You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


MrRodgers -> You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 9:51:04 AM)

Some just never give up, living in their own delusional world. Far too many are from the same party and are not 'conservative' at all.

At the press conference, McDaniel announced he will be using such evidence to file a formal challenge of the runoff results with the state GOP executive committee. Ten days after he files the challenge with that body—which, given its extensive ties to the GOP establishment in the state, is expected to rule against the Tea Party-backed McDaniel or just simply ignore the challenge—McDaniel can take the challenge into state court.

“We know that the conservative movement [sic] is passionate about this issue,” McDaniel said. “We know right now that the conservative movement is very angry about what’s occurred. We all witnessed what a segment of our party did leading up to the 24th. We saw despicable acts of race-baiting. We saw despicable allegations from those who are supposed to be leaders in our party. There is no place in the Republican Party for those that would race bait. There is no place in the Republican Party for racism of any kind, and that’s exactly what we saw on those evenings and mornings leading up to the 24th. That has to end. We watched it. We witnessed it. We saw the dirty money coming in from D.C., whether it was from Bloomberg or other Republican United States senators. We saw what they did here in Mississippi.”

Now far too often on my view, all of this is only because he lost, "this has to end ?" whine is just so ridiculously and cheaply partisan but is perfectly fine when one wins and as likely...as a direct result. The money, the rhetoric, even possibly some race baiting but when the same occurs and one loses...oh politics has gotten just too dirty and there's too much outside money coming in and. ..we're now having been denied by the exec. committee...going to court. [sic]

Here









DaddySatyr -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 9:58:46 AM)


Bloomberg only registered Republican to run in NYC for mayor.

Up until that election, he was a life-long democrat. It would not surprise me, at all to find out he is now re-registered as a democrat.

All that aside, his behavior while mayor was anything but republican.

All of that said; it's amazing (to me) how often people can just launch un-founded accusations at others with seeming impunity.

I understand the trans-actional immunity that congress critters enjoy while they are debating on the floor but public statements, made in the "cool process" of campaigning should be subject to defamation suits and if those suits are successful, some of the more outrageous headlines should then fall under libel liability.







Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?




joether -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 10:22:45 AM)

So the Tea Partier dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner. Well, his hatred, stupidity and lunacy have dug him a hole so deeply, he'll never run for public office again. He seems to act like a child (typical tea partier behavior btw) in that black people are not allowed to vote. All in all, its amusing to watch how fellow tea partiers react to this in every other mannerism except saying "ok, enough is enough, stop doing this crap as your making us look like total idiots and loons'.




MrRodgers -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 10:26:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Bloomberg only registered Republican to run in NYC for mayor.

Up until that election, he was a life-long democrat. It would not surprise me, at all to find out he is now re-registered as a democrat.

All that aside, his behavior while mayor was anything but republican.

All of that said; it's amazing (to me) how often people can just launch un-founded accusations at others with seeming impunity.

I understand the trans-actional immunity that congress critters enjoy while they are debating on the floor but public statements, made in the "cool process" of campaigning should be subject to defamation suits and if those suits are successful, some of the more outrageous headlines should then fall under libel liability.







Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?

I generally agree but also this is an ego trip because Miss. is an blanket open primary state. There is no hope and they may even throw it out.




DesideriScuri -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 10:32:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
...this is an ego trip because Miss. is an blanket open primary state. There is no hope and they may even throw it out.


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So the Tea Partier dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner. Well, his hatred, stupidity and lunacy have dug him a hole so deeply, he'll never run for public office again. He seems to act like a child (typical tea partier behavior btw) in that black people are not allowed to vote. All in all, its amusing to watch how fellow tea partiers react to this in every other mannerism except saying "ok, enough is enough, stop doing this crap as your making us look like total idiots and loons'.


The only way there is hope, is if McDaniels & Co. can prove that more than 7800 (or by however many he lost) +1 votes were cast illegally (ie. Democrats casting votes in the Republican runoff after having cast votes in the Democrat primary is not legal). If he can't do that, he has no case.

