucking stupid when it comes to politics. I think the general idea is that Americans have had it so good for so long compared to most countries, that the average American takes it for granted that the system just works, and they don't need to worry about actually learning anything about politics. Combine that with organized religion, IMO, and you have a nation full of retards.

I think eliminating the 2 party system is probably the best way to force people to become more educated about politics, because it might force them to actually learn something about what they want to vote about.

 

[avatar299]

After reading all these quotes do people still believe that everyone should be allowed to vote? Shouldn't there be at least a sanity test for the voters?

why would you even want to risk the possibility of discrimination when it comes to voting? If we did pass laws that discriminate voting many minorities and poor would be kicked out. That would be great.

Also Spec can post as much shit as he wants, (and of course, he will) but we don't know anything about the people making those comments, most importantly if those people vote. Shrinking the voting base because of youtube comments is stupid.

 

[Learn2read]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LlrdPmeC64

Bill Maher WOW!

Krugman: "There's no atheists in foxholes and there no libertarians in a financial crisis"

:lol

 

[Mahadev]

why would you even want to risk the possibility of discrimination when it comes to voting? If we did pass laws that discriminate voting many minorities and poor would be kicked out. That would be great.

Also Spec can post as much shit as he wants, (and of course, he will) but we don't know anything about the people making those comments, most importantly if those people vote. Shrinking the voting base because of youtube comments is stupid.

It's not discrimination it's common sense. Discrimination is when former criminals aren't allowed to vote (something republicans have made into law in some states iirc to ban minorities from voting) but I do believe that people's sanity should be taken into consideration in the voting process. Voting is a serious matter and imo not every insane moron should be allowed to do it because that poses a threat to democracy.

I don't know about you but I'd looooooooove to see the Westboro Baptist Church retards banned from voting. Also her.

 

[mclem]

That's always been a funny argument to me as well. Honestly, I'm willing to concede that debates haven't always been Obama's strongest forum. But when Republicans get giddy about how Obama is going to make a fool out of himself during the debates, they do realize that they're not allowed to send in a designated hitter for McCain, right?

I sometimes wonder if many republicans are convinced this election is Obama vs. Not Obama. They haven't quite cottoned on that they're supposed to be championing a specific alternative.

 

[mclem]

Their health care both cost over a trillion(McCain 1.3, Obama 1.6), but McCain costs could become much smaller if his tax policy improves the economy so in the end Obama is more expensive.

How a possibility turns into a fact in one easy Republican Talking Point. Let's observe in detail:

Their health care both cost over a trillion(McCain 1.3, Obama 1.6), but McCain costs could become much smaller if his tax policy improves the economy so in the end Obama is more expensive.

Something might happen...

Their health care both cost over a trillion(McCain 1.3, Obama 1.6), but McCain costs could become much smaller if his tax policy improves the economy so in the end Obama is more expensive.

Therefore it will happen.

 

[maximum360]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gehjsXjRU6cEer94pOkWWCmJEOAAD93ACO3O0

Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama

By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON – 2 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent" or responsible for their own troubles.

The poll suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.

Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.

Such numbers are a harsh dose of reality in a campaign for the history books. Obama, the first black candidate with a serious shot at the presidency, accepted the Democratic nomination on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, a seminal moment for a nation that enshrined slavery in its Constitution.

"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Paul Sniderman, a political scientist at Stanford University, which partnered with The Associated Press and Yahoo News to conduct the exhaustive poll and analysis.

The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in a close race with McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats. President Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war and a national sense of economic hard times cut against GOP candidates, as does that fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.

The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home — among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.

The survey also focused on the racial attitudes of independent voters because they are likely to decide the election.

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.

Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.

On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn't be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites' views.

Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.

Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.

Still, the effects of whites' racial views are apparent in the polling.

Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.

But in an election without precedent, it's hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.

The AP-Yahoo poll used the unique methodology of Knowledge Networks, a Menlo Park, Calif., firm that interviews people online after randomly selecting and screening them over telephone. Numerous studies have shown that people are more likely to report embarrassing behavior and unpopular opinions when answering questions on a computer rather than talking to a stranger.

Other techniques used in the poll included recording people's responses to black or white faces flashed on a computer screen, asking participants to rate how well certain adjectives apply to blacks, measuring whether people believe blacks' troubles are their own fault, and simply asking people how much they like or dislike blacks.

"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.

Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible." When asked about positive adjectives, whites were more likely to stay on the fence than give a strongly positive assessment.

Among white Democrats, one-third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.

The poll sought to measure latent prejudices among whites by asking about factors contributing to the state of black America. One finding: More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."

Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn't.

Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."

Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."

The survey broke ground by incorporating images of black and white faces to measure implicit racial attitudes, or prejudices that are so deeply rooted that people may not realize they have them. That test suggested the incidence of racial prejudice is even higher, with more than half of whites revealing more negative feelings toward blacks than whites.

Researchers used mathematical modeling to sort out the relative impact of a huge swath of variables that might have an impact on people's votes — including race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.

Just 59 percent of her white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.

Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.

The survey of 2,227 adults was conducted Aug. 27 to Sept. 5. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

 

[Schlep]

Could've saved everyone a bunch of time and summarized the article as 1 in 10 democrats are retarded and would rather vote for their own doom than for an 'inexperienced' biracial man.

 

[gcubed]

i still dont get the point of the story. Do people that respond to polls nationwide and in every state not know he's black?

Are there going to be people at the polling place saying "hey, just wanted to make sure you knew he was black" "well oh shit, changing my vote then"

I dont get what relevance this poll has in relation to every other state and nationwide poll showing him and his blackness ahead.

 

[avatar299]

Have we already forgotten Kentucky and West Virginia during the primaries? Racism isn't a republican monopoly

Spoiler

welcome to common sense

and some white dems won't vote obama, but they already poll as McCain supporters

 

[mclem]

i still dont get the point of the story. Do people that respond to polls nationwide and in every state not know he's black?

Are there going to be people at the polling place saying "hey, just wanted to make sure you knew he was black" "well oh shit, changing my vote then"

I dont get what relevance this poll has in relation to every other state and nationwide poll showing him and his blackness ahead.

I'm guessing they're asserting that such people are, er, Bradleying (it's a real word, honest!) right now; if they're polled, they give the "good democrat" answer. Even so, Nate's had a very good anti-Bradley-effect post up on 538 for a few days, which is reassuring. Somewhat.

I won't be *completely* happy that Bradley doesn't exist until Nov 5th, though.

 

[capslock]

What they forget to mention are the new voters that Obama will bring that will make up for this difference, especially young voters....if those fuckers actually turn out to vote for once.

 

[gcubed]

I'm guessing they're asserting that such people are, er, Bradleying (it's a real word, honest!) right now; if they're polled, they give the "good democrat" answer. Even so, Nate's had a very good anti-Bradley-effect post up on 538 for a few days, which is reassuring. Somewhat.

I won't be *completely* happy that Bradley doesn't exist until Nov 5th, though.

with the breakdowns Obama gets in the polls, i doubt the effect will exist.

That being said, with the breakdown Obama gets in the polls, young people need to VOTE

 

[avatar299]

How a possibility turns into a fact in one easy Republican Talking Point. Let's observe in detail:


Something might happen...


Therefore it will happen.

Obama's plan is more expensive no matter what happen, but he will raise more revenue anyway. Learn to fucking read.

 

[Learn2read]

I'm not too familar with the Bradley election and thus the dynamics of the Bradley Effect. But I think that, at least in this election, enough of these type of voters seem to be able to grasp onto ridiculously ambiguous statements like "I don't know who he really is..." that their views are probably reflected accurately in the polls (I hope).

 

[LCGeek]

why would you even want to risk the possibility of discrimination when it comes to voting? If we did pass laws that discriminate voting many minorities and poor would be kicked out. That would be great.

Also Spec can post as much shit as he wants, (and of course, he will) but we don't know anything about the people making those comments, most importantly if those people vote. Shrinking the voting base because of youtube comments is stupid.

I'm all for expanding the voting base. Lower the age limit a little or let the rest of world in considering our government loves sticking their nose in everyone else's business.

 

[avatar299]

It's not discrimination it's common sense. Discrimination is when former criminals aren't allowed to vote (something republicans have made into law in some states iirc to ban minorities from voting) but I do believe that people's sanity should be taken into consideration in the voting process. Voting is a serious matter and imo not every insane moron should be allowed to do it because that poses a threat to democracy.

I don't know about you but I'd looooooooove to see the Westboro Baptist Church retards banned from voting. Also her.

You have to be joking. Define "Sanity" because I have an idea insanity is just a tool to attack those who disagree with you.

and do 4 insane people really matter

 

[adamsappel]

You guys keep bringing up "potential" as if we should agree that it applies here. We don't.

I find most of Jay's views almost-scarily extreme, but let's not tar him with things he doesn't espouse. Fill your tube-socks all you want, the only time he cares about sperm is when it penetrates an egg. Your skin cells are even less important to his moral code.

(I know I'm really late to this post, but I'm pretty certain the argument will never be resolved.)