Was it a dirty trick? I don't know that I'd agree it's dirty, but it was definitely a trick. Was it legal? The "trick" itself was legal, but all the votes cast due to the trick might not be legal. The key is in how many weren't legally cast.




MrRodgers -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/16/2014 11:28:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
...this is an ego trip because Miss. is an blanket open primary state. There is no hope and they may even throw it out.


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So the Tea Partier dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner. Well, his hatred, stupidity and lunacy have dug him a hole so deeply, he'll never run for public office again. He seems to act like a child (typical tea partier behavior btw) in that black people are not allowed to vote. All in all, its amusing to watch how fellow tea partiers react to this in every other mannerism except saying "ok, enough is enough, stop doing this crap as your making us look like total idiots and loons'.

The only way there is hope, is if McDaniels & Co. can prove that more than 7800 (or by however many he lost) +1 votes were cast illegally (ie. Democrats casting votes in the Republican runoff after having cast votes in the Democrat primary is not legal). If he can't do that, he has no case.

Was it a dirty trick? I don't know that I'd agree it's dirty, but it was definitely a trick. Was it legal? The "trick" itself was legal, but all the votes cast due to the trick might not be legal. The key is in how many weren't legally cast.

All over the web...info. is that Miss. is an open primary state. Dems and repubs can vote in either's primary. Here




DesideriScuri -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/17/2014 6:44:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
...this is an ego trip because Miss. is an blanket open primary state. There is no hope and they may even throw it out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So the Tea Partier dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner. Well, his hatred, stupidity and lunacy have dug him a hole so deeply, he'll never run for public office again. He seems to act like a child (typical tea partier behavior btw) in that black people are not allowed to vote. All in all, its amusing to watch how fellow tea partiers react to this in every other mannerism except saying "ok, enough is enough, stop doing this crap as your making us look like total idiots and loons'.

The only way there is hope, is if McDaniels & Co. can prove that more than 7800 (or by however many he lost) +1 votes were cast illegally (ie. Democrats casting votes in the Republican runoff after having cast votes in the Democrat primary is not legal). If he can't do that, he has no case.
Was it a dirty trick? I don't know that I'd agree it's dirty, but it was definitely a trick. Was it legal? The "trick" itself was legal, but all the votes cast due to the trick might not be legal. The key is in how many weren't legally cast.

All over the web...info. is that Miss. is an open primary state. Dems and repubs can vote in either's primary. Here


Yeah, that's not the same issue, MrRodgers. It isn't a question of open primaries or not. It's about voting in a party primary and then voting in the other party's runoff. That was the sticking point. And, as it seems, that may or may not be a sticking point, either.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/07/30/gop-attorney-miss-law-prohibits-crossover-voting/13348489/
    quote:

    An attorney for the Mississippi Republican Party says state law does not prohibit people from crossing over to vote in party’s primary and another’s primary runoff, an issue in Chris McDaniel’s presumed challenge to his GOP runoff loss to Sen. Thad Cochran.

    “You heard me right,” said Michael Wallace, attorney for the state Republican Party. “There is an attorney general’s opinion on the subject, but that is all. The attorney general may be right. I wasn’t telling the judge that the attorney general wasn’t right. I was telling her that the issue has never gone to court. ... The attorney general may be 100 percent right, but the issue has not been tested in court that I know of. It may have came up in a county court somewhere that hasn’t made it to reported cases. But to the best of my knowledge, it hasn’t been tested. All we have is an attorney general interpretation.”

    ...

    Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann has advised election officials, based on a 1988 attorney general’s opinion, that there is a statutory prohibition to crossover voting, Hosemann spokeswoman Pamela Weaver said Tuesday.

    The 1988 opinion, issued to a Natchez city attorney, said, “Crossover voting may be defined as participation in the first primary of one political party and participation in the runoff primary of another party. Several attorney general’s opinions and case law has defined the first and second primary as one election process. The runoff primary has been described as a continuation of the first primary.”

    The opinion said that Mississippi law that prohibits voting in more than one primary on the same day covers the primary-runoff scenario.

    Mississippi Code 97-13-35 says:

    • “Any person who shall vote at any election, not being legally qualified, or who shall vote in more than one county, or at more than one place in any county or in any city, town, or village entitled to separate representation, or who shall vote out of the district of his legal domicile, or who shall vote or attempt to vote in the primary election of one party when he shall have voted on the same date in the primary election of another party, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be fined not exceeding two hundred dollars, or be imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months, or both.”

    An attorney for McDaniel on Tuesday did not respond to a request for comment.

    Mississippi Democratic Party Chairman Rickey Cole said it has been a fact of election conduct and training for decades that a voter who has voted in one party’s primary is prohibited from voting in the other party’s runoff.

    “Every runoff in living memory has been conducted under that law in that fashion,” Cole said.

    Cole said the Democratic Party does not permit voters who voted in the Republican primary to vote in the Democratic runoff. He said those who conduct Democratic primaries have all been trained for many years by the secretary of state to that effect, and it is stated in the secretary of state’s training materials.


This isn't just about open primaries or closed primaries.




joether -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/18/2014 11:07:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
...this is an ego trip because Miss. is an blanket open primary state. There is no hope and they may even throw it out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
So the Tea Partier dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner. Well, his hatred, stupidity and lunacy have dug him a hole so deeply, he'll never run for public office again. He seems to act like a child (typical tea partier behavior btw) in that black people are not allowed to vote. All in all, its amusing to watch how fellow tea partiers react to this in every other mannerism except saying "ok, enough is enough, stop doing this crap as your making us look like total idiots and loons'.

The only way there is hope, is if McDaniels & Co. can prove that more than 7800 (or by however many he lost) +1 votes were cast illegally (ie. Democrats casting votes in the Republican runoff after having cast votes in the Democrat primary is not legal). If he can't do that, he has no case.
Was it a dirty trick? I don't know that I'd agree it's dirty, but it was definitely a trick. Was it legal? The "trick" itself was legal, but all the votes cast due to the trick might not be legal. The key is in how many weren't legally cast.

All over the web...info. is that Miss. is an open primary state. Dems and repubs can vote in either's primary. Here


Yeah, that's not the same issue, MrRodgers. It isn't a question of open primaries or not. It's about voting in a party primary and then voting in the other party's runoff. That was the sticking point. And, as it seems, that may or may not be a sticking point, either.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/07/30/gop-attorney-miss-law-prohibits-crossover-voting/13348489/
    quote:

    An attorney for the Mississippi Republican Party says state law does not prohibit people from crossing over to vote in party’s primary and another’s primary runoff, an issue in Chris McDaniel’s presumed challenge to his GOP runoff loss to Sen. Thad Cochran.

    “You heard me right,” said Michael Wallace, attorney for the state Republican Party. “There is an attorney general’s opinion on the subject, but that is all. The attorney general may be right. I wasn’t telling the judge that the attorney general wasn’t right. I was telling her that the issue has never gone to court. ... The attorney general may be 100 percent right, but the issue has not been tested in court that I know of. It may have came up in a county court somewhere that hasn’t made it to reported cases. But to the best of my knowledge, it hasn’t been tested. All we have is an attorney general interpretation.”

    ...

    Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann has advised election officials, based on a 1988 attorney general’s opinion, that there is a statutory prohibition to crossover voting, Hosemann spokeswoman Pamela Weaver said Tuesday.

    The 1988 opinion, issued to a Natchez city attorney, said, “Crossover voting may be defined as participation in the first primary of one political party and participation in the runoff primary of another party. Several attorney general’s opinions and case law has defined the first and second primary as one election process. The runoff primary has been described as a continuation of the first primary.”

    The opinion said that Mississippi law that prohibits voting in more than one primary on the same day covers the primary-runoff scenario.

    Mississippi Code 97-13-35 says:

    • “Any person who shall vote at any election, not being legally qualified, or who shall vote in more than one county, or at more than one place in any county or in any city, town, or village entitled to separate representation, or who shall vote out of the district of his legal domicile, or who shall vote or attempt to vote in the primary election of one party when he shall have voted on the same date in the primary election of another party, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be fined not exceeding two hundred dollars, or be imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months, or both.”

    An attorney for McDaniel on Tuesday did not respond to a request for comment.

    Mississippi Democratic Party Chairman Rickey Cole said it has been a fact of election conduct and training for decades that a voter who has voted in one party’s primary is prohibited from voting in the other party’s runoff.

    “Every runoff in living memory has been conducted under that law in that fashion,” Cole said.

    Cole said the Democratic Party does not permit voters who voted in the Republican primary to vote in the Democratic runoff. He said those who conduct Democratic primaries have all been trained for many years by the secretary of state to that effect, and it is stated in the secretary of state’s training materials.


This isn't just about open primaries or closed primaries.


Its still McDaniel's to show evidence 'beyond a shadow of doubt', that each and every person whom voted, would be voting for the same individual in the general election. And do this...BEFORE...the election. Its safe to say this is the most silly argument into the courts. This guy and his legal team have a time machine no one knows about? Because that is the ONLY way of knowing how those voters....MIGHT....vote in the general election.

This guy is an idiot and loser. He lost the election process fair and square and cant handle it like an adult. Just another Tea Partier behaving like a little child. What else is new....




Kirata -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/18/2014 11:20:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

All over the web...info. is that Miss. is an open primary state. Dems and repubs can vote in either's primary. Here

§ 23-15-575. Participation in primary election

No person shall be eligible to participate in any primary election unless he intends to support the nominations made in the primary in which he participates.

K.




joether -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 12:56:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
All over the web...info. is that Miss. is an open primary state. Dems and repubs can vote in either's primary. Here

§ 23-15-575. Participation in primary election

No person shall be eligible to participate in any primary election unless he intends to support the nominations made in the primary in which he participates.


PROVE beyond a shadow of doubt that the person intends to vote for someone else in the general election...BEFORE...they vote in said general election.

The ONLY way that can be done is to monitor whom the person actual votes for in the general election and compare that to whom they voted for in the previous nomination election.

An since no one recorded who those people voted for in the nomination election, it will be nearly impossible to make the comparison to arrive at the answer.

The guy lost and cant accept it like an adult.




Kirata -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 1:11:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The ONLY way that can be done is to monitor whom the person actual votes for in the general election and compare that to whom they voted for in the previous nomination election.

Yeah, or you could just ask them. McDaniel's lawyer points to post-election polling that found 71 percent of the Democrats who voted in the run-off did not plan to support the Republican in the general election. ~ABC News.

K.






Musicmystery -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 7:52:58 AM)

While point taken, nonetheless, this just underscores why open primaries are a ridiculously naive practice.




mnottertail -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 7:57:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The ONLY way that can be done is to monitor whom the person actual votes for in the general election and compare that to whom they voted for in the previous nomination election.

Yeah, or you could just ask them. McDaniel's lawyer points to post-election polling that found 71 percent of the Democrats who voted in the run-off did not plan to support the Republican in the general election. ~ABC News.

K.





Polls are just that though, meaningless. But I mean; why would they lie? And I might reply; why would they tell the truth?

Nevertheless, it looks like either one would get their ass stomped in the general election, so..........




tj444 -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 7:59:52 AM)

I disagree with you that politicians are not all they same.. they are the same, the same crap goes on in both parties.. what you are actually saying is that a certain level of crap and corruption, etc, etc is acceptable cuz the other guy is worse.. to me, no, that's not acceptable at any level.. but that's jmo.. I don't vote so my view doesn't really matter.. But.. the attitude that those guys are worse so I will vote for the other party is why ya'll keep getting the same results..




RottenJohnny -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 10:22:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
I disagree with you that politicians are not all they same.. they are the same, the same crap goes on in both parties.. what you are actually saying is that a certain level of crap and corruption, etc, etc is acceptable cuz the other guy is worse.. to me, no, that's not acceptable at any level.. but that's jmo.. I don't vote so my view doesn't really matter.. But.. the attitude that those guys are worse so I will vote for the other party is why ya'll keep getting the same results..

Or is it that the electoral system is so damaged that any person, no matter how well-intentioned, has virtually no chance of getting into office without accepting the corruption of either party's program?




Musicmystery -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 10:32:46 AM)

I don't think the system is damaged. I think the inputs are faulty.

There's nothing people are standing for, nothing they're building, nothing they're about creating. It's all about opposing, cutting down, fear-mongering, tricks and deception, making sure the opposition isn't in power, blocking initiatives the opposition might get credit for . . . all that, really by definition, can only create lessor of two evils. It doesn't even acknowledge the promise of alternative or third party approaches.

And it's not simply party leadership doing that -- it's the American public. This forum exemplifies that, in fact.

As long as that's the general base, this is the result we're going to get.

He fucked it up, but Obama was right that we need Hope and Change. As we don't believe we can have it, we play the either/or destruction game, and we get only destroyed stuff.

No big mystery, except how to turn a bitter and resigned populace back to proactive solutions and the willingness to work and pay for them.

Instead . . . we want nothing for nothing. And that's what we're getting. A lot of it, too.




FelineRanger -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 12:03:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

So the [politician] dislikes that democracy worked and wants to try every trick (clean, dirty, and foul alike) to be declared a winner.


Seems to me this has happened before. Only the last time was in a Presidential election that was decided by the Supreme Court with evidence like "hanging chads."




DesideriScuri -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 2:39:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
§ 23-15-575. Participation in primary election
No person shall be eligible to participate in any primary election unless he intends to support the nominations made in the primary in which he participates.
K.


Mississippi has open primaries, so I'm sure that's not really a statute that could be upheld. While you can prove 71% of those polled would not support the Republican candidate, extrapolation isn't proof that 71% of those that crossed the party line to vote in the runoff wouldn't support the Republican.

And, this relies on the opinion that a runoff is an extension of the primary, which is also the basis of the restriction of voting in one party's primary and then voting in the other party's runoff, as it's illegal to vote in more than one party primary on the same day.




ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 2:54:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

PROVE beyond a shadow of doubt that the person intends to vote for someone else in the general election...BEFORE...they vote in said general election.

The ONLY way that can be done is to monitor whom the person actual votes for in the general election and compare that to whom they voted for in the previous nomination election.

An since no one recorded who those people voted for in the nomination election, it will be nearly impossible to make the comparison to arrive at the answer.

The guy lost and cant accept it like an adult.


So as long as you're sure you can get away with something, it's not illegal? Good to know.




MrRodgers -> RE: You see ? NO politicians are not all the same. (8/19/2014 4:40:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

I disagree with you that politicians are not all they same.. they are the same, the same crap goes on in both parties.. what you are actually saying is that a certain level of crap and corruption, etc, etc is acceptable cuz the other guy is worse.. to me, no, that's not acceptable at any level.. but that's jmo.. I don't vote so my view doesn't really matter.. But.. the attitude that those guys are worse so I will vote for the other party is why ya'll keep getting the same results..

Except that the repubs have done this more often that'a all. They even did this in I think it was S. Car. for DeMint which was ridiculous because he was never in trouble. Plus other places. Don't know the exact score and just how many the dems have and this is the only time that comes to memory.

But that's not the point. When others lose, they go home and try again. They don't bring these frivolous law suits.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